Skadden NYC for lit Forum

[Anonymous User]

I can't find much info on skadden's nyc lit practice. I really liked everyone I met and know it is band one or whatever on chambers, but does anyone have any particular thoughts on it or have an idea of how it compares to the more traditional nyc lit shops (e.g. Deb, PW, Cleary)? Thanks

[John_Luther1989]

If you really started splitting hairs (which you have to because all the mentioned firms are great at litigation), I think it would be fair to say that PW, Cravath, and Debevoise are marginally more well regarded than Skadden or Cleary for NY lit.

Edit: DPW was a glaring omission on my part.

[VulcanVulcanVulcan]

If you really started splitting hairs (which you have to because all the mentioned firms are great at litigation), I think it would be fair to say that PW, Cravath, and Debevoise are marginally more well regarded than Skadden or Cleary for NY lit.

Edit: DPW was a glaring omission on my part.

Is there any actual basis for this? Skadden (and Gibson Dunn NY!) is Band 1 and Debevoise/Cleary are not. http://www.chambersandpartners.com/1280 ... torial/5/1

I'll never get enough of the hair-splitting when it comes to NY litigation. People love to do the "[insert three V10 firms] are definitely better than [insert three other V10 firms]!" thing without any real basis for doing so. At all of the V10-15 firms, anywhere from Cravath to Debevoise, you'll basically be doing the same things: white collar, securities litigation, general commercial litigation, financial regulation, and so on. The differences between the firms don't really matter that much, unlike for corporate work, where public company M&A is actually substantially different than PE, for example.

[Nekrowizard]

I'm pretty dumb, but I'd be skeptical of the bands. Boies is on 2, for example.

[Anonymous User]

Not OP, but, Out of curiosity, for example, would someone be ill advised, generally speaking, for picking, say, a skadden over a PW? (Assuming lit gunning in nyc)

[Anonymous User]

Not OP, but, Out of curiosity, for example, would someone be ill advised, generally speaking, for picking, say, a skadden over a PW? (Assuming lit gunning in nyc)

Not at all. Once you get to the top, the differences are essentially negligible--go where you feel like you fit in. For example, I wanted to do NY lit, had summer associate offers from Cravath, PW, and STB (among others). Went STB because I liked the fit more, and many of my colleagues did the same.

[SweetrollStealer]

Correct me if I'm wrong but I think Skadden has specific subgroups within litigation (e.g., white collar and government enforcement is a distinct group) whereas the other firms mentioned ITT have general lit groups that would allow you to try anything, so Skadden might offer a little less flexibility if you're unsure of what you want to do.

[Anonymous User]

Yeah that is correct and it is one of the bigger marks in their con list for me. At the same time, my interest in white collar is exclusively ausa related (and I don't know if I'd have the resume to really be competitive there down the line), and the actual work sounds pretty not fun/tedious relative to general com/sec lit, so it's not like a deal breaker. I think the only specific groups are white collar, IP, and mass torts; international arb is still under the general flag.