Shearman and sterling or fried frank? Forum

Anonymous User · Post by **Anonymous User** » Thu Sep 17, 2015 12:05 pm

Alright tls, it's time to decide this week, and I've narrowed it to the two. Since your collective wisdom has never steered me wrong, especially since I've ignored it when it was obviously wrong, I'm seeking your input one last time!

A little about me (mostly unhelpful):

CCN, debt free merit scholar. I don't know whether I want to litigate or transact, which is a bullshit thing to claim to know as a 2L barring prior experience. I do think certain loose connections I have could make real estate an attractive choice, which favors fried frank, but I also have long term academic inclinations and there seem to be a good number of people publishing at Shearman and Sterling- and academia seems to be more friendly to litigators.

I don't plan to make partner, and that being the case, good exit options from biglaw are important to me if the professor thing doesn't work out. That's a reason to favor transactional.

I may clerk. That's a reason to favor litigation.

Now that my *totally* unclear career path is out on the table, which firm, basically in a vacuum, sounds like the better option?

Priorities are
A) quality of life in firm
B) quality of post firm life (aka exit options, largely determined by preftige of firm and practice group).

If your answer is aimed at helpfully disabusing me of the notion of work-life balance, please just don't hit submit to clutter the page. Everyone who has billed 2500 one year and 2100 another knows the difference. Responses from practicing attorneys strongly preferred.

Thanks!

Anonymous User · Post by **Anonymous User** » Thu Sep 17, 2015 12:13 pm

Fried Frank is the better choice if you want lit or have the slightest interest in real estate. I have heard both firms have the usual terrible biglaw hours. Would have advised that you choose Shearman if you were interested in corp.

Anonymous User · Post by **Anonymous User** » Thu Sep 17, 2015 12:35 pm

Thanks!

Anything on firms futures, job security in the event of another downturn (I know ff layoffs were startlingly rough), insider complaints or commendations with regard to the firm generally or specific practice groups - this site is best used as a rumor mill!

I can't tell whether s and s is turning around. When i was an infant they would be mentioned in a breath with skadden. I wonder whether to see that as where they could be again, or just t=0 on a long down trend. Preftige is admittedly a strong factor in a first law firm - exit options could be where I work for significantly longer (I envision about 5 years in biglaw).

I can't decide whether I see the smaller size of ff as a plus for them or for Shearman. Bigger firm means bigger footprint and bigger network, ceteris paribus. Smaller firm could be slightly more personable workplace. The impression I got from ff was a little more laid back. Not that i got any red flags from Shearman either...

Anonymous User · Post by **Anonymous User** » Thu Sep 17, 2015 12:42 pm

Practicing lawyer here. If these are your best offers, you have almost no chance at an academic career (even with a clerkship), so that shouldn't enter into the equation. The firms are equally prestigious and have roughly equally good practices in most corporate areas, though there are some areas FF is stronger in (e.g. bkcy or RE) and some that S&S is stronger in (traditionally white shoe practices like cap markets, finance). Both are adequate in lit.

Basically, pick whichever firm feels better.

Anonymous User · Post by **Anonymous User** » Thu Sep 17, 2015 1:30 pm

Thanks! I blew summer campus interviews and sorta learned how to interview afterward, fwiw. I'm happy with both offers, but my grades are significantly better than you seem to imagine. Anyway, I've had professors who've worked in less preftigiouf firms - they also clerked for federal appellate courts or SC, of course. Anyway I have strong backers for when I'm ready to pursue that route ; and I'll have publications out soon after I graduate.

I still see it as a somewhat long shot, but not hopeless and certainly not based on the firms I work for. Publication and a supportive network is more critical.

Anonymous User · Post by **Anonymous User** » Thu Sep 17, 2015 3:08 pm

mt2165 · Post by **mt2165** » Thu Sep 17, 2015 3:14 pm

^Wtf "Jewish practice areas"?

Anonymous User · Post by **Anonymous User** » Thu Sep 17, 2015 3:41 pm

Lol what the hell did I miss? Hey it might have been helpful, I am Jewish!

Anonymous User · Post by **Anonymous User** » Thu Sep 17, 2015 9:14 pm

If you were 100% fixed on corporate, would say Shearman here unless you want to do hedge fund. But with litigation option still open (as well as real estate), go FF.

Shearman and sterling or fried frank? Forum

Shearman and sterling or fried frank?

Re: Shearman and sterling or fried frank?

Re: Shearman and sterling or fried frank?

Re: Shearman and sterling or fried frank?

Re: Shearman and sterling or fried frank?

Register now to search topics and post comments!

Re: Shearman and sterling or fried frank?

Re: Shearman and sterling or fried frank?

Re: Shearman and sterling or fried frank?

Re: Shearman and sterling or fried frank?

Register for access!