Top Law Schools

Looking to do transactional.

Both top firms. One firm has a history of layoffs, though, and the other doesn't. Latham is doing well right now. But its model is to expand rapidly in good times, and then contract in bad times.

https://abovethelaw.com/2010/01/latham- ... ie-before/

Simpson Thacher is the superior firm, so barring some compelling reason to choose Latham, it's no contest.

I’m making pretty much the same decision with CSM thrown in the mix. I personally like the people at Latham the most and think I’d fit in best there but I have to admit that I’m concerned (not sure if I should be) about choosing them over STB or CSM.

I’m not too concerned about the layoffs because they’ve kept a relatively small class size compared to peers in NY and if any firm currently fits the dangerous model described above I’d say it’s Kirkland.

Lathams history was tarnished by the financial crisis, but since then it has undertaken great efforts to make sure it doesnt happen again. Both are great firms and none is quite superior to the other- I’d go with practice area and fit.

STB is traditionally the stronger firm in the NY market, and with Latham you have the added risk of layoffs (especially in transactional) if you think we’re headed for a downturn in the next 2 years.

I think another thing to consider is the breadth of its practice areas - STB is more focused on a few corporate sectors while LW has more practice areas to sample. If you're relatively certain what corp practice you want, than STB is the way to go - if not Latham might be the fit for you.

Can't really make a mistake with either. I'd go with your gut feeling when meeting people, stepping into the office, etc.

Latham means you can say you work at a v5... easy choice

I don't know but the name Latham sounds way cooler

Anonymous User wrote:I’m making pretty much the same decision with CSM thrown in the mix. I personally like the people at Latham the most and think I’d fit in best there but I have to admit that I’m concerned (not sure if I should be) about choosing them over STB or CSM.

I’m not too concerned about the layoffs because they’ve kept a relatively small class size compared to peers in NY and if any firm currently fits the dangerous model described above I’d say it’s Kirkland.

Cravath crushes public market M&A. Simpson has an excellent PE fundraising team that this board is always going on about. Its capital markets is very strong too. Latham's cap markets is in the same league as Simpson's.

Important to consider though: Latham has like ~2,500 attorneys, while STB has ~800 and Cravath <500. Different business models - high volume vs high $ transactions. Generally, think the latter = better experience. You're doing more complicated, more important stuff and demanding more $ for it.

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:I’m making pretty much the same decision with CSM thrown in the mix. I personally like the people at Latham the most and think I’d fit in best there but I have to admit that I’m concerned (not sure if I should be) about choosing them over STB or CSM.

I’m not too concerned about the layoffs because they’ve kept a relatively small class size compared to peers in NY and if any firm currently fits the dangerous model described above I’d say it’s Kirkland.

Cravath crushes public market M&A. Simpson has an excellent PE fundraising team that this board is always going on about. Its capital markets is very strong too. Latham's cap markets is in the same league as Simpson's.

Important to consider though: Latham has like ~2,500 attorneys, while STB has ~800 and Cravath <500. Different business models - high volume vs high $ transactions. Generally, think the latter = better experience. You're doing more complicated, more important stuff and demanding more $ for it.

Disregard the bolded. Latham has 3x the offices world wide as STB, and covers a far wider variety of practice areas than Cravath. The size difference is based largely on those factors and has nothing to do with experience of juniors. If you do M&A at one, you will do the same tasks for the same types of clients (generally speaking) as either of the other.

First portion of the above post is pretty spot on.

Anonymous User wrote:Latham means you can say you work at a v5... easy choice

And Simpson means you can say you work at one of the most prestigious firms in NYC.

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Latham means you can say you work at a v5... easy choice

And Simpson means you can say you work at one of the most prestigious firms in NYC.

And Latham, Debevoise, and White and Case can't?

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Latham means you can say you work at a v5... easy choice

And Simpson means you can say you work at one of the most prestigious firms in NYC.

And Latham, Debevoise, and White and Case can't?

They're all prestigious firms; the previous poster was just mocking the earlier comment about Latham being better due to being a "V5" firm. IMO no one should choose Latham over STB (or vice versa) on the basis of prestige.

QContinuum wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Latham means you can say you work at a v5... easy choice

And Simpson means you can say you work at one of the most prestigious firms in NYC.

And Latham, Debevoise, and White and Case can't?

They're all prestigious firms; the previous poster was just mocking the earlier comment about Latham being better due to being a "V5" firm. IMO no one should choose Latham over STB (or vice versa) on the basis of prestige.

