Cravath v. Gibson v. Paul Weiss v. Weil Forum

[Anonymous User]

All offers for NY; currently I'm mostly interested in litigation, white-collar (maybe antitrust too), but am open to other areas.

[Joachim2017]

Cravath is distinct from these others in the type of work environment is has. Even if we're going to be in WFH mode for a while, Cravath's rotation and assignment system is unique. You need to figure out if that's what you want. More than anything else day-to-day, it will make an impact and should inform your decision.

More generally, Cravath, GDC, and PW are a cut above Weil unless you have an interest in specific types of corporate practice. If you're interested in lit, it's not in the same league as these other three.

[Anonymous User]

I have no idea what kind of assignment system I would like (free-market sounds nice in theory but not sure how well I would do in a system where I have to actively hunt for work). Is this the only major differentiator between these firms? I think I'll take Weil out for now; I liked the people there a lot more than at Cravath/GDC but it sounds like their litigation is not up to par in comparison. Given that PW, GDC, and Cravath all have fairly different assignment systems, are there any other factors I should consider that will have a meaningful impact on my day-to-day? Pipe dream is to make partner (either at one of these firms or as a lateral elsewhere). Alternatively, would like to exit to government.

[Anonymous User]

I have no idea what kind of assignment system I would like (free-market sounds nice in theory but not sure how well I would do in a system where I have to actively hunt for work). Is this the only major differentiator between these firms? I think I'll take Weil out for now; I liked the people there a lot more than at Cravath/GDC but it sounds like their litigation is not up to par in comparison. Given that PW, GDC, and Cravath all have fairly different assignment systems, are there any other factors I should consider that will have a meaningful impact on my day-to-day? Pipe dream is to make partner (either at one of these firms or as a lateral elsewhere). Alternatively, would like to exit to government.

If government exit is your goal, then you should eliminate Cravath since its ties to the government is weaker than GDC or PW. You should also talk to some alums (not current associates) of those firms and determine the culture. At least one of those firms is crazy toxic, and many alum will probably be happy to discuss that.

[Sackboy]

If it were me, I'd probably go with PW/GDC. If I really vibed with Cravath for some reason, that'd be a fine choice. Weil just doesn't really make sense here.

[Anonymous User]

I've met with a lot of associates at both firms and liked everyone I spoke to (probably PW more so than GDC), but it's hard to read between the lines to understand the culture, especially given that I can't go into the office to see for myself. I'll reach out to former associates of both to learn more.

Between PW and GDC, does one offer measurably better exit options both in and out of NY? If I wanted to leave NY a few years down the road (have ties to both Midwest/West Coast), would GDC being headquartered in LA make a difference? Should I be thinking about the differences in leverage and/or partnership prospects at this stage?

[Anonymous User]

[Posting anonymously because I work at a peer firm and can provide some insight based on that and don't want my identity revealed. Thank you, mods.]

I'm a senior-ish associate (litigator) at a peer firm. I don't know the culture at any of these firms well because I don't work there, but my two cents is to take the Cravath offer. Their brand is stronger, and you'll have an easier time lateraling if you ever decide to do that. Given that your goal is to make partner, you may well decide to make partner somewhere else. My sense (from rather limited examples), is that people from Cravath do have a marginally but appreciably easier time lateraling than their peers at the other firms you're considering.

The grass is always greener, of course, but Cravath's rotation system has much to recommend. In litigation, cases can last for years---far longer than the average associate's tenure at a firm. That means that many associates get stuck on one or two large cases and find it very hard to escape those teams. (The culture at most firms makes it quite hard to get off a case.) Yes, the litigation rotations at Cravath can be long, but at least there is some light at the end of the tunnel if you're on a bad case.

[Anonymous User]

[Posting anonymously because I work at a peer firm and can provide some insight based on that and don't want my identity revealed. Thank you, mods.]

I'm a senior-ish associate (litigator) at a peer firm. I don't know the culture at any of these firms well because I don't work there, but my two cents is to take the Cravath offer. Their brand is stronger, and you'll have an easier time lateraling if you ever decide to do that. Given that your goal is to make partner, you may well decide to make partner somewhere else. My sense (from rather limited examples), is that people from Cravath do have a marginally but appreciably easier time lateraling than their peers at the other firms you're considering.

The grass is always greener, of course, but Cravath's rotation system has much to recommend. In litigation, cases can last for years---far longer than the average associate's tenure at a firm. That means that many associates get stuck on one or two large cases and find it very hard to escape those teams. (The culture at most firms makes it quite hard to get off a case.) Yes, the litigation rotations at Cravath can be long, but at least there is some light at the end of the tunnel if you're on a bad case.

