Be very wary of Cadwalader (NYC) Forum

[Anonymous User]

How is the litigation practice now that they hired plenty of Boies attorneys?

Can't tell if this is tongue-in-cheek. Anyway, really they only got Nick Gravante from Boies Schiller. He brought over a couple of his service partners and one or two favored associates, but I doubt it will have a big impact on a firm like Cadwalader in terms of its associates' day-to-day experience. Maybe a few more interesting cases/clients, but you have to imagine Gravante is putting is own folks on those cases...

[Anonymous User]

How is the litigation practice now that they hired plenty of Boies attorneys?

Can't tell if this is tongue-in-cheek. Anyway, really they only got Nick Gravante from Boies Schiller. He brought over a couple of his service partners and one or two favored associates, but I doubt it will have a big impact on a firm like Cadwalader in terms of its associates' day-to-day experience. Maybe a few more interesting cases/clients, but you have to imagine Gravante is putting is own folks on those cases...

One of the above anons. Remember, cwt is not a giant firm. Lit here in some ways feels like a boutique-biglaw hybrid. All of the boies people went to the nyc office, and now like 6/15 lit partners in nyc are former boies partners (gravante's trio of partners came over a year or two after a different trio of boies partners lateralled). So it really did expand the practice. But also can't tell if the comment was tongue-in-cheek; effect was good for morale, much like what you would expect when your group is growing and attracting talent.

[Prudent_Jurist]

Isn’t there a famous poem by Lewis Carroll with a line that goes “Beware the Cadwalader”?

[mardash]

Isn’t there a famous poem by Lewis Carroll with a line that goes “Beware the Cadwalader”?

Yeah, something about a partner throwing a vorpal sword at associates’ heads.

[existentialcrisis]

Current associate at Cadwalader. As far as my experience goes, I do think the firm culture has changed. All the partners I have interacted with or have worked for are genuinely great people. Of course I cannot speak for everyone, and I know morale has been extraordinarily low due to several departures after the payout of year-end bonuses. But compared to my peers working at other firms, I’m very happy where I am at. I would have to say perhaps the quality of clients we have are not spectacular. But I don’t think the firm is something to fear

Litigation associate, i think the culture has absolutely changed, and a long while ago at that since i have never really experienced what others have talked about. Lit's busy and growing (pretty sure everyone in the group got full bonuses and pay retroactively restored after beginning of covid cuts), I've met quite a few people i really like, it just got a number of high profile laterals form boies, and as a whole firm increased equity class by 20% this year. Happy with clients, e.g., mcdonalds, macmillan, and bcg.

Finally, about the firm's bad rep is i think a lot of it relates to cap markets. During the great recession, the firm fired a large amount of associates, and all of them were cap markets. There were a lot of bad posts about cwt at that time and after, but especially in the past 5-6 years or so there has been a slow rise of people who like and defend cwt on this site. Cap markets is, imho an awful, awful, awful practice group no matter where you are (if you are thinking of going into cap markets maybe reassess some life choices), and since that is cwt's biggest group the reputation from cap markets inaccurately colors peoples' perceptions of the firm as a whole. i think while the firm has its problems that are typical for biglaw, it is an excellent firm that based on ppp/rpl/client prestige outshines the firms that are often perceived as its peers. Plus it has some lay prestige: while like with most firms no non-lawyer has ever heard of cwt, it's always fun to say that i work for the oldest firm in the country (no one has ever corrected me by saying it's the 2nd oldest, so I'm going to keep on saying it's the oldest).

The thing that makes their cap markets group bad is what someone noted upthread, that it's not a normal cap markets group. It's a high volume CMBS paper mill (stated as someone who works across from them on shitty CMBS deals and does not envy their position).

This is a big deal.

Work reportedly a ton, with allegedly difficult personalities, with none of the exits of real Capital Markets groups.

[Anonymous User]

Current associate at Cadwalader. As far as my experience goes, I do think the firm culture has changed. All the partners I have interacted with or have worked for are genuinely great people. Of course I cannot speak for everyone, and I know morale has been extraordinarily low due to several departures after the payout of year-end bonuses. But compared to my peers working at other firms, I’m very happy where I am at. I would have to say perhaps the quality of clients we have are not spectacular. But I don’t think the firm is something to fear

Litigation associate, i think the culture has absolutely changed, and a long while ago at that since i have never really experienced what others have talked about. Lit's busy and growing (pretty sure everyone in the group got full bonuses and pay retroactively restored after beginning of covid cuts), I've met quite a few people i really like, it just got a number of high profile laterals form boies, and as a whole firm increased equity class by 20% this year. Happy with clients, e.g., mcdonalds, macmillan, and bcg.

