Shearman v. Cadwalader v. Milbank (all NYC) Forum

(On Campus Interviews, Summer Associate positions, Firm Reviews, Tips, ...)
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 User
Posts: 432536
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Shearman v. Cadwalader v. Milbank (all NYC)

Post by Anonymous User » Tue Sep 08, 2015 5:27 pm

I want to do transactional stuff and I'm wondering more about fit and long-term prospects. Any insight would be welcomed, I'm finding this to be a really hard decision.

Anonymous User
Posts: 432536
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Shearman v. Cadwalader v. Milbank (all NYC)

Post by Anonymous User » Tue Sep 08, 2015 7:14 pm

Bump. Also interested in this.

Anonymous User
Posts: 432536
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Shearman v. Cadwalader v. Milbank (all NYC)

Post by Anonymous User » Tue Sep 08, 2015 7:19 pm

shearman = downward spiral
cadwalader = really high leverage

milbank imo.

Anonymous User
Posts: 432536
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Shearman v. Cadwalader v. Milbank (all NYC)

Post by Anonymous User » Tue Sep 08, 2015 7:23 pm

Anonymous User wrote:shearman = downward spiral
cadwalader = really high leverage

milbank imo.
What is the basis for saying that Shearman is in a downward spiral? Any numbers or specifics?

Anonymous User
Posts: 432536
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Shearman v. Cadwalader v. Milbank (all NYC)

Post by Anonymous User » Tue Sep 08, 2015 7:44 pm

OP: I would narrow your options to Shearman and Milbank. If you don't know what within transactional work you want to do (M&A, project finance, capt markets, private equity, etc), then I would choose Shearman, since its corporate practice is more diverse and is highly ranked in many areas. For example, according to http://www.chambersandpartners.com/1280 ... torial/5/1 Shearman is a league above Milbank in M&A.
If your interest is specific, Milbank could be a better option depending on what you want to do.

Anon above: If you are obsessed with Vault rankings, Shearman will still never fall to Milbank's range. Nor will Milbank rise up in rankings dramatically over next few years. But all this obsession with Vault is just bs though. I wouldn't rely on Vault to choose where I want to work.

Want to continue reading?

Register now to search topics and post comments!

Absolutely FREE!


Anonymous User
Posts: 432536
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Shearman v. Cadwalader v. Milbank (all NYC)

Post by Anonymous User » Tue Sep 08, 2015 7:51 pm

What's wrong with cadwalader? I've heard they changed up their culture recently, and it's chambers ranked one for capital markets - securitization. Also, office is swanky as fucl.

Anonymous User
Posts: 432536
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Shearman v. Cadwalader v. Milbank (all NYC)

Post by Anonymous User » Tue Sep 08, 2015 7:55 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:shearman = downward spiral
cadwalader = really high leverage

milbank imo.
What is the basis for saying that Shearman is in a downward spiral? Any numbers or specifics?
Congrats on your offers but I honestly think you should research the firms more on your own using better online resources.

Anonymous User
Posts: 432536
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Shearman v. Cadwalader v. Milbank (all NYC)

Post by Anonymous User » Tue Sep 08, 2015 8:44 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:shearman = downward spiral
cadwalader = really high leverage

milbank imo.
What is the basis for saying that Shearman is in a downward spiral? Any numbers or specifics?
Congrats on your offers but I honestly think you should research the firms more on your own using better online resources.
I did and it seems like much of whats said on TLS about firms is hive mind. That's why I asked the anon for something concrete. Still interested to hear from the anon...

Anonymous User
Posts: 432536
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Shearman v. Cadwalader v. Milbank (all NYC)

Post by Anonymous User » Tue Sep 08, 2015 10:43 pm

I would definitely go to Milbank of these three.

Want to continue reading?

Register for access!

Did I mention it was FREE ?


Wol

New
Posts: 26
Joined: Sat Jun 06, 2015 10:49 pm

Re: Shearman v. Cadwalader v. Milbank (all NYC)

Post by Wol » Tue Sep 08, 2015 10:54 pm

Anonymous User wrote:OP: I would narrow your options to Shearman and Milbank. If you don't know what within transactional work you want to do (M&A, project finance, capt markets, private equity, etc), then I would choose Shearman, since its corporate practice is more diverse and is highly ranked in many areas. For example, according to http://www.chambersandpartners.com/1280 ... torial/5/1 Shearman is a league above Milbank in M&A.
If your interest is specific, Milbank could be a better option depending on what you want to do.