My primary concern with Cravath is the culture. From my interviews at PW and GDC, and speaking with 3Ls going to those firms, I felt that they have more similar cultures in ways that are important to me (pro bono work, emphasis on diversity, etc.) I did not get the same feeling from my Cravath interview; in general the people I spoke with were much more serious and conservative (in manner, not necessarily politics). Of course it's not necessary that my colleagues become my best friends, but I have always enjoyed grabbing drinks with coworkers and spending time with them in a social setting.

Another thing I have heard is that the hours will be worse at Cravath, but of course the hours are going to be terrible anywhere. Do you think the reputation is worth these tradeoffs? I quite literally have no clue whether I want to be in a rotation, free-market, assigned to a practice group, etc and do not want to make my decision based on that alone.

[Anonymous User]

I'm a Midlevel lit boutique associate who works with /across from some of these firms and knows a number of associates at all four firms.

1) I want to push back against Cravath having a stronger brand for lit. Maybe it is stronger for certain specific practices, but I think in most instances the Cravath/GDC/PW brand is essentially the same in lit. In fact, there are certainly lit specialties (including the field I practice in) where GDC/PW/Weil are bigger players than Cravath.

2) Free-Market vs. Rotation: I would say it depends a lot on your personality. I know people who were able to effectively navigate the free-market system (follow up with partners they like in practices they enjoy, slow roll less pleasant partners, etc.) and ended up rather quickly plugged into teams and work streams they enjoyed (often times leading to good, substantive experience earlier). I also know people who just got buried on one or two large shitty cases (like the poster below mentioned) and burned out in two years.

3) 100% anecdotal (but answering questions like this is hard because the sample size is so small) I know more people who are overworked and miserable at PW. But I also know people who love and hate all four firms.

4) At the end of the day, I'd go with your gut culture feel - if your goal it to make partner than survival and stomaching 10 years is going to be more important than any of the other factors. Plus, it is really hard to predicate what your experience will be like. I know a junior at Weil who got amazing early experience there due to a case they were staffed on early (which they had 0 influence over). They're probably in a better position than a generic Cravath lit junior, but I still wouldn't recommend Weil over Cravath.

[Sackboy]

I honestly wouldn't worry about hours too much. When we're looking at the bunch of PW/GDC/Cravath/Weil, you're going to work hard everywhere. They all have very similar profits per equity partners and likely billing rates. With those two quantities known, it's pretty easy to deduce that the hours are probably roughly equivalent.

I think the "you'll have an easier time lateraling from Cravath" line is malarkey. Your lateral opportunities from PW/GDC/Cravath will all be materially the same.

In your shoes, I would personally go with GDC since you don't plan on staying in NY, as it's the only firm where you could internally transfer to the West Coast in case you really like the partners you're working with but just want to change up the scenery. If you had wanted to stay in NY, I would have probably recommended PW.

Like I intimated earlier, Weil is probably the only wrong answer here.

[Anonymous User]

[Posting anonymously because I work at a peer firm and can provide some insight based on that and don't want my identity revealed. Thank you, mods.]

I'm a senior-ish associate (litigator) at a peer firm. I don't know the culture at any of these firms well because I don't work there, but my two cents is to take the Cravath offer. Their brand is stronger, and you'll have an easier time lateraling if you ever decide to do that. Given that your goal is to make partner, you may well decide to make partner somewhere else. My sense (from rather limited examples), is that people from Cravath do have a marginally but appreciably easier time lateraling than their peers at the other firms you're considering.

The grass is always greener, of course, but Cravath's rotation system has much to recommend. In litigation, cases can last for years---far longer than the average associate's tenure at a firm. That means that many associates get stuck on one or two large cases and find it very hard to escape those teams. (The culture at most firms makes it quite hard to get off a case.) Yes, the litigation rotations at Cravath can be long, but at least there is some light at the end of the tunnel if you're on a bad case.

My primary concern with Cravath is the culture. From my interviews at PW and GDC, and speaking with 3Ls going to those firms, I felt that they have more similar cultures in ways that are important to me (pro bono work, emphasis on diversity, etc.) I did not get the same feeling from my Cravath interview; in general the people I spoke with were much more serious and conservative (in manner, not necessarily politics). Of course it's not necessary that my colleagues become my best friends, but I have always enjoyed grabbing drinks with coworkers and spending time with them in a social setting.

Another thing I have heard is that the hours will be worse at Cravath, but of course the hours are going to be terrible anywhere. Do you think the reputation is worth these tradeoffs? I quite literally have no clue whether I want to be in a rotation, free-market, assigned to a practice group, etc and do not want to make my decision based on that alone.

