Top Law Schools

Former Sullivan & Cromwell associate here answering questions about the associate experience. Left as a mid-level. The firm has its pros and cons, but I don't think I could have gotten a better experience at another firm. Some observations to start off with:

1. S&C has a very direct culture

True. Feedback is very direct. When you screw up (and even the best associates screw up at times), feedback will be swift and in your face. You learn to avoid similar mistakes going forward and is pushed to become a really good lawyer who prizes effectiveness and perfection.

2. S&C has a bad culture

False. Culture is group dependent and very good overall. Partners/senior associates are demanding but polite. I found most partners/senior associates to be considerate of junior/mid-level lawyers' time. Partners/senior associates tend to think carefully about the exact analyses/products they want before delegating in order to minimize needless changes/tedious turns.

3. S&C provides incredible exit opportunities

True, with caveats. At the highest end, I have seen mid-level litigation lawyers leave for SCOTUS clerkships and AUSA positions and corporate lawyers leave for investment banking positions at Goldman, Evercore, Morgan Stanley, Citi, etc., consulting positions at BCG, McKinsey, etc., and associate positions at Wachtell as early as in year 1. Most lawyers leave for in-house legal positions at investment banks, F500 corporations, and other law firms. Could these lawyers have gotten the same exit opportunities if they had chosen to work at Wachtell/Cravath, probably.

4. S&C does not try to attract any particular type of personality

True. S&C's recruiting process tend to be very grade-based. As a result, you will find all types of personalities (from people who go out every weekend & sometimes during the week to people who prefer books over drinks) at the firm. S&C does try to screen out assholes.

5. S&C's generalist system provides a great training ground for junior lawyers

True, with caveats. In practice, S&C's generalist system is a free market system with central assignment mechanism. You get assigned work in practices areas that you ranked high most of the time, though you will be asked to work on assignments that don't interest you at all sometimes. The free market system allows you to stand out only a few month into your first year. Some star first-years (yes, some stars are apparent as first years) seem to be able to consistently source high-profile/interesting work, be treated explicitly as mid-levels, and to turn down work (even from partners). Though, there's enough good work for everyone.

Are you a WASP?

True, with caveats. In practice, S&C's generalist system is a free market system with central assignment mechanism. You get assigned work in practices areas that you ranked high most of the time, though you will be asked to work on assignments that don't interest you at all sometimes. The free market system allows you to stand out only a few month into your first year. Some star first-years (yes, some stars are apparent as first years) seem to be able to consistently source high-profile/interesting work, be treated explicitly as mid-levels, and to turn down work (even from partners). Though, there's enough good work for everyone

This is one of the great low key trolls of all time.

Do you still have your S&C shoulder bag?

I have not been too successful in the dating world because although I am tall and good looking, I am shy around women. If I go the S & C route and gain 3-4 years of experience there, will I have better chance (or even just as good a chance as male lawyers at Wachtell/Cravath) with women?

Thanks.

School?

Worst AMA ever

Do any associates or partners at Sullivan Cromwell chew tobacco?

Can you chew tobacco in your office at this firm?

After reading your post, I think I know everything I need to about S&C. Thanks.

What's S&C's reputation for litigation in NY compared to Cravath or PW (the other two litigation shops that are thought to be top-notch)? Basically the same but different focus?

LaLiLuLeLo wrote:Are you a WASP?

True, with caveats. While S&C is generally known for being the whitest motherfuckers around, in practice we have several women and minorities. We are especially diverse at the staff and janitorial levels. I personally identify as a White non-Hispanic Caucasian, but no longer believe in God after my time at A&C so cannot fully claim the Protestant part of that tag.

Thanks for taking the time OP, insider insight is always interesting to me.

How did you feel about your ability to work from home? Was it easy to do so? Is it shunned? Promoted?

I think criticism is better upfront, much better than passive aggressiveness at least. Can you expand a bit more on what that feedback is like? And I mean on a day-to-day basis, not the formal reviews.