Finally, about the firm's bad rep is i think a lot of it relates to cap markets. During the great recession, the firm fired a large amount of associates, and all of them were cap markets. There were a lot of bad posts about cwt at that time and after, but especially in the past 5-6 years or so there has been a slow rise of people who like and defend cwt on this site. Cap markets is, imho an awful, awful, awful practice group no matter where you are (if you are thinking of going into cap markets maybe reassess some life choices), and since that is cwt's biggest group the reputation from cap markets inaccurately colors peoples' perceptions of the firm as a whole. i think while the firm has its problems that are typical for biglaw, it is an excellent firm that based on ppp/rpl/client prestige outshines the firms that are often perceived as its peers. Plus it has some lay prestige: while like with most firms no non-lawyer has ever heard of cwt, it's always fun to say that i work for the oldest firm in the country (no one has ever corrected me by saying it's the 2nd oldest, so I'm going to keep on saying it's the oldest).

The thing that makes their cap markets group bad is what someone noted upthread, that it's not a normal cap markets group. It's a high volume CMBS paper mill (stated as someone who works across from them on shitty CMBS deals and does not envy their position).

This is a big deal.

Work reportedly a ton, with allegedly difficult personalities, with none of the exits of real Capital Markets groups.

They're mostly pleasant to work across from because they're a bit of a well-oiled machine from the volume, but damn do their juniors send out a boatload of 3am emails

[Anonymous User]

CWT capital markets is soul crushing and the awful part is everyone there knows it is bad and just excuses it. It’s an issue of socialization. Several very domineering and very out of touch partners run the group and by the time you are relatively senior you have excused pretty bad behavior and even come to rationalize it. Of the CMBS partners that are still actively engaged in the practice, only 3 would largely qualify as decent bosses. Another two are tolerable because you can say “at least they aren’t X.” The rest are really very difficult people who can fake a certain amount of humanity but really are awful (by any other rational standard). The special counsels (by and large) are pretty cowed because a lot of them have been chewed up and spit out and one of the special counsels is maybe the worst person at the entire firm and the fact that person is tolerated to any degree by the leadership is all you need to know.

[Anonymous User]

one of the special counsels is maybe the worst person at the entire firm and the fact that person is tolerated to any degree by the leadership is all you need to know

Story time

[Anonymous User]

The special counsel in question is legendary and essentially runs everyone off

[Anonymous User]

This is a big deal.

Work reportedly a ton, with allegedly difficult personalities, with none of the exits of real Capital Markets groups.

I don't think the difficult personalities thing is worse than the average big law firm. I think the worst Cap Markets partners to work with are largely not involved in deals anymore, and my understanding is that CWT's shitty rep in that area actually stems from an M&A partner who left for Greenberg Traurig like 15 years ago.

I have heard horror stories about the special counsel referenced above, but I worked with that person and they seemed fine? Like a bit sharp but nothing crazy. Possible they've reformed, but also possible I didn't see the worst because I was in a different office. Either way...I only worked for that person on one occasion and was generally able to steer myself towards people I liked working with.

Definitely a bit of a sweatshop, but I can't confidently say it's worse than a typical big law transactional practice.

CWT capital markets is soul crushing and the awful part is everyone there knows it is bad and just excuses it. It’s an issue of socialization. Several very domineering and very out of touch partners run the group and by the time you are relatively senior you have excused pretty bad behavior and even come to rationalize it. Of the CMBS partners that are still actively engaged in the practice, only 3 would largely qualify as decent bosses. Another two are tolerable because you can say “at least they aren’t X.” The rest are really very difficult people who can fake a certain amount of humanity but really are awful (by any other rational standard). The special counsels (by and large) are pretty cowed because a lot of them have been chewed up and spit out and one of the special counsels is maybe the worst person at the entire firm and the fact that person is tolerated to any degree by the leadership is all you need to know.

