Firm Prestige... how do you know? Forum

[Anonymous User]

This. Is. A. Very. Dumb. Post. I know this.

My hypothetical person is: anyone who didn't go to a t-20ish law school (lots of lawyers) and is not or has not worked in NYC, LA, Chicago, D.C., S.F., Dallas, basically one of the biggest cities in the USA (lots of lawyers).

How do they know (or do they know) about the relative "prestige" of big law firms? For an average lawyer working in, say, Indianapolis, do they not know that W&C is "more prestigious" than Weil? Or that Boies is "more prestigious" than White & Case? Is it just all vault? Word of mouth?

For someone who wants to move from a big city to a smaller city with a way smaller legal market, the big city guy might be curious about what the smaller town guy knows/thinks about the big city person's firm. I know it might not (and will often be) nothing at all, just curious.

[NoBladesNoBows]

This. Is. A. Very. Dumb. Post. I know this.

My hypothetical person is: anyone who didn't go to a t-20ish law school (lots of lawyers) and is not or has not worked in NYC, LA, Chicago, D.C., S.F., Dallas, basically one of the biggest cities in the USA (lots of lawyers).

How do they know (or do they know) about the relative "prestige" of big law firms? For an average lawyer working in, say, Indianapolis, do they not know that W&C is "more prestigious" than Weil? Or that Boies is "more prestigious" than White & Case? Is it just all vault? Word of mouth?

For someone who wants to move from a big city to a smaller city with a way smaller legal market, the big city guy might be curious about what the smaller town guy knows/thinks about the big city person's firm. I know it might not (and will often be) nothing at all, just curious.

http://www.vault.com/company-rankings/law/vault-law-100

[Anonymous User]

This. Is. A. Very. Dumb. Post. I know this.

My hypothetical person is: anyone who didn't go to a t-20ish law school (lots of lawyers) and is not or has not worked in NYC, LA, Chicago, D.C., S.F., Dallas, basically one of the biggest cities in the USA (lots of lawyers).

How do they know (or do they know) about the relative "prestige" of big law firms? For an average lawyer working in, say, Indianapolis, do they not know that W&C is "more prestigious" than Weil? Or that Boies is "more prestigious" than White & Case? Is it just all vault? Word of mouth?

For someone who wants to move from a big city to a smaller city with a way smaller legal market, the big city guy might be curious about what the smaller town guy knows/thinks about the big city person's firm. I know it might not (and will often be) nothing at all, just curious.

I'm a little puzzled by this question. Anyone with hiring authority probably has a good idea about the relative prestige of biglaw firms and anyone without hiring authority....who cares? I, personally, can't imagine caring who recognizes how "prestigious" my former firm is and someone who does need/desire that will probably have a hard time fitting in at the smaller firm.

[Anonymous User]

This. Is. A. Very. Dumb. Post. I know this.

My hypothetical person is: anyone who didn't go to a t-20ish law school (lots of lawyers) and is not or has not worked in NYC, LA, Chicago, D.C., S.F., Dallas, basically one of the biggest cities in the USA (lots of lawyers).

How do they know (or do they know) about the relative "prestige" of big law firms? For an average lawyer working in, say, Indianapolis, do they not know that W&C is "more prestigious" than Weil? Or that Boies is "more prestigious" than White & Case? Is it just all vault? Word of mouth?

For someone who wants to move from a big city to a smaller city with a way smaller legal market, the big city guy might be curious about what the smaller town guy knows/thinks about the big city person's firm. I know it might not (and will often be) nothing at all, just curious.

http://www.vault.com/company-rankings/law/vault-law-100

But the two examples poster gave are instances where everyone can agree that the vault rankings do not reflect the relative prestige of those firms. The question from what I understand is how far does the "everyone can agree" go? I for one live in a t-14 bubble right now and have no idea.

[NoBladesNoBows]

Sorry, misread the question. Vault's regional rankings I suppose reflect this as well. If the market is so small that Vault doesn't have regional rankings, I assume it would just have to be local knowledge/word-of-mouth.

[Anonymous User]

This. Is. A. Very. Dumb. Post. I know this.

My hypothetical person is: anyone who didn't go to a t-20ish law school (lots of lawyers) and is not or has not worked in NYC, LA, Chicago, D.C., S.F., Dallas, basically one of the biggest cities in the USA (lots of lawyers).

