Top Law Schools

I (and I'm sure many other fortunate TLSers) are trying to pick between great firms. In addition to firm strengths, we also hear various negatives about certain places (weak practice areas, negative traits about the culture, etc.).

For those associates currently or formerly at v10 firms, mind telling us what wrong advice 2L's have been getting about specific firms?

Why not just take second looks and figure it out for yourself instead of relying on anonymous users who may or may not have actually worked at your firm? I don't know if either method would be super beneficial, but I'm definitely certain you will have better luck taking second looks vs. relying on TLS

DPW myth - passive aggressive culture = negative = no idea how you're doing.

At DPW, yelling or being dismissive or rude is frowned upon even at the partnership level. In my years at DPW, I've seen several rainmaker partners (some who I have worked with) tone it down because they were getting feedback from the grapevine that people thought they were difficult to work with. Several senior associates who were stars but didn't fit into the culture also lateraled because juniors didn't like working with them.

I don't see this passive aggressive culture as a negative - unless of course you don't fit the mold. People will be direct with you if your work isn't up to snuff or you're not fitting in the culture. They just won't yell at you to get the point across - they'll say it in a calm manner and suggest ways to help you do better.

why are we limiting this to v10

i heard latham once laid off one or two people can someone please deny because my screener was really nice!!!

xael wrote:why are we limiting this to v10

Enjoy DLA Piper

DPW - is the firm actually full of exceptionally beautiful associates?

Desert Fox wrote:Here is a myth I'd like addressed. Both Skadden and Kirkland have been accused of literally working several associates to death (via heart attacks at very young ages or suicide). Can someone address this.

I think Kirkland actually used the associate they worked until her heart gave out in a promotional video about how the culture really promoted work-life balance.

Can anyone speak to Skadden v. DPW. Currently deciding between the two. Thank you!

TheSpanishMain wrote:

Desert Fox wrote:Here is a myth I'd like addressed. Both Skadden and Kirkland have been accused of literally working several associates to death (via heart attacks at very young ages or suicide). Can someone address this.

I think Kirkland actually used the associate they worked until her heart gave out in a promotional video about how the culture really promoted work-life balance.

[youtube]XgSJUzYCGtc[/youtube]

Desert Fox wrote:Here is a myth I'd like addressed. Both Skadden and Kirkland have been accused of literally working several associates to death (via heart attacks at very young ages or suicide). Can someone address this.

This is my first time hearing about a Kirkland associate death... When did this happen? Google isn't coming up with anything either.

Northwestern c/o13 had a guy who went to KE I think in SF. He killed himself last year or early this year. Had a sweet heartbroken young fiancé. Very sad.

Cobretti wrote:

Desert Fox wrote:Here is a myth I'd like addressed. Both Skadden and Kirkland have been accused of literally working several associates to death (via heart attacks at very young ages or suicide). Can someone address this.

This is my first time hearing about a Kirkland associate death... When did this happen? Google isn't coming up with anything either.

2009
http://www.anitaslove.com/about/

edits sorry

PourMeTea wrote:

Cobretti wrote:

Desert Fox wrote:Here is a myth I'd like addressed. Both Skadden and Kirkland have been accused of literally working several associates to death (via heart attacks at very young ages or suicide). Can someone address this.

This is my first time hearing about a Kirkland associate death... When did this happen? Google isn't coming up with anything either.

2009
http://www.anitaslove.com/about/

edits sorry

Holy shit that really is her in the video too... I've laughed at that video so many times, this just got really dark.

And I think I heard about the suicide now that I think about it... tragic.

Learning about this stuff really makes all of the OCI dings easier pills to swallow.

Anonymous User wrote:DPW - is the firm actually full of exceptionally beautiful associates?

my summer class was pretty attractive, definitely well above the average law school constituency. to be somewhat crass about it, probably as many objectively pretty women as in my law school class, which is several times the size of the summer class.
the juniors were a mixed bag, as with most firms, plenty of tall/fit dudes and very attractive women but also some of more of what you'd expect - balding slightly overweight ect. Overall though I think the stereotype holds pretty true.