I don’t think anyone here considers Latham more prestigious than STB just because of the vault rankings. If anything it seems that the posters think that STB > LW for prestige and are wondering if choosing LW would be a reasonable decision or if LW’s practice areas are actually inferior to STB

uncle_rico wrote:Latham means you can say you work at a v5... easy choice

This bait is a lot more effective than it should have been.

BrainsyK wrote:

uncle_rico wrote:Latham means you can say you work at a v5... easy choice

This bait is a lot more effective than it should have been.

The White & Case poster above is some next-level shit.

Work wherever you can be "happier." Nicer people, better office inside, better office location, better practice/work etc.

I strongly suggest you go to STB (or for the other dude, Cravath).

Out of the attainable New York firms (i.e., not WLRK), Cravath, Sullivan, Davis, Cleary and Simpson are all pretty much on par with each other. Latham is a clear step down, while Paul, Weiss and Debevoise are a half step down.

Latham is more comparable to Kirkland and Weil in terms of selectivity. Latham is prestigious to Michigan, Berkeley or Virginia students (generally top 25%), but not really at all prestigious to someone coming from an ultra-competitive Manhattan law school like Columbia or NYU, where they hire down to median and even below median. At CLS/NYU school, firms that generally recruit from the top 25% of the class are those elite New York ones originally mentioned. If you go to Latham NY you're going to spend all your time wondering why your coworkers are from unprestigious schools like Cornell, Berkeley, Duke and GULC -- all of which are virtually nonexistent at DPW, S&C, STB and Cleary.

If you have the option, keep playing in the prestigious league. This is an industry where nice credentials are valued in spades, and a firm's worth is in significant part determined by how much it can concentrate those nice credentials.

Anonymous User wrote: Out of the attainable New York firms (i.e., not WLRK), Cravath, Sullivan, Davis, Cleary and Simpson are all pretty much on par with each other. Latham is a clear step down, while Paul, Weiss and Debevoise are a half step down.

At CLS/NYU school, firms that generally recruit from the top 25% of the class are those elite New York ones originally mentioned.

NYU -> Cleary associate detected with a severe inferiority complex.

If you go to Latham NY you're going to spend all your time wondering why your coworkers are from unprestigious schools like Cornell, Berkeley, Duke and GULC -- all of which are virtually nonexistent at DPW, S&C, STB and Cleary.

Blatantly false.

Anonymous User wrote:If you go to Latham NY you're going to spend all your time wondering why your coworkers are from unprestigious schools like Cornell, Berkeley, Duke and GULC -- all of which are virtually nonexistent at DPW, S&C, STB and Cleary.

What kind of psychopath actually goes through life like this? OP, I don’t know where you should go; they’re both great. But if you would seriously be unhappy working alongside colleagues from marginally less prestigious law schools, you deserve every ounce of misery you’ll certainly face down the line, regardless of your choice.

It’s gross that people say shit like this—in the context of giving advice!—here without any push back.

I would go with fit. Neither is “more prestigious” than the other.

Latham’s bad rep with the massive layoff is only among law students... it never tarnished its name in the industry and among clients, and they’ve kept their summer class to almost half the size of other comparable NYC firms since. If you think you like the people at Latham better, go there.

Any contrived measure of prestige and chasing that prestige will only lead to unhappiness.

Both are awesome firms - go with the one where you would be happier.

Anonymous User wrote:I strongly suggest you go to STB (or for the other dude, Cravath).

Out of the attainable New York firms (i.e., not WLRK), Cravath, Sullivan, Davis, Cleary and Simpson are all pretty much on par with each other. Latham is a clear step down, while Paul, Weiss and Debevoise are a half step down.

Latham is more comparable to Kirkland and Weil in terms of selectivity. Latham is prestigious to Michigan, Berkeley or Virginia students (generally top 25%), but not really at all prestigious to someone coming from an ultra-competitive Manhattan law school like Columbia or NYU, where they hire down to median and even below median. At CLS/NYU school, firms that generally recruit from the top 25% of the class are those elite New York ones originally mentioned. If you go to Latham NY you're going to spend all your time wondering why your coworkers are from unprestigious schools like Cornell, Berkeley, Duke and GULC -- all of which are virtually nonexistent at DPW, S&C, STB and Cleary.

If you have the option, keep playing in the prestigious league. This is an industry where nice credentials are valued in spades, and a firm's worth is in significant part determined by how much it can concentrate those nice credentials.

Cornell student at median here: Dinged by Cravath, Simpson, Paul Weiss and Debevoise. Offers from Skadden, Sull Crom, DPW, Cleary, Latham and Kirkland. Interviews aren't even over and I can already tell you 10 Cornell offers from each of these firms including Cravath. Have a nice day while I make my decision!