Okay but that's like...most of the CMBS partners who are actively engaged in deals. Depending on how you define that you could argue there's only like 7 or 8.


All that said...CWT should have caught more heat for not truing up all associates last year. Shitty move that has cost them quite a few associates.

[existentialcrisis]

This is a big deal.

Work reportedly a ton, with allegedly difficult personalities, with none of the exits of real Capital Markets groups.

I don't think the difficult personalities thing is worse than the average big law firm. I think the worst Cap Markets partners to work with are largely not involved in deals anymore, and my understanding is that CWT's shitty rep in that area actually stems from an M&A partner who left for Greenberg Traurig like 15 years ago.

I have heard horror stories about the special counsel referenced above, but I worked with that person and they seemed fine? Like a bit sharp but nothing crazy. Possible they've reformed, but also possible I didn't see the worst because I was in a different office. Either way...I only worked for that person on one occasion and was generally able to steer myself towards people I liked working with.

Definitely a bit of a sweatshop, but I can't confidently say it's worse than a typical big law transactional practice.

CWT capital markets is soul crushing and the awful part is everyone there knows it is bad and just excuses it. It’s an issue of socialization. Several very domineering and very out of touch partners run the group and by the time you are relatively senior you have excused pretty bad behavior and even come to rationalize it. Of the CMBS partners that are still actively engaged in the practice, only 3 would largely qualify as decent bosses. Another two are tolerable because you can say “at least they aren’t X.” The rest are really very difficult people who can fake a certain amount of humanity but really are awful (by any other rational standard). The special counsels (by and large) are pretty cowed because a lot of them have been chewed up and spit out and one of the special counsels is maybe the worst person at the entire firm and the fact that person is tolerated to any degree by the leadership is all you need to know.

Okay but that's like...most of the CMBS partners who are actively engaged in deals. Depending on how you define that you could argue there's only like 7 or 8.


All that said...CWT should have caught more heat for not truing up all associates last year. Shitty move that has cost them quite a few associates.

Again though, the main point I was trying to make was about the narrow practice.

It could be true that CWT “Capital Markets” is no worse in terms of hours/personalities than at many other groups or firms.

But that group won’t offer nearly the same breath of exits that other firm’ real securities practices will.

[Anonymous User]

For a while when I was going through OCI, Cadwalader was my only offer, so I nearly ended up there. The main reason I was apprehensive, and ultimately jumped on the next offer I received, was how little control you have over which practice group you go into. It definitely seems like there are solid practice groups with good culture/people in them, but that is clearly not a universal trait. From my understanding they let you try out different groups in the summer and rank your preferences, but at the end of the day many more people end up in cap markets (or other undesirable groups with high turnover) than want to be there. That's a risk not worth taking if you have other options imo.

[Anonymous User]

For a while when I was going through OCI, Cadwalader was my only offer, so I nearly ended up there. The main reason I was apprehensive, and ultimately jumped on the next offer I received, was how little control you have over which practice group you go into. It definitely seems like there are solid practice groups with good culture/people in them, but that is clearly not a universal trait. From my understanding they let you try out different groups in the summer and rank your preferences, but at the end of the day many more people end up in cap markets (or other undesirable groups with high turnover) than want to be there. That's a risk not worth taking if you have other options imo.

I think it could be a risk to be put in a practice you don't want to be in if you sample a few groups during your summer or target a tiny group like tax or IP. But, since the summer is a free market system I did all my work in the non-cap markets group I wanted to be in, did no work outside of that group, and the was placed in that group without any fuss. I got the sense that while the firm always needs cap markets people, they won't force people into it who clearly have no interest, because they don't people fleeing from the firm which they might otherwise do.

[Anonymous User]

Again though, the main point I was trying to make was about the narrow practice.

It could be true that CWT “Capital Markets” is no worse in terms of hours/personalities than at many other groups or firms.

But that group won’t offer nearly the same breath of exits that other firm’ real securities practices will.

Yeah that's definitely a good reason to look elsewhere. CMBS is super niche. Your exits are like...the 3 other firms that do CMBS or in-house at a bank (which is not easy to find). That's part of why I lateraled.

Just saying the common critique that CWT has so much worse hours or personalities than a typical biglaw firm feels way overblown to me. People at my new firm in a different practice send 3 am e-mails too.