How do they know (or do they know) about the relative "prestige" of big law firms? For an average lawyer working in, say, Indianapolis, do they not know that W&C is "more prestigious" than Weil? Or that Boies is "more prestigious" than White & Case? Is it just all vault? Word of mouth?

For someone who wants to move from a big city to a smaller city with a way smaller legal market, the big city guy might be curious about what the smaller town guy knows/thinks about the big city person's firm. I know it might not (and will often be) nothing at all, just curious.

I'm a little puzzled by this question. Anyone with hiring authority probably has a good idea about the relative prestige of biglaw firms and anyone without hiring authority....who cares? I, personally, can't imagine caring who recognizes how "prestigious" my former firm is and someone who does need/desire that will probably have a hard time fitting in at the smaller firm.

Poster is clearly getting at whether his colleagues (not necessarily hiring authority ppl) will know he's is a badass lawyer when he goes to smaller market coming from bigger firm. Seemingly, a "smaller" albeit "prestigious" firm that is not super high in the vault rankings (I'm guessing MTO since that's a firm that fits the bill but OP did not name). It's an arrogant and selfish question, but as a type-A who worked hard to get to a good firm, I must admit I would also be curious about OP's question were I to move to a smaller market.

[Lacepiece23]

The only people that will care are the T14ish alums working in that market who know about your former firm through their own OCI experiences or having friends there. But most people will be from the local regional school where the top local firm is the Cravath of that market. And some people will make arguments about why that firm’s lawyers are better than Cravath. A good example might be mcguirewoods in its home market, which I believe is Richmond. Too lazy to look it up but know it’s somewhere down South.

[Ultramar vistas]

This. Is. A. Very. Dumb. Post. I know this.

My hypothetical person is: anyone who didn't go to a t-20ish law school (lots of lawyers) and is not or has not worked in NYC, LA, Chicago, D.C., S.F., Dallas, basically one of the biggest cities in the USA (lots of lawyers).

How do they know (or do they know) about the relative "prestige" of big law firms? For an average lawyer working in, say, Indianapolis, do they not know that W&C is "more prestigious" than Weil? Or that Boies is "more prestigious" than White & Case? Is it just all vault? Word of mouth?

For someone who wants to move from a big city to a smaller city with a way smaller legal market, the big city guy might be curious about what the smaller town guy knows/thinks about the big city person's firm. I know it might not (and will often be) nothing at all, just curious.

http://www.vault.com/company-rankings/law/vault-law-100

But the two examples poster gave are instances where everyone can agree that the vault rankings do not reflect the relative prestige of those firms. The question from what I understand is how far does the "everyone can agree" go? I for one live in a t-14 bubble right now and have no idea.

Valid question, dismissed too glibly.

Reality is, that's a downside of going to a boutique or pseudo-boutique-firms like W&C/Boies/Quinn/MTO etc etc: name recognition is massively lacking in the broader legal market. But here's the thing that counteracts all that - if you're going to W&C, you don't give a damn whether some lawyer in Indianapolis knows what a big deal that is, because the only people whose opinion matters to your career are a pretty niche group who mostly live in DC. Same with Boies - you're going there because you want to be a trial lawyer, so who cares what anyone thinks other than other trial lawyers? And they all know what BSF means. But yeah, if you want to exit into general counsel roles, massive firms at the top of Vault are great places to have on your resumé.

[Anonymous User]

Sorry, misread the question. Vault's regional rankings I suppose reflect this as well. If the market is so small that Vault doesn't have regional rankings, I assume it would just have to be local knowledge/word-of-mouth.

not always true, though. Vault regional ranking suffer from the same problem as vault's overall rankings: apparently, in NYC Latham is more prestigious than Boies; in Chicago, Katten is more prestigeous than Bartlitt Beck; and in SoCal, Skadden is more prestigeous than Irell. All wrong, but everyone in "the know" knows that's wrong.

[Anonymous User]

I have only worked as a lawyer in non-major metro markets, markets which have strong regional law schools but no local T14s. I have worked with many many people like your hypothetical lawyer.

They don’t know. They don’t care. They will probably have a category in their head of “big NY firm” and all NY big firms will fit in that category. It’s not because they’re dumb; they just don’t need to care. It’s not relevant. If they happen to work with/against a firm, they’ll have an opinion about it. Otherwise the fine distinctions that TLS agonizes over are meaningless.