Anon because at Cravath.

When you say you're concerned with Cravath's culture, are you talking about its long hours or something else? If hours, you're right to worry that they are long. I've been working weekends and will be working during the holidays. Those senior to me also seem swamped. I think the reputation is 100% worth the long hours though, and that clients come to us at least partly because we're available 24/7 to provide high quality legal services. If you're talking about something other than the hours, I wonder what you mean and if it's actually based on reality or rumors.

[Anonymous User]

My primary concern with Cravath is the culture. From my interviews at PW and GDC, and speaking with 3Ls going to those firms, I felt that they have more similar cultures in ways that are important to me (pro bono work, emphasis on diversity, etc.) I did not get the same feeling from my Cravath interview; in general the people I spoke with were much more serious and conservative (in manner, not necessarily politics). Of course it's not necessary that my colleagues become my best friends, but I have always enjoyed grabbing drinks with coworkers and spending time with them in a social setting.

Another thing I have heard is that the hours will be worse at Cravath, but of course the hours are going to be terrible anywhere. Do you think the reputation is worth these tradeoffs? I quite literally have no clue whether I want to be in a rotation, free-market, assigned to a practice group, etc and do not want to make my decision based on that alone.

Anon because at Cravath.

When you say you're concerned with Cravath's culture, are you talking about its long hours or something else? If hours, you're right to worry that they are long. I've been working weekends and will be working during the holidays. Those senior to me also seem swamped. I think the reputation is 100% worth the long hours though, and that clients come to us at least partly because we're available 24/7 to provide high quality legal services. If you're talking about something other than the hours, I wonder what you mean and if it's actually based on reality or rumors.

Yes, partially the hours although I don't think that the other firms have materially better hours. My primary reservation is that in comparison to Cravath, PW/GDC seem to 1) encourage more pro bono work and 2) place a higher emphasis on diversity. Adding in the "feel" I got from interviewing at all three firms; I did feel that the people at Cravath are a bit more reserved and formal than those at PW, and to a lesser extent, GDC. I will caveat this and say that I know a lot more people at/going to PW and GDC and have spoken to fewer people going to Cravath. I don't want to make generalizations about hundreds of people based on the handful I've spoken to, but I have no idea how else to assess fit.

[Anonymous User]

My primary concern with Cravath is the culture. From my interviews at PW and GDC, and speaking with 3Ls going to those firms, I felt that they have more similar cultures in ways that are important to me (pro bono work, emphasis on diversity, etc.) I did not get the same feeling from my Cravath interview; in general the people I spoke with were much more serious and conservative (in manner, not necessarily politics). Of course it's not necessary that my colleagues become my best friends, but I have always enjoyed grabbing drinks with coworkers and spending time with them in a social setting.

Another thing I have heard is that the hours will be worse at Cravath, but of course the hours are going to be terrible anywhere. Do you think the reputation is worth these tradeoffs? I quite literally have no clue whether I want to be in a rotation, free-market, assigned to a practice group, etc and do not want to make my decision based on that alone.

Anon because at Cravath.

When you say you're concerned with Cravath's culture, are you talking about its long hours or something else? If hours, you're right to worry that they are long. I've been working weekends and will be working during the holidays. Those senior to me also seem swamped. I think the reputation is 100% worth the long hours though, and that clients come to us at least partly because we're available 24/7 to provide high quality legal services. If you're talking about something other than the hours, I wonder what you mean and if it's actually based on reality or rumors.

Yes, partially the hours although I don't think that the other firms have materially better hours. My primary reservation is that in comparison to Cravath, PW/GDC seem to 1) encourage more pro bono work and 2) place a higher emphasis on diversity. Adding in the "feel" I got from interviewing at all three firms; I did feel that the people at Cravath are a bit more reserved and formal than those at PW, and to a lesser extent, GDC. I will caveat this and say that I know a lot more people at/going to PW and GDC and have spoken to fewer people going to Cravath. I don't want to make generalizations about hundreds of people based on the handful I've spoken to, but I have no idea how else to assess fit.

Anon because ex-Cravath and now at peer firm.

Hours are comparable at Cravath to other firms, by the way. Cravath associates think their hours are longer but mind you they've never worked anywhere else. My hours at my new firm are basically the same, but the day-to-day stress is lower because I don't feel the "do-or-die" mentality for every little thing, and I mean literally every little thing (e.g. even cite checking, proof reading, binder making), that you feel at Cravath. Does that produce better work product? I personally don't think so but some Cravath associates surely believe it does. I billed above average for Cravath and above average here as well, though, for what it's worth.

