Top Law Schools

This might be a strange request, but I would love to hear some negative feedback, if any, about Davis Polk's corporate practice in NY. I'm strongly leaning towards DPW, and have heard really nothing but good things (with the caveat that it's still NY Biglaw). I would love to hear any criticisms that past associates or summer may have regarding the office.

Much appreciated. Thanks!

The big one: DPW's M&A group is on the small side, but often very popular among incoming associates. And the firm does so much credit and capital markets work that it can be hard to avoid even if you're not that interested in it.

Also looking at DPW, how robotic are associates? Will I be forced to temper all personality?

Anonymous User wrote:Also looking at DPW, how robotic are associates? Will I be forced to temper all personality?

Not at all robotic. Friendly, supportive, fun. Some people are a little reserved/passive. Sometimes you run into a bit of a gentile/hamptons vibe in some quarters but really there's room for lots of different types.

Anonymous User wrote:The big one: DPW's M&A group is on the small side, but often very popular among incoming associates. And the firm does so much credit and capital markets work that it can be hard to avoid even if you're not that interested in it.

M&A has historically been smaller than finance and cap markets, but it's had record years last year and this year and topped out the league tables. So it shouldn't be underestimated for volume or complexity.

The defining feature of DPW's corp dept relative to its peers (CSM, STB, S&C) is its 2 rotation system and diversity of smaller groups, vis a vis three rotations, eternal rotations, and general corporate. All have advantages and 'drawbacks', but none have proven superior over any other in an absolute sense.

I'm also curious about DPW. I know their corporate work is top notch but is the culture as passive aggressive as people say? Is everyone that preppy and formal?

I start there tomorrow. I like to think this is one of my brothers in arms getting cold feet the night before we go.

any other thoughts?

Bumping this. Probably going to accept an offer from DPW next week. It's NY Biglaw so it's going to be awful but I can't really find any specific negatives. Seems like a relatively lovely place to work. Any cautionary words?

Not a lot of genuine opportunity to advance within the firm, they don't necessarily give you marketable skills because they have a lot of associates and they expect you to leave, don't make homegrown partners.

That's all the negative I've heard.

I think the one downside was sort of touched on already--it can be hard to control your career path a bit or get a generalist experience b/c of the limited number (2) and relatively short duration (6 months and 4 months) of rotations. It's a little competitive to get slotted into the M&A group, and their strong relationships with JPM/MS can be a bit of a double-edged sword, b/c a lot of the finance work is bank-side representation, which can be somewhat less interesting and worse for exit ops.

That said, all of the top firms have some weaknesses, and the choice ultimately comes down to preference. If your gut says DPW, go with it. Assuming you're looking in the same tier, you're not going to make a bad decision.

Anonymous User wrote:Not a lot of genuine opportunity to advance within the firm, they don't necessarily give you marketable skills because they have a lot of associates and they expect you to leave, don't make homegrown partners.

That's all the negative I've heard.

I think the homegrown partners thing is actually completely untrue. DPW is generally one of the less lateral-friendly among the top firms, and its partners are overwhelmingly homegrown (compared to, e.g., Skadden or STB). That said, odds of becoming partner is a terrible basis for choosing between firms.

People are generally nicer at DPW, but not as nice/friendly as at a firm like Cleary. Partners are generally very reserved and aloof at DPW.

Also JPM is a terrible client to work for.

Anonymous User wrote:People are generally nicer at DPW, but not as nice/friendly as at a firm like Cleary

lol?

to be clear, there is literally no person on earth who would be in a position to accurately tell you which firm generally has nicer people

v5junior wrote:I think the one downside was sort of touched on already--it can be hard to control your career path a bit or get a generalist experience b/c of the limited number (2) and relatively short duration (6 months and 4 months) of rotations. It's a little competitive to get slotted into the M&A group, and their strong relationships with JPM/MS can be a bit of a double-edged sword, b/c a lot of the finance work is bank-side representation, which can be somewhat less interesting and worse for exit ops.

That said, all of the top firms have some weaknesses, and the choice ultimately comes down to preference. If your gut says DPW, go with it. Assuming you're looking in the same tier, you're not going to make a bad decision.