The only people who will know are other major metro biglaw refugees.

[Anonymous User]

I have only worked as a lawyer in non-major metro markets, markets which have strong regional law schools but no local T14s. I have worked with many many people like your hypothetical lawyer.

They don’t know. They don’t care. They will probably have a category in their head of “big NY firm” and all NY big firms will fit in that category. It’s not because they’re dumb; they just don’t need to care. It’s not relevant. If they happen to work with/against a firm, they’ll have an opinion about it. Otherwise the fine distinctions that TLS agonizes over are meaningless.

The only people who will know are other major metro biglaw refugees.

To this poster, I'm curious: what does "this hypothetical lawyer" think about t-14 law schools? I bet they still know about law review, etc., right? What about clerkships?

[Anonymous User]

They’re not rubes. Of course they know about law review and clerkships - those things exist in these markets. They view LR the same way attorneys in other places do - some consider it a must-have, some people (who either didn’t do it or hated it) don’t care. They don’t make significant distinctions between 2/9/DC and other clerkships; local clerkships with local judges matter more, although a fancy COA is respected and anyone who did one is de facto smart. They know that the T14 are good schools, but they do not give two shits about T3 v. T7 v. T-whatever other fake ranking TLS has created. Some people will apply general lay prestige to a law school (so for instance a rabid Notre Dame fan will probably think ND law school is good, too).

Of course I’m generalizing madly, people are individuals with individual quirks and beliefs, but generally, the fine distinctions between firms (or law school) in distant cities don’t matter much to them.

[Lacepiece23]

I have only worked as a lawyer in non-major metro markets, markets which have strong regional law schools but no local T14s. I have worked with many many people like your hypothetical lawyer.

They don’t know. They don’t care. They will probably have a category in their head of “big NY firm” and all NY big firms will fit in that category. It’s not because they’re dumb; they just don’t need to care. It’s not relevant. If they happen to work with/against a firm, they’ll have an opinion about it. Otherwise the fine distinctions that TLS agonizes over are meaningless.

The only people who will know are other major metro biglaw refugees.

To this poster, I'm curious: what does "this hypothetical lawyer" think about t-14 law schools? I bet they still know about law review, etc., right? What about clerkships?

They will know the T14 and understand that it’s a better school. They will know what law review is because their school will have that. Clerkship actually not so much. It’s not something pushed at lower ranked schools because they can’t really get them. So they won’t care.

[kyle010723]

This. Is. A. Very. Dumb. Post. I know this.

My hypothetical person is: anyone who didn't go to a t-20ish law school (lots of lawyers) and is not or has not worked in NYC, LA, Chicago, D.C., S.F., Dallas, basically one of the biggest cities in the USA (lots of lawyers).

How do they know (or do they know) about the relative "prestige" of big law firms? For an average lawyer working in, say, Indianapolis, do they not know that W&C is "more prestigious" than Weil? Or that Boies is "more prestigious" than White & Case? Is it just all vault? Word of mouth?

For someone who wants to move from a big city to a smaller city with a way smaller legal market, the big city guy might be curious about what the smaller town guy knows/thinks about the big city person's firm. I know it might not (and will often be) nothing at all, just curious.

Good firm is good firm is good firm. I did not know W&C is "more prestigious" than Weil until I read this post.

[Anonymous User]

I have only worked as a lawyer in non-major metro markets, markets which have strong regional law schools but no local T14s. I have worked with many many people like your hypothetical lawyer.

They don’t know. They don’t care. They will probably have a category in their head of “big NY firm” and all NY big firms will fit in that category. It’s not because they’re dumb; they just don’t need to care. It’s not relevant. If they happen to work with/against a firm, they’ll have an opinion about it. Otherwise the fine distinctions that TLS agonizes over are meaningless.

The only people who will know are other major metro biglaw refugees.

To this poster, I'm curious: what does "this hypothetical lawyer" think about t-14 law schools? I bet they still know about law review, etc., right? What about clerkships?

They will know the T14 and understand that it’s a better school. They will know what law review is because their school will have that. Clerkship actually not so much. It’s not something pushed at lower ranked schools because they can’t really get them. So they won’t care.

Anon from above - I disagree with that. Lots of strong regionals do decently with local clerkships. They will probably value state SC pretty equally with federal clerkships though (and maybe state COA, depending on the firm - some won’t).