As for culture, I don't want to say much, but I will encourage the other two firms.

I actually had the same set of options as you several years ago after graduating. I very much enjoy my current firm, but I do wish I had gone to PW or GDC. I chose Cravath, even though I too felt like PW was more my people, because of ranking, prestige, and the allure of "you can't lateral to Cravath and Cravath gives you better options". The former is still kind of true, but the firm has been making more and more "exceptions".
The latter is NOT true; Cravath does NOT give you better lateral options. Your lateral options depend on large part your experience, less so firm brand, and I have many friends who are stuck at Cravath because they can't find an option that is "as prestigious" as their landing spot, or had to take a huge hit to "prestige" in order to get out.

Edit: I will also add that ranking changes. When I was graduating, Cravath was V2 and PW was somewhere in the V20s. Now, sure Cravath is V1 but PW climbed up over 10 spots, landing itself solidly in V10. Also, who knew Latham and Kirkland would be doing as well as it does now, when I was graduating. In that time period, tons of partners I loved at Cravath left Cravath too (which again, highlights the changes in time), so the practice area I was interested in disappeared at the firm.

[Anonymous User]

Anon because ex-Cravath and now at peer firm.

Hours are comparable at Cravath to other firms, by the way. Cravath associates think their hours are longer but mind you they've never worked anywhere else. My hours at my new firm are basically the same, but the day-to-day stress is lower because I don't feel the "do-or-die" mentality for every little thing, and I mean literally every little thing (e.g. even cite checking, proof reading, binder making), that you feel at Cravath. Does that produce better work product? I personally don't think so but some Cravath associates surely believe it does. I billed above average for Cravath and above average here as well, though, for what it's worth.

As for culture, I don't want to say much, but I will encourage the other two firms.

I actually had the same set of options as you several years ago after graduating. I very much enjoy my current firm, but I do wish I had gone to PW or GDC. I chose Cravath, even though I too felt like PW was more my people, because of ranking, prestige, and the allure of "you can't lateral to Cravath and Cravath gives you better options". The former is still kind of true, but the firm has been making more and more "exceptions".
The latter is NOT true; Cravath does NOT give you better lateral options. Your lateral options depend on large part your experience, less so firm brand, and I have many friends who are stuck at Cravath because they can't find an option that is "as prestigious" as their landing spot, or had to take a huge hit to "prestige" in order to get out.

Edit: I will also add that ranking changes. When I was graduating, Cravath was V2 and PW was somewhere in the V20s. Now, sure Cravath is V1 but PW climbed up over 10 spots, landing itself solidly in V10. Also, who knew Latham and Kirkland would be doing as well as it does now, when I was graduating. In that time period, tons of partners I loved at Cravath left Cravath too (which again, highlights the changes in time), so the practice area I was interested in disappeared at the firm.

That makes sense. I don't really care about 'prestige' per se but just want to maximize my exit options. Based on these comments, I am strongly leaning to either PW or GDC. I liked the people at both firms, probably PW a bit more, but it seems like the primary difference is assignment system. Has anyone experienced both a free-market and a formal assignment system? How much is success in a free-market system predicated on ability to schmooze with the partners/senior associates? Are there other factors I should consider?

[Anonymous User]

That makes sense. I don't really care about 'prestige' per se but just want to maximize my exit options. Based on these comments, I am strongly leaning to either PW or GDC. I liked the people at both firms, probably PW a bit more, but it seems like the primary difference is assignment system. Has anyone experienced both a free-market and a formal assignment system? How much is success in a free-market system predicated on ability to schmooze with the partners/senior associates? Are there other factors I should consider?

I've dealt with both, so I'm happy to chime in. Disclaimer, though, I have not worked at any of the firms you listed. I have worked at a V50 with an assignment system and a V10 with a free-market system. There were definitely pros and cons to both. In the assignment system, I very much felt like if I didn't have work that it was not my fault, and there was not work to give me. That being said, I disliked being, effectively, locked into certain partners. I worked for the same 2-3 partners my entire time at my V50 with rare exception. At my free-market V10, I worked for 8 different partners in the first 3 months. From there, I've been able to find the partners I vibe with (and who like me) and continually get work there. I personally really appreciate that, even though I do need to send out a few emails if the work well has dried up for too long. When you're working in biglaw, you're sending dozens of emails some days, so I figure a few extra emails here and there to make sure my matter list is full isn't too big of a deal. The free-market system has also helped me carve out specifically what I want to do with my practice. I'm in a specialist group, but I've basically been able to spin things where I pretty much only work on capital markets/bankruptcy transactions, which is what I enjoy most. I'm unsure if I could have achieved that in an assignment system.