Anonymous User wrote:Can anyone speak to Skadden v. DPW. Currently deciding between the two. Thank you!

obviously I have a certain bias here; I think it depends on what you want to do but for the most part I'd rather be a junior at Davis Polk (if you want to be in new york). You'll work similarly brutal hours but you'll receive more respect and more support. DPW is a smaller and more selective firm that provides the same caliber of work as Skadden. For certain corporate areas, Skadden might have a superior/larger practice, as DPW will for others, but you'd have to have pretty well defined interests (which, as an incoming 2L, you almost certainly do not) for those to make a difference.

The firms have very different cultures also. If you want a frattier, slightly more social, more aggressive, and generally more 'massive' environment, Skadden will provide that. For something slightly more conservative (not politically, just culturally), friendlier, and more passive, that's Davis Polk.

ETA: one definite advantage to Skadden is geographic flexibility. If you think you'll be changing markets soon, Skadden definitely offers a more national practice and they make transferring offices relatively easy.

Whoosh...I think?

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:DPW - is the firm actually full of exceptionally beautiful associates?

my summer class was pretty attractive, definitely well above the average law school constituency. to be somewhat crass about it, probably as many objectively pretty women as in my law school class, which is several times the size of the summer class.
the juniors were a mixed bag, as with most firms, plenty of tall/fit dudes and very attractive women but also some of more of what you'd expect - balding slightly overweight ect. Overall though I think the stereotype holds pretty true.

Not one DPW person I work with is attractive.

runinthefront wrote:Why not just take second looks and figure it out for yourself instead of relying on anonymous users who may or may not have actually worked at your firm? I don't know if either method would be super beneficial, but I'm definitely certain you will have better luck taking second looks vs. relying on TLS

Can you explain the layout of a second look? Sorry if this is naive, but I would really like some more info in the hopes of making an educated decision, and I'm not sure how it works: do you just ask the firm to speak with some of its attorneys? If they sugarcoated things before, wouldn't they sugarcoat it now? Also like what question do you ask that would be off limits at a callback?

Totally not being rude (don't mean it to come off this way and sorry if it does). I'm genuinely interested, and would just like to make my second looks as worthwhile as possible

Also interested in how a second look is structured.

Cobretti wrote:

Desert Fox wrote:Here is a myth I'd like addressed. Both Skadden and Kirkland have been accused of literally working several associates to death (via heart attacks at very young ages or suicide). Can someone address this.

This is my first time hearing about a Kirkland associate death... When did this happen? Google isn't coming up with anything either.

http://www.legacy.com/obituaries/inside ... &fhid=5486

SowhatsNU wrote:

runinthefront wrote:Why not just take second looks and figure it out for yourself instead of relying on anonymous users who may or may not have actually worked at your firm? I don't know if either method would be super beneficial, but I'm definitely certain you will have better luck taking second looks vs. relying on TLS

Can you explain the layout of a second look? Sorry if this is naive, but I would really like some more info in the hopes of making an educated decision, and I'm not sure how it works: do you just ask the firm to speak with some of its attorneys? If they sugarcoated things before, wouldn't they sugarcoat it now? Also like what question do you ask that would be off limits at a callback?

Totally not being rude (don't mean it to come off this way and sorry if it does). I'm genuinely interested, and would just like to make my second looks as worthwhile as possible

A second look can be basically a series of informational interviews rather than actual interviews, or just dinner with a couple associates. They are very likely to sugarcoat everything just the same, but the benefit is just getting in front of more people and getting a feel for the culture. If you do the dinner variant alcohol can get involved and can kind of help to get through their armor (in my experience anyway).

this thread is a covert goldmine

xael wrote:i heard latham once laid off one or two people can someone please deny because my screener was really nice!!!

Anonymous User wrote:Latham myth - publicly cutting the fat in bust years = negative = no idea whether you're going to have a job.

At Latham, hiring sustainable class sizes is frowned upon even at the partnership level. In my years at Latham, I've seen several rainmaker partners (some who I have worked with) hire massive classes because they were getting a decent deal flow and heard through the grapevine that they could just lay off people who were difficult to work with. Several senior associates who were stars but didn't fit into the culture also lateraled because they we secretly fired.

I don't see this boom/bust culture as a negative - unless of course you don't fit the mold. People will be direct with you if your work isn't up to snuff or if they simply hired an unsustainable number of lawyers. They just won't yell at you to get the point across - they'll say it in a calm manner and politely show you the door. But, it's public, so it's a service, really.