Anon above: If you are obsessed with Vault rankings, Shearman will still never fall to Milbank's range. Nor will Milbank rise up in rankings dramatically over next few years. But all this obsession with Vault is just bs though. I wouldn't rely on Vault to choose where I want to work.
Milbank was 25th in 2008, which is higher than Shearman is now. Shearman was 14th that year, but the Vault rankings fluctuate.

Wol

New
Posts: 26
Joined: Sat Jun 06, 2015 10:49 pm

Re: Shearman v. Cadwalader v. Milbank (all NYC)

Post by Wol » Tue Sep 08, 2015 11:03 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:shearman = downward spiral
cadwalader = really high leverage

milbank imo.
What is the basis for saying that Shearman is in a downward spiral? Any numbers or specifics?
Not the quoted anon, but here's my understanding:

Shearman had several incredibly important corporate partners in a row leave to work for clients, and they weren't invested enough in countercyclical practices like litigation to handle the economic downturn that coincided with those departures. They went from 5th by gross revenue to mid 30s in ten years, though that decline seems to have finally leveled off since about 2012. I've read that 2014 was really positive for them, but looking at M&A league tables for the first half of this year they're nowhere to be found, so I don't know. I don't know how seriously to take league tables.

Have plummeted in the vault rankings as well. If you go to the vault list, there's a drop down menu where you can select previous year's rankings. That will illustrate what I mean.

Anonymous User
Posts: 432536
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Shearman v. Cadwalader v. Milbank (all NYC)

Post by Anonymous User » Tue Sep 08, 2015 11:30 pm

first/vague anon:
Wol wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:shearman = downward spiral
cadwalader = really high leverage

milbank imo.
What is the basis for saying that Shearman is in a downward spiral? Any numbers or specifics?
Not the quoted anon, but here's my understanding:

Shearman had several incredibly important corporate partners in a row leave to work for clients, and they weren't invested enough in countercyclical practices like litigation to handle the economic downturn that coincided with those departures. They went from 5th by gross revenue to mid 30s in ten years, though that decline seems to have finally leveled off since about 2012. I've read that 2014 was really positive for them, but looking at M&A league tables for the first half of this year they're nowhere to be found, so I don't know. I don't know how seriously to take league tables.

Have plummeted in the vault rankings as well. If you go to the vault list, there's a drop down menu where you can select previous year's rankings. That will illustrate what I mean.
Absolutely this - minus the vault rankings stuff, which is largely pointless.
You mentioned you're thinking long term.. look at Cadwalader's leverage numbers.. making partner will be tough/impossible
The departure of the head of the firm, as well as key structured finance partners, layoffs through the GFC..

Your original question was pretty vague but id go w milbank. if u are interested in project finance, leveraged finance, restructuring, transportation, or private client work.. its not even a comparison.

cadwalader is clearly solid for cap markets/CMBS powerhouse.
shearman.. meh LatAm?
again original question was fairly vague

Anonymous User
Posts: 432536
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Shearman v. Cadwalader v. Milbank (all NYC)

Post by Anonymous User » Tue Sep 08, 2015 11:45 pm

I would choose Shearman for general corporate practice. If you are interested in M&A, capital markets, Shearman is no-brainer here. Good for project finance too though Milbank is also renowned for project finance. Shearman has gone down enough and it is likely to slowly go back up again.

Register now!

Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.

It's still FREE!


Anonymous User
Posts: 432536
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Shearman v. Cadwalader v. Milbank (all NYC)

Post by Anonymous User » Tue Sep 08, 2015 11:51 pm

Anonymous User wrote:If you are interested in ... capital markets, Shearman is no-brainer here.
Yeah, this is definitely wrong. If you want cap markets, you go to Cadwalader. M&A, sure do Shearman. But Cadwalader is no doubt the best cap markets firm of what you've got and the overall best of any firm if you want to do cmbs.