I had a DPW partner tell me to my face that if you want a particular group, they will make sure you end up there. Stretching the truth a bit? I've dug fairly deep on this and I can't find a single example of an associate being forced into a group they don't want long term. You may have to endure another rotation somewhere else, but they'll get you into your preferred group. Or so I've been told by several DPW attorneys.

v5junior wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:People are generally nicer at DPW, but not as nice/friendly as at a firm like Cleary

lol?

to be clear, there is literally no person on earth who would be in a position to accurately tell you which firm generally has nicer people

Odd statement, considering I've worked at both of them. Do I not exist?

Anonymous User wrote:

v5junior wrote:I think the one downside was sort of touched on already--it can be hard to control your career path a bit or get a generalist experience b/c of the limited number (2) and relatively short duration (6 months and 4 months) of rotations. It's a little competitive to get slotted into the M&A group, and their strong relationships with JPM/MS can be a bit of a double-edged sword, b/c a lot of the finance work is bank-side representation, which can be somewhat less interesting and worse for exit ops.

That said, all of the top firms have some weaknesses, and the choice ultimately comes down to preference. If your gut says DPW, go with it. Assuming you're looking in the same tier, you're not going to make a bad decision.

I had a DPW partner tell me to my face that if you want a particular group, they will make sure you end up there. Stretching the truth a bit? I've dug fairly deep on this and I can't find a single example of an associate being forced into a group they don't want long term. You may have to endure another rotation somewhere else, but they'll get you into your preferred group. Or so I've been told by several DPW attorneys.

Am I stretching the truth? All I said was it's a little competitive--not getting it as your first rotation (i.e. the longer one), spending an additional six or whatever months in a practice group that might not be your first or second choice? For a lot of people, that's a third of their tenure at DPW spent outside of m&a that they didn't want to spend outside of m&a. Like I said, DPW is a great firm. Whenever you're making distinctions among law firms of this caliber, you're going to be splitting hairs a bit.

Anonymous User wrote:

v5junior wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:People are generally nicer at DPW, but not as nice/friendly as at a firm like Cleary

lol?

to be clear, there is literally no person on earth who would be in a position to accurately tell you which firm generally has nicer people

Odd statement, considering I've worked at both of them. Do I not exist?

Oh, okay. So you've interacted with enough people, and are just so great at telling whether people are "nice" or not, such that, regardless of what practice group someone chooses or how many of your buds leave in the next 3 years before this person actually starts at his or her law firm, you're in a position to speak to this? Or did you just see at Cleary that "nice" was factor #2 on the list of criteria for recruiting while DPW had it as #3?

Can anyone speak to exit options coming out of DPW's capital markets group? Are you mostly restricted to financial institutions? Or is in-house counsel at F500's in play?

v5junior wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

v5junior wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:People are generally nicer at DPW, but not as nice/friendly as at a firm like Cleary

lol?

to be clear, there is literally no person on earth who would be in a position to accurately tell you which firm generally has nicer people

Odd statement, considering I've worked at both of them. Do I not exist?

Oh, okay. So you've interacted with enough people, and are just so great at telling whether people are "nice" or not, such that, regardless of what practice group someone chooses or how many of your buds leave in the next 3 years before this person actually starts at his or her law firm, you're in a position to speak to this? Or did you just see at Cleary that "nice" was factor #2 on the list of criteria for recruiting while DPW had it as #3?

You must work at Skadden.

Anonymous User wrote:

v5junior wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

v5junior wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:People are generally nicer at DPW, but not as nice/friendly as at a firm like Cleary

lol?

to be clear, there is literally no person on earth who would be in a position to accurately tell you which firm generally has nicer people

Odd statement, considering I've worked at both of them. Do I not exist?

Oh, okay. So you've interacted with enough people, and are just so great at telling whether people are "nice" or not, such that, regardless of what practice group someone chooses or how many of your buds leave in the next 3 years before this person actually starts at his or her law firm, you're in a position to speak to this? Or did you just see at Cleary that "nice" was factor #2 on the list of criteria for recruiting while DPW had it as #3?

You must work at Skadden.

Guess again! Thanks for all of your useful contributions so far, though.

Possible downside: It's not WLRK, CSM, or S&C. Possible upside: It's not WLRK, CSM, or S&C.

Definitive upside: It's not Skadden or any other law firm not listed in the sentence above.

