Skadden DC vs. WilmerHale DC Forum

[Anonymous User]

Hey All,

I would love to get some advice/feedback. I'm lucky enough to have offers from both Skadden and WilmerHale in DC and have no idea what to do.

I'm interested mainly in financial regulatory work and both of these practices seem strong in those areas. I'm not entirely sure what I want to do with my career and am attracted to the regulatory components because I find them interested and because there are both transactional and litigation components.

I really like the people at both firms - everyone generally seems really friendly. They both seem to do really interesting work. I'm attracted to the larger range of practice areas available at Skadden but am also a big fan of the more generalist approach at WilmerHale - I'm not sure how I feel about the practice-specific offers that Skadden gives out.

If anyone has any thoughts about either firm, experiences, stories or insights, I would really appreciate hearing them!

[Anonymous User]

Do you have an email address?

[Anonymous User]

Speaking from personal knowledge: I think people will tell you generally that WilmerHale is one of the three best firms in DC (along with Covington and W&C) and that's the default choice. Fair enough. But I think Skadden's DC office is a credible choice if you're interested in the things that Skadden DC does very well: antitrust, tax, international trade, commercial litigation, political law, etc. Skadden is a major firm in DC even if it's not regarded on the same level as Wilmer/Covington/W&C.

One thing to consider: Skadden DC follows the NY bonus and salary structure. WilmerHale doesn't and moves to a black-box compensation model after Year 2. And the bonuses are generally not at the NY scale. http://abovethelaw.com/2015/01/associat ... wily-ways/ In DC, it's not as easy to just pile up the hours the way it is in NY.

[Anonymous User]

You'll get broad regulatory exposure at both, work hard at both, and probably make about the same at both (even taking into account WilmerHale's slightly different approach to compensation).

You should lean Skadden if you are more interested in deal work, transitioning to a business position in-house, or working in NY some day. You should lean WilmerHale if you are more interested in securities regulatory, transitioning to government, being in DC for the long-term, or getting involved in politics (especially Democratic politics).

Have you done a second look with each of those firm's fin reg departments?

[Anonymous User]

Also interested in this with the same choices. Anyone have a sense as to which is better for antitrust or Skadden's ability to send people to the government?

[Anonymous User]

Wilmer is probably better for criminal cartel defense while skadden is probably better for antitrust merger reviews. Wilmer places well in government generally, but I can't speak to skadden.

[Anonymous User]

Wilmer is probably better for criminal cartel defense while skadden is probably better for antitrust merger reviews. Wilmer places well in government generally, but I can't speak to skadden.

Skadden has a stronger antitrust practice generally, and its strength in DC is understated because half its antitrust group is based in NY. Criminal antitrust is a pretty small and cyclical area so it's more cartel civil litigation and mergers that take up most time at biglaw firms.