Anonymous User
Posts: 432536
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Shearman v. Cadwalader v. Milbank (all NYC)

Post by Anonymous User » Wed Sep 09, 2015 8:32 am

Anon would probably get better advice if he/she provided more background info, thread has been maximized

Anonymous User
Posts: 432536
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Shearman v. Cadwalader v. Milbank (all NYC)

Post by Anonymous User » Mon Apr 11, 2016 3:28 pm

milbank just seems heads and shoulders above these guys nowadays. cadwalader seems to be on the decline, shearman is cool. Milbank has been around forever and is beyond well-regarded in NYC, just under the STB PW Cleary band

Londonbear

Bronze
Posts: 209
Joined: Fri Dec 27, 2013 11:19 am

Re: Shearman v. Cadwalader v. Milbank (all NYC)

Post by Londonbear » Mon Apr 11, 2016 5:05 pm

Anonymous User wrote:milbank just seems heads and shoulders above these guys nowadays. cadwalader seems to be on the decline, shearman is cool. Milbank has been around forever and is beyond well-regarded in NYC, just under the STB PW Cleary band
Uh seriously?

Get unlimited access to all forums and topics

Register now!

I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...


User avatar
Actus Reus

Bronze
Posts: 460
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2014 8:21 pm

Re: Shearman v. Cadwalader v. Milbank (all NYC)

Post by Actus Reus » Mon Apr 11, 2016 5:10 pm

Anonymous User wrote:milbank just seems heads and shoulders above these guys nowadays. cadwalader seems to be on the decline, shearman is cool. Milbank has been around forever and is beyond well-regarded in NYC, just under the STB PW Cleary band
The rare, factually incorrect thread necro.

h2go

Bronze
Posts: 168
Joined: Sat May 30, 2015 8:38 pm

Re: Shearman v. Cadwalader v. Milbank (all NYC)

Post by h2go » Mon Apr 11, 2016 5:13 pm

Someone from Milbrank got in trouble for their precipitous drop in Vault ranking.

Anonymous User
Posts: 432536
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Shearman v. Cadwalader v. Milbank (all NYC)

Post by Anonymous User » Mon Apr 18, 2016 9:51 pm

I've heard Cadwalader is absolutely tanking (it has lost most, if not all, of its litigation partnership and associate ranks, and I think it might be leaking transactional people too?). I only know 2 peoples' first hand accounts, but IMO, it's definitely worth doing your diligence on Cadwalader before committing to them.

User avatar
Actus Reus

Bronze
Posts: 460
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2014 8:21 pm

Re: Shearman v. Cadwalader v. Milbank (all NYC)

Post by Actus Reus » Mon Apr 18, 2016 10:07 pm

Anonymous User wrote:I've heard Cadwalader is absolutely tanking (it has lost most, if not all, of its litigation partnership and associate ranks, and I think it might be leaking transactional people too?). I only know 2 peoples' first hand accounts, but IMO, it's definitely worth doing your diligence on Cadwalader before committing to them.
Your bumping strategy seems to now involve above the law articles, so nicely done. You should post about bonus payouts next.

Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.

Register now, it's still FREE!


Anonymous User
Posts: 432536
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Shearman v. Cadwalader v. Milbank (all NYC)

Post by Anonymous User » Mon Apr 18, 2016 10:54 pm

Looks like Milbank is engaging in a new online PR campaign.

ExpOriental

Bronze
Posts: 287
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2018 2:36 pm

Re: Shearman v. Cadwalader v. Milbank (all NYC)

Post by ExpOriental » Wed Mar 10, 2021 1:14 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Tue Sep 08, 2015 7:44 pm
OP: I would narrow your options to Shearman and Milbank. If you don't know what within transactional work you want to do (M&A, project finance, capt markets, private equity, etc), then I would choose Shearman, since its corporate practice is more diverse and is highly ranked in many areas. For example, according to http://www.chambersandpartners.com/1280 ... torial/5/1 Shearman is a league above Milbank in M&A.
If your interest is specific, Milbank could be a better option depending on what you want to do.

Anon above: If you are obsessed with Vault rankings, Shearman will still never fall to Milbank's range. Nor will Milbank rise up in rankings dramatically over next few years. But all this obsession with Vault is just bs though. I wouldn't rely on Vault to choose where I want to work.
Nailed it

User avatar
lolwutpar

Bronze
Posts: 240
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2020 4:13 pm

Re: Shearman v. Cadwalader v. Milbank (all NYC)

Post by lolwutpar » Wed Mar 10, 2021 2:09 pm

Aged like milk.

We should all be eternally grateful to Milbank for the $$$$$

Seriously? What are you waiting for?

Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!


Post Reply Post Anonymous Reply  

Return to “Legal Employment”