Seriously, what are you choosing against? It's obviously a top-tier department, and if you're simply looking for anodyne advice about the "downsides," congrats -- you've got a bitchfight about how it might <stretch the truth> to call its rotation system <competitive>.

lawlorbust wrote:Possible downside: It's not WLRK, CSM, or S&C. Possible upside: It's not WLRK, CSM, or S&C.

Definitive upside: It's not Skadden or any other law firm not listed in the sentence above.

Seriously, what are you choosing against? It's obviously a top-tier department, and if you're simply looking for anodyne advice about the "downsides," congrats -- you've got a bitchfight about how it might <stretch the truth> to call its rotation system <competitive>.

Think you could probably expand that list up top to include Cleary, STB and K&E, but otherwise, yep.

v5junior wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Not a lot of genuine opportunity to advance within the firm, they don't necessarily give you marketable skills because they have a lot of associates and they expect you to leave, don't make homegrown partners.

That's all the negative I've heard.

I think the homegrown partners thing is actually completely untrue. DPW is generally one of the less lateral-friendly among the top firms, and its partners are overwhelmingly homegrown (compared to, e.g., Skadden or STB). That said, odds of becoming partner is a terrible basis for choosing between firms.

DPW has relatively high leverage, which may or may not matter to you in terms of training and potential to advance within the firm.

I don't think this necessarily matters and would pick DPW over almost any other firm. However, if asked for downsides it seems right to give them.

Anonymous User wrote:

v5junior wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Not a lot of genuine opportunity to advance within the firm, they don't necessarily give you marketable skills because they have a lot of associates and they expect you to leave, don't make homegrown partners.

That's all the negative I've heard.

I think the homegrown partners thing is actually completely untrue. DPW is generally one of the less lateral-friendly among the top firms, and its partners are overwhelmingly homegrown (compared to, e.g., Skadden or STB). That said, odds of becoming partner is a terrible basis for choosing between firms.

DPW has relatively high leverage, which may or may not matter to you in terms of training and potential to advance within the firm.

I don't think this necessarily matters and would pick DPW over almost any other firm. However, if asked for downsides it seems right to give them.

Sure, but it's different to say they don't make partners vs. they don't make homegrown partners.

v5junior wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

v5junior wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Not a lot of genuine opportunity to advance within the firm, they don't necessarily give you marketable skills because they have a lot of associates and they expect you to leave, don't make homegrown partners.

That's all the negative I've heard.

I think the homegrown partners thing is actually completely untrue. DPW is generally one of the less lateral-friendly among the top firms, and its partners are overwhelmingly homegrown (compared to, e.g., Skadden or STB). That said, odds of becoming partner is a terrible basis for choosing between firms.

DPW has relatively high leverage, which may or may not matter to you in terms of training and potential to advance within the firm.

I don't think this necessarily matters and would pick DPW over almost any other firm. However, if asked for downsides it seems right to give them.

Sure, but it's different to say they don't make partners vs. they don't make homegrown partners.

+++

Original anon comment is just very very incorrect. Your odds of making partner at DPW are low, but they are astronomically better if you start there than if you lateral in, the stats don't lie.

The commentary on the rotations is on point, it's the best objective differentiating factor between DPW its peer firms. All of the systems are defensible, it comes down to preference.

To the person who spoke to a partner who said DPW makes sure everyone gets where they want to be - I'd say that's overwhelmingly but not 100% true. If by all accounts you are a decent junior and your group of choice happens to be oversubscribed at the time they will work you in 6 months or a year later. If you are not a decent junior, the firm is likely to put you where they need bodies.

Then finally the culture is definitely a thing but the passive aggressive stereotype has not been my experience. It's a very collaborative environment filled with people who work very hard but will put down what they are doing to make your question their priority. I've consistently gotten feedback on work, both positive and negative, and that's traditionally the biggest connected stereotype.

Really most of the people in the building are there because they think they have bought into the culture and it ends up as a self-fulfilling circle. The culture isn't for everyone though - some people are fueled by frantic energy, late night all hands meetings, raised voices, vigorous challenges to their thoughts, etc. and that is just not DPW. People still have a TON of personality, it's just a subdued work environment by and large.

(DPW Junior)