Simpson v Kirkland v Debevoise (all NYC) Forum

[Anonymous User]

In the corporate arena, any major distinctions between the 3 firms? By that I don't mean free market v assignment system. More generally, type of clients, exit option, culture, etc

[gchatbrah]

STB/Deb generally have a more genteel culture -- other side of the bro spectrum from Kirkland. When I was doing callbacks/second looks with Deb, associates complained that the environment was almost too polite -- in that it made it difficult to get honest feedback. All deal with private equity clients, all have the backing of a top 3 fund formation practice. STB and Kirkland have very sophisticated leveraged finance/acquisition finance practices, which ensures that if they're not repping a PE client directly, they'll be involved with financing on one side.

I had this same choice, and I chose STB. The culture seemed a little less polite than Debevoise, so I felt like I'd get real feedback if I asked. I didn't like the free-market system that Kirkland boasts, and I didn't like how it seemed like the eat-what-you-kill partnership compensation flowed down to the associates from a culture perspective. I also just think the rotation system that STB and Deb utilize is a better way to learn to be a corporate lawyer -- I liked the idea of someone who knows better than me about what skills I need controlling where I went next with deal experience. STB in NY is as good or better than Deb or Kirk NY in every practice area I can think of (at least in terms of how Chambers rankings reflect client perception of esteem). Can't really go wrong here, though. Do a second look at all 3!

[Anonymous User]

Deb summer here. Culture is probably the biggest distinction, followed by the type of clients. As for culture, it's not so polite that it'll be difficult to receive honest feedback. The downside of its politeness comes with the passivity with which it deals with problems, such as staffing issues. But at the end of the day, that's the real charm of the place. It really (really) didn't fire anyone after the crisis hit. I don't have a lot to say about Kirkland's culture besides what is typically said, but of Simpson I would add that it's really not that similar to Deb's. People are cool and kind at both, but at Debevoise people are more eccentric and academic.

As for the clients, I would say Kirkland and STB are getting much more PE work outside of the fund formation practice (i.e. M&A work). Debevoise certainly gets it, but STB/Kirkland are dominant. Debevoise gets other great deals in that arena though - take a look at partner profiles - and it is my impression that Debevoise has the premier fund formation practice (but keep in mind that is a totally different thing than what you think of as PE). Also, Debevoise is a bit different than these firms because it has best-in-the world practices across a great variety of practice areas, e.g. insurance, white collar, international arbitration. A lot of Debevoise's strength comes from these areas, not really general corporate. I would even go so far as to say STB and Kirkland may be better by some measures for general corporate/M&A. But not meaningfully so. Your exit options will be essentially the same, they are difficult to predict, and can come about by luck, so just pick where you'll be happy. I turned down a V5 for Debevoise and have zero regrets.

[Anonymous User]

How are you still choosing?

[Anonymous User]

How are you still choosing?