Top Law Schools

I tend to like the "fratty"/"social" firms from a culture perspective, so I've narrowed my options down to these remaining offers. Objectively very happy with this outcome and acknowledge there may not be a "right" or "wrong" answer here. I want to toss this to the mob and make sure I'm not missing anything. Leaning lit but not closed to transactional. My skill-set is such that I'd probably do fine in either area.

Things going through my head right now:

- Lathaming. Is it still a threat or have they learned their lesson?
- Kirkland's growth is impressive and their revenue is insane. Is there potential that a high-growth rate pre-recession could portend drastic cutbacks during a downturn? In other words, could Kirkland be the next Latham or are they better positioned than firms pre-2007?
- Skadden has branding and name recognition. Is there any reason beyond name recognition that makes Skadden a stronger firm overall than Kirkland? Or, are they basically identical firms from a junior associate's perspective?

What am I missing here? Am I overlooking a glaring issue? Thanks for the assist, TLS!

Anonymous User wrote: Leaning lit but not closed to transactional.

This type of uncertainty makes Kirkland less attractive than Skadden in my opinion.

So I did second looks at Kirkland and Latham and I asked a LOT about the Lathamings while I was there. People were really upfront about the fact that the firm made a mistake (business and PR-wise) in how they handled that, but the junior associates appreciated that the Lathamings were at least upfront about the fact that the layoffs were due to business, not performance, while a lot of other firms who did "stealth layoffs" tried to tie the layoffs to performance so that the firm didn't look weak, making it harder for associates to land somewhere else. And at least in NY (which was hit the hardest) they've scaled back hiring quite a bit.

Anonymous User wrote:So I did second looks at Kirkland and Latham and I asked a LOT about the Lathamings while I was there. People were really upfront about the fact that the firm made a mistake (business and PR-wise) in how they handled that, but the junior associates appreciated that the Lathamings were at least upfront about the fact that the layoffs were due to business, not performance, while a lot of other firms who did "stealth layoffs" tried to tie the layoffs to performance so that the firm didn't look weak, making it harder for associates to land somewhere else. And at least in NY (which was hit the hardest) they've scaled back hiring quite a bit.

Yea, this here is good info. I got the briefest sense of this thought process during my callback interviews, so it's good to hear the argument fleshed out in its entirety. Thanks!

Kirkland is a great firm. I worked there for 2 years. I highly recommend them.

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote: Leaning lit but not closed to transactional.

This type of uncertainty makes Kirkland less attractive than Skadden in my opinion.

Agree. Definitely tossing this point as a +1 for Skadden.