K&E v. Debevoise v. Gibson v. Paul Hastings Forum

[littlewing67]

Help me make a decision. I'm interested in litigation, not sure exactly what practice area, but would like a place that does white-collar as well as a variety of litigation and is strong in litigation. In terms of personality, I am very outgoing and like to go out and not interested in a place that is stuffy. My plan would be to eventually end up in a plaintiff firm doing civil rights litigation of some sort. Thoughts on these places and where may be best?

[jbagelboy]

Gibson sounds right for you.

[Wubbles]

Assuming this is for NY. Gibson Dunn is the best for a broad range of litigation areas, Debevoise has a slight edge for white collar. I think your choice should definitely be between these 2 if you're looking to go to a top litigation practice. Some argument could be made for Kirkland if you really like it. Paul Hastings should be out. Great options though, best of luck!

[littlewing67]

Assuming this is for NY. Gibson Dunn is the best for a broad range of litigation areas, Debevoise has a slight edge for white collar. I think your choice should definitely be between these 2 if you're looking to go to a top litigation practice. Some argument could be made for Kirkland if you really like it. Paul Hastings should be out. Great options though, best of luck!

In terms of people, I like the people at Kirkland the most probably, but I have this feeling their litigation is geared towards private equity clients and I'm not a financial person. Thoughts?

[Wubbles]

Assuming this is for NY. Gibson Dunn is the best for a broad range of litigation areas, Debevoise has a slight edge for white collar. I think your choice should definitely be between these 2 if you're looking to go to a top litigation practice. Some argument could be made for Kirkland if you really like it. Paul Hastings should be out. Great options though, best of luck!

In terms of people, I like the people at Kirkland the most probably, but I have this feeling their litigation is geared towards private equity clients and I'm not a financial person. Thoughts?

If you're in general lit at any of these firms there's a good chance you'll be dealing with financial sector clients either way, but if you want to maintain the most flexibility Gibson seems like the safest bet

[Anonymous User]

Assuming this is for NY. Gibson Dunn is the best for a broad range of litigation areas, Debevoise has a slight edge for white collar. I think your choice should definitely be between these 2 if you're looking to go to a top litigation practice. Some argument could be made for Kirkland if you really like it. Paul Hastings should be out. Great options though, best of luck!

In terms of people, I like the people at Kirkland the most probably, but I have this feeling their litigation is geared towards private equity clients and I'm not a financial person. Thoughts?

If you're in general lit at any of these firms there's a good chance you'll be dealing with financial sector clients either way, but if you want to maintain the most flexibility Gibson seems like the safest bet

I'm a lit associate at K&E. This is the correct response.

[RaceJudicata]

Chiming in to say Paul Hastings should be moved out of consideration. Send em a rejection and open the spot for someone else.

[littlewing67]

Chiming in to say Paul Hastings should be moved out of consideration. Send em a rejection and open the spot for someone else.

Done

[Anonymous User]

Assuming this is for NY. Gibson Dunn is the best for a broad range of litigation areas, Debevoise has a slight edge for white collar. I think your choice should definitely be between these 2 if you're looking to go to a top litigation practice. Some argument could be made for Kirkland if you really like it. Paul Hastings should be out. Great options though, best of luck!

In terms of people, I like the people at Kirkland the most probably, but I have this feeling their litigation is geared towards private equity clients and I'm not a financial person. Thoughts?

I think you may misunderstand what it means to represent private equity clients. Private equity companies are companies that own other companies - in all sorts of spaces. So a firm that does litigation for its private equity clients just means it does whatever litigation those portfolio companies are facing - IP disputes, class actions, employee disputes, etc. I'm sure there are *some* financial things that come up too (as there would in any litigation), but it isn't like that's all there is.

[littlewing67]

Assuming this is for NY. Gibson Dunn is the best for a broad range of litigation areas, Debevoise has a slight edge for white collar. I think your choice should definitely be between these 2 if you're looking to go to a top litigation practice. Some argument could be made for Kirkland if you really like it. Paul Hastings should be out. Great options though, best of luck!

In terms of people, I like the people at Kirkland the most probably, but I have this feeling their litigation is geared towards private equity clients and I'm not a financial person. Thoughts?

I think you may misunderstand what it means to represent private equity clients. Private equity companies are companies that own other companies - in all sorts of spaces. So a firm that does litigation for its private equity clients just means it does whatever litigation those portfolio companies are facing - IP disputes, class actions, employee disputes, etc. I'm sure there are *some* financial things that come up too (as there would in any litigation), but it isn't like that's all there is.

Thanks for the info!