Top Law Schools

Thankful for the offers, 100% interested in transactional. Free market v. lockstep? Prestige? Compensation? "Culture"? Thoughts/insights?

Free market: kirkland, sorta; lockstep: STB

Compensation: KE>STB

Prestige: STB>KE NY. I don't think is a fair comparison since KE flagship is Chi. KE NY is solid, don't get me wrong, but I don't think it's in the same tier...unless you're looking for something specific (and it doesn't sound like you are)

Culture: KE's staffing requires a more entrepreneurial attitude--some people thrive in this sort of environment, and some view this as incredibly cutthroat. I personally like STB's culture a lot more as it's quite a bit more cordial. The personalities of the two firms are pretty different so do a second look if you haven't found a distinction.

Culture is dramatically different, as noted above. K&E is notoriously cutthroat/entrepreneurial depending on whether you want the negative or positive spin. STB is the exact opposite. Partner comp, associate comp, free market v. assigned staffing system, vacation policy, etc. all play into this.

Comp at K&E can be substantially higher than STB's lockstep comp, but only if you're working very long hours--at low billables, STB comp is higher. Average comp is slightly higher at K&E overall.

Prestige will depend on practice area. Both firms are PE-heavy in NY (and generally) in corporate. STB generally does more of the largest blockbuster deals, but K&E has greater deal volume.

Totally side show - how long does it take to get offers from KE NY after callbacks?

Anonymous User wrote:Culture is dramatically different, as noted above. K&E is notoriously cutthroat/entrepreneurial depending on whether you want the negative or positive spin. STB is the exact opposite. Partner comp, associate comp, free market v. assigned staffing system, vacation policy, etc. all play into this.

Comp at K&E can be substantially higher than STB's lockstep comp, but only if you're working very long hours--at low billables, STB comp is higher. Average comp is slightly higher at K&E overall.

Prestige will depend on practice area. Both firms are PE-heavy in NY (and generally) in corporate. STB generally does more of the largest blockbuster deals, but K&E has greater deal volume.

K&E has more normal people you'd want to grab a drink with. STB dorkier, more buttoned up, but probably less intimidating to talk to for most people. K&E is more self selecting, STB is the safer choice for most people. K&E is a better place to practice then STB (more individuality, more flexibility/less face-time) From an STB paralegal->K&E associate.

Edit -- the bolded is wrong. Had low billables for NYC the past two years and still had a bonus at a multiple of the market.

It is worth noting that K&E and STB actively hate each other (at least on the corporate side), so getting advice that is both informed and neutral on this decision is probably harder than most other choices between firms.

And, no, this isn't rumor-mongering. I can't think of any other pair of law firms that have the kind of bad blood between them that K&E and STB do.

Anonymous User wrote:It is worth noting that K&E and STB actively hate each other (at least on the corporate side), so getting advice that is both informed and neutral on this decision is probably harder than most other choices between firms.

And, no, this isn't rumor-mongering. I can't think of any other pair of law firms that have the kind of bad blood between them that K&E and STB do.

Do tell us a bit more? How did this come about? Understand if you're cautious-I'm just curious.

Middle market PE theoretically provides more cases under your belt and generally more responsibility early on when compared to mega cases.

But in all honesty, personality should solve this VERY easily. You should know where you fit in. Go there. Can't go wrong with this choice.

ETA: in reply to the fellow above me, http://abovethelaw.com/2014/04/musical- ... n-houston/

As someone at a free market firm, given the choice, I would go for assigned staffing all the way. Whether the completely unnecessary (and, IMO, counterproductive) stress of dealing with the free market system is worth marginally higher bonuses is something you have to decide. Yes after a few years your reputation has established itself and you can work off that, but it isn't fun being a junior and having to add excessive brownnosing to your list of daily duties.

1. Agree K&E people are more sociable, STB are more reserved.
2. K&E's bonuses are anywhere from 10% to 100% higher than market. Note that it's just your bonus that's, say, 30% higher, not overall comp.
3. Haven't seen any bad blood on a person-to-person level between K&E and STB. They're both great firms and the best for PE. You have to take this stuff pretty seriously to actually feel bad blood toward another law firm...
4. Wouldn't describe K&E's culture as "cutthroat." I don't know why people say that.

Anonymous User wrote:As someone at a free market firm, given the choice, I would go for assigned staffing all the way. Whether the completely unnecessary (and, IMO, counterproductive) stress of dealing with the free market system is worth marginally higher bonuses is something you have to decide. Yes after a few years your reputation has established itself and you can work off that, but it isn't fun being a junior and having to add excessive brownnosing to your list of daily duties.

Same anon K&E poster as above who was an STB paralegal. There's no brown nosing here to get work. If anything, it works in the reverse direction where partners are brown nosing associates to staff deals. I don't know where people get that idea, but it's just not the case at K&E that you need to suck up to someone to get good work. Especially excessive brown nosing daily? C'mon.

