NYC Lit: STB v. Kirkland Forum

[Anonymous User]

Feeling very fortunate to have offers from both firms. Here are my major concerns/considerations:

Culture - I preferred the people I met at Kirkland, and tend to be social and pretty casual in how I interact with people. I am probably a better fit for the more outgoing, "fratty" culture that Kirkland has a reputation for (although my inclination is that it may not be as true in lit). That said, I hate assholes. Simpson felt a little stuffy and rigid to me.

Exit Options - This is a big one for me. I'd love to clerk and then get into either government work (state AG/USAO/DOJ) or public interest (specifically NRDC or ACLU). Most likely want to switch markets from NYC if national brand makes a difference.

Substantive Work - My sense is that there are more opportunities for substantive work for young associates at Kirkland. The partner:associate ratio for litigation at Simpson is around 1:4, while at Kirkland it's closer to 1:1.

Hours - Big difference between the two? My impression is that Kirkland junior associates bill substantially more than associates at Simpson.

Types of Cases - Not so interested in securities lit. Much more interested in white collar, soft IP, general commercial, and (to the extent that young associates are allowed to touch it, if at all) appellate.

Prestige - Any meaningful difference for lit specifically?


Input would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!

[jbagelboy]

Kirkland equity partner:associate ratio is comparable or possibly worse than Simpson. You can't count the non-equity partners in the partner/associate ratio for the purposes of substantive work and partner contact; non-equity partners are just senior associates with a different title. That's certainly not an advantage for Kirkland IMO.

Simpson has the more elite lit practice in New York, although it's probably not a huge distinction. E.g., Simpson is Band 1 elite for lit in NY, KE band 2. Simpson is a New York based firm, so more judges and AUSA's have worked there/are familiar with the firm. I'm not sure how much that impacts hiring, but Simpson certainly has the stronger white collar practice, which is big for any future government aspirations.

As far as hours are concerned, they both work a ton. Kirkland associates have more incentive to "bill" more from a compensation perspective, but you'll have tough hours at either shop.

Culture wise, Simpson is friendlier and more reserved. This can go either way.

For litigators in New York, I would say Simpson Thacher is the better firm overall; that being said, if you really like K&E and didn't like Simpson, fit is important enough here to be a deciding factor.

[Anonymous User]

Thanks, very helpful. I neglected to think about the non equity partner aspect, even though I still think the ratio at K&E is better. Any other written thoughts? Need to make a decision ASAP and feel completely torn.

[Anonymous User]

I think STB is a better firm to be in if you are choosing New York as your market. It has more New York contacts and thus better exit options. Always better to be in a main office than a satellite.