Baker Hostetler v. Schulte v. Milbank Forum
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
-
Anonymous User
- Posts: 432656
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Baker Hostetler v. Schulte v. Milbank
Which would you choose and why?
Last edited by Anonymous User on Mon Aug 31, 2015 1:00 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
nerd1
- Posts: 157
- Joined: Mon May 26, 2014 11:35 pm
Re: Baker Hostetler v. Pillsbury v. Mintz Levin (NY)
?
Last edited by nerd1 on Sun Aug 30, 2015 4:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
PourMeTea
- Posts: 6874
- Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2012 8:32 am
Re: Baker Hostetler v. Pillsbury v. Mintz Levin (NY)
lol at backpeddling twice from "literal human shit" to "jerk"Anonymous User wrote:you took time out of your day to be a jerk. really?Anonymous User wrote:None
OP, what are you interested in?
-
A. Nony Mouse
- Posts: 29293
- Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:51 am
Re: Baker Hostetler v. Pillsbury v. Mintz Levin (NY)
We're in the on-topics. An unhelpful answer is unhelpful and can be called out as such, but doesn't merit using anon to call someone literal human shit.
-
KingofSplitters55
- Posts: 139
- Joined: Sun May 13, 2012 7:40 pm
Re: Baker Hostetler v. Pillsbury v. Mintz Levin (NY)
_________ reminds me of a person who's currently a 2L I might know.
User was outed for anon abuse.
User was outed for anon abuse.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
Anonymous User
- Posts: 432656
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Baker Hostetler v. Pillsbury v. Mintz Levin (NY)
I have information about BH. The NY office of BH is primarily Madoff work, which is slowing down. Doing Madoff work also doesn't give you many transferrable skills (depending on what you are doing) as the issues involved in billion dollar Ponzi schemes are rather unique. I believe they also only pay market if you hit 1950 hours.
-
sublime
- Posts: 17385
- Joined: Sun Mar 10, 2013 12:21 pm
-
Anonymous User
- Posts: 432656
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Baker Hostetler v. Schulte v. Milbank
If Corporate, I'd be picking between Milbank and SRZ.
If you want to work anywhere but in NYC while at the firm, pick Milbank.
Otherwise, I think it depends on what areas of interest you have.
Looking at Chambers and Partners, Milbank is better for Bankruptcy, Finance, Tax and Project Finance in general.
They are equal on M&A and Capital Markets.
Schulte is ahead on Investment Management.
It should be noted that at Schulte, the biggest focus of the firm is by far Investment Management. So they are the best at what most of their attorneys do. This is likely true for Milbank too -- and most firms in general.
If you want to work anywhere but in NYC while at the firm, pick Milbank.
Otherwise, I think it depends on what areas of interest you have.
Looking at Chambers and Partners, Milbank is better for Bankruptcy, Finance, Tax and Project Finance in general.
They are equal on M&A and Capital Markets.
Schulte is ahead on Investment Management.
It should be noted that at Schulte, the biggest focus of the firm is by far Investment Management. So they are the best at what most of their attorneys do. This is likely true for Milbank too -- and most firms in general.