If you can't stand up for yourself or are bad at saying no to people, though, the free market will not work for you. It definitely requires a certain type of personality to make it there.

But too much misinformation in this thread to be useful anymore I think. In my opinion, someone choosing between STB and K&E should know based on who they are and how they felt visiting those firms, whether one is a better fit than the other.

Re: Bad blood between STB and K&E, it's not just the Houston raid (though that was a part of it). K&E routinely offers STB partners enormous pay raises/guarantees to leave to join K&E, and STB is pretty resentful of the practice (though credit to the STB partnership that very few have actually left). The below article also discusses this issue and the drama surrounding another sore point in the STB-K&E rivalry. Much of the STB partnership has only bad things to say about K&E, though it's unclear to me whether the K&E partners feel the same way about STB. (Generally I think the STB partners view themselves as more of a "unit" than the K&E partners do, especially because so many K&E partners are lateral hires, so K&E is unlikely to have nearly as strong institutional feelings one way or another.) Associates care a lot less (or not at all) but are aware of the dislike.

http://abovethelaw.com/2014/10/musical- ... stays-put/

Also in this situation.... looking for more feedback as well

bump

Is there anything new to consider with respect to Simpson v. Kirkland? What does a 2nd year Kirkland associate make with 2000 hrs billed, 2200, 2400? They told us at a firm event that the average corporate associate bills 2400 at Kirkland. What does the average corporate associate bill at Simpson? what's the facetime requirement at Simpson?

Also, what's the deal with this non-equity partnership deal at Kirkland? Do they make 500k? 600k?

bump

I don't think these firms are all that similar aside from their respective strength/focus on PE.

STB is more prestigious as a firm and definitely vis-a-vis KE NYC, but, more importantly, its corporate group is broader and better in New York specifically.

While K&E might have more "fun" individuals, STB has tons of lawyers, so you can find all types.

I'd choose STB unless there was something significant and specific about K&E that attracted me.

Anonymous User wrote:Is there anything new to consider with respect to Simpson v. Kirkland? What does a 2nd year Kirkland associate make with 2000 hrs billed, 2200, 2400? They told us at a firm event that the average corporate associate bills 2400 at Kirkland. What does the average corporate associate bill at Simpson? what's the facetime requirement at Simpson?

Also, what's the deal with this non-equity partnership deal at Kirkland? Do they make 500k? 600k?

For Kirkland, the hourly billable ranges. It can go from 1600 to 2400; it just really depends on the associate and how driven they are. From what I could tell, I think this year started off slow but when it picks up, it's just crazy (resulting in 250-300 hours a month easy). Facetime seems pretty lax at Kirkland, but this is dependent on the practice group as well. Certain practice groups are smaller and thus are more driven by how the partners are.

Non-equity partnership pays pretty much similar to senior associates, but the bonuses are always good. For example, restructuring is making a killing this year, so they get two bonuses. Compensation is always going to be better (except for the few exceptions like Wachtell) at Kirkland even if you're billing average hours it seems.

I think one of the biggest difference between the two and has the most effect on your daily life is the culture. For prestige, sure it can be argued that STB is better, but not so much that the the exit options are going to be all that different.

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:As someone at a free market firm, given the choice, I would go for assigned staffing all the way. Whether the completely unnecessary (and, IMO, counterproductive) stress of dealing with the free market system is worth marginally higher bonuses is something you have to decide. Yes after a few years your reputation has established itself and you can work off that, but it isn't fun being a junior and having to add excessive brownnosing to your list of daily duties.

Same anon K&E poster as above who was an STB paralegal. There's no brown nosing here to get work. If anything, it works in the reverse direction where partners are brown nosing associates to staff deals. I don't know where people get that idea, but it's just not the case at K&E that you need to suck up to someone to get good work. Especially excessive brown nosing daily? C'mon.

If you can't stand up for yourself or are bad at saying no to people, though, the free market will not work for you. It definitely requires a certain type of personality to make it there.

But too much misinformation in this thread to be useful anymore I think. In my opinion, someone choosing between STB and K&E should know based on who they are and how they felt visiting those firms, whether one is a better fit than the other.

The brown nosing issue is more of an indirect effect of the free market system. Junior associates, and even when I was a summer, do feel pressure to put themselves out there in order to get to the right people. Pretty much the entire SA is focused on networking and meeting people, rather than the work. Since higher level associates and partners decide who gets asked to be on the team, if you don't know people and since you haven't made a reputation yet concerning your work, this does add stress. And since there are so many driven people at Kirkland, there are a good number of brown nosers. But Kirkland does have a lot of work to go around, so this is less of an issue when it is busy, but can be stressful if it is not busy.

Besides that I agree with everything else, especially the bolded.