[Lacepiece23]

I have only worked as a lawyer in non-major metro markets, markets which have strong regional law schools but no local T14s. I have worked with many many people like your hypothetical lawyer.

They don’t know. They don’t care. They will probably have a category in their head of “big NY firm” and all NY big firms will fit in that category. It’s not because they’re dumb; they just don’t need to care. It’s not relevant. If they happen to work with/against a firm, they’ll have an opinion about it. Otherwise the fine distinctions that TLS agonizes over are meaningless.

The only people who will know are other major metro biglaw refugees.

To this poster, I'm curious: what does "this hypothetical lawyer" think about t-14 law schools? I bet they still know about law review, etc., right? What about clerkships?

They will know the T14 and understand that it’s a better school. They will know what law review is because their school will have that. Clerkship actually not so much. It’s not something pushed at lower ranked schools because they can’t really get them. So they won’t care.

Anon from above - I disagree with that. Lots of strong regionals do decently with local clerkships. They will probably value state SC pretty equally with federal clerkships though (and maybe state COA, depending on the firm - some won’t).

The whole thread is about prestige though. My point wasn’t necessarily that the strong regionals don’t know what they are, or that they don’t get start clerkships and sometimes a student or two will get fed, it’s just that they don’t salivate over them like T14 students do. They don’t necessarily think that it’s a hard thing to get because it’s not really an option that the school pushes. A lot of lawyers in my secondary market are very blah about me clerking, but super impressed with my firm.

[Wild Card]

"Commoners" know about Cravath and SullCrom, for some reason. The latter, I think, because of the CIA, and for defending Chiquita for funding death squads in South America, or something like that...

[Anonymous User]

Sorry, misread the question. Vault's regional rankings I suppose reflect this as well. If the market is so small that Vault doesn't have regional rankings, I assume it would just have to be local knowledge/word-of-mouth.

not always true, though. Vault regional ranking suffer from the same problem as vault's overall rankings: apparently, in NYC Latham is more prestigious than Boies; in Chicago, Katten is more prestigeous than Bartlitt Beck; and in SoCal, Skadden is more prestigeous than Irell. All wrong, but everyone in "the know" knows that's wrong.

I think that sometimes TLS confuses selectivity with "prestige". You're right that the firms that you mentioned are smaller and more selective. Therefore, they're sometimes perceived as more "desirable" amongst law students. That doesn't however necessarily make them more prestigious. For example, Latham honestly is just a bigger name in NYC if that's the metric for the rankings.

[Anonymous User]

The whole thread is about prestige though. My point wasn’t necessarily that the strong regionals don’t know what they are, or that they don’t get start clerkships and sometimes a student or two will get fed, it’s just that they don’t salivate over them like T14 students do. They don’t necessarily think that it’s a hard thing to get because it’s not really an option that the school pushes. A lot of lawyers in my secondary market are very blah about me clerking, but super impressed with my firm.

I guess this just must vary by small market/firm/the like. My school pushed clerkships pretty heavily, though a lot of them were state, and they always seemed to be highly respected. Though I get if a given local school really doesn't push/get clerkships and therefore almost none of the local alumni have them/have a framework for them, I get that they wouldn't matter so much. I agree they're not regarded quite the same way they are on TLS, though.

[BlackAndOrange84]

The whole thread is about prestige though. My point wasn’t necessarily that the strong regionals don’t know what they are, or that they don’t get start clerkships and sometimes a student or two will get fed, it’s just that they don’t salivate over them like T14 students do. They don’t necessarily think that it’s a hard thing to get because it’s not really an option that the school pushes. A lot of lawyers in my secondary market are very blah about me clerking, but super impressed with my firm.

Dude, this is wrong on the facts. Strong regionals (flagship state law schools) send more than "a student or two" to fed clerkships. UGA, for example, sent 6.6% of its 2017 graduating class of 181 to fed clerkships, or 12 students. The niversities of Alabama and Iowa did about the same percentage-wise. This is probably less true in places where there is a T14/20 local, but I suspect holds fairly true across strong regional and flagship state schools. In the secondary market I graduated in, fed clerkships are highly desired by the top local and regional firms because they're relatively uncommon. If people you know are blah on clerkships from strong regionals, it's because it was strictly out of their reach, not out of their classmates' reach.