Top Law Schools

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?

Gibson sounds right for you.

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!

Wubbles wrote: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?

littlewing67 wrote:

Wubbles wrote: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

Wubbles wrote:

littlewing67 wrote:

Wubbles wrote: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.

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

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

Done

littlewing67 wrote:

Wubbles wrote: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.

Anonymous User wrote:

littlewing67 wrote:

Wubbles wrote: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!