With respect to hours and work-life balance, did you ever feel like things were getting far too overwhelming? If so, how did you handle it?

Thanks again

How much does it bother you that Skadden is ranked higher by Vault

Thank you very much!
Can you tell us about specific practices in the firm that are known as being more relaxed/friendly/balanced?

what drives law students and junior associates to be incessant and shameless homers for their law firms

Blackfish wrote:what drives law students and junior associates to be incessant and shameless homers for their law firms

Validation that you didn't piss away the prime of your life.

Were you a star first year?

Did you have other offer from peer firms? If so, why S&C?

Mad Hatter wrote:After reading your post, I think I know everything I need to about S&C. Thanks.

Same

eth1988 wrote:
You learn to avoid similar mistakes going forward and is pushed to become a really good lawyer who prizes effectiveness and perfection.

I see why you're a former S&C associate. Sorry, that's just my direct culture talking.

"True, with caveats" is an accurate answer to every proposition in the world, except something that is demonstrably always false. The answers above that are "True" are incorrect.

LaLiLuLeLo wrote:Are you a WASP?

Yes.

wiz wrote:Do you still have your S&C shoulder bag?

Yes.

Genius wrote:I have not been too successful in the dating world because although I am tall and good looking, I am shy around women. If I go the S & C route and gain 3-4 years of experience there, will I have better chance (or even just as good a chance as male lawyers at Wachtell/Cravath) with women?

Thanks.

Not sure.

rwe13 wrote:School?

Columbia.

kellyfrost wrote:Do any associates or partners at Sullivan Cromwell chew tobacco?

Can you chew tobacco in your office at this firm?

Not sure.

Anonymous User wrote:What's S&C's reputation for litigation in NY compared to Cravath or PW (the other two litigation shops that are thought to be top-notch)? Basically the same but different focus?

S&C's practice has traditionally been more focused on financial institutions and white-collar defense. Though I was a capital markets lawyer, so my knowledge of litigation is more limited.

misterjames wrote:Thanks for taking the time OP, insider insight is always interesting to me.

How did you feel about your ability to work from home? Was it easy to do so? Is it shunned? Promoted?

I think criticism is better upfront, much better than passive aggressiveness at least. Can you expand a bit more on what that feedback is like? And I mean on a day-to-day basis, not the formal reviews.

With respect to hours and work-life balance, did you ever feel like things were getting far too overwhelming? If so, how did you handle it?

Thanks again

Definitely fine to work from home. As a mid-level, I was able to go home for dinner and then log on later during the evening to finish up any work on most nights. You are generally expected to be in the office from 10-5 though. People don't bother you during scheduled vacation.

Informal feedback is frequent and direct. Some seniors will frame criticisms as things that you could improve on, while others will call you to their office and directly tell you that you screwed up and ask you to fix the mistakes. If you made a mistake, people will bring it to your attention. I've never encountered any screamers at the firm though. On the flip side, you are often expected to push back against seniors lawyers (including partners) and tell them that you disagree with their interpretations of the law.

I did on occasions feel overwhelmed, especially as a first year. After getting overwhelmed a couple of times, I became more comfortable saying no to additional projects.

Anonymous User wrote:Thank you very much!
Can you tell us about specific practices in the firm that are known as being more relaxed/friendly/balanced?

Relatively speaking, real estate, derivatives, financial regulatory work, executive comp, and tax tend to be more predictable/involve less weekend work. Though I've heard that these areas are still stressful at times.

Rahviveh wrote:Were you a star first year?

No.

Moonraker wrote:Did you have other offer from peer firms? If so, why S&C?

Yes. Davis Polk and Cravath. Lawyers at Davis Polk seemed nice, though a few seemed fake, and I got the passive aggressive vibe. Chose S&C over Cravath because of the more flexible assignment system.

Oceans rise, empires fall, SullCrom remains the worst.