Top Law Schools

Hi all, I wanted to get people's thoughts on offers from S&C. Some things I'm thinking about:

1. SullCrom paid below-market?
S&C said they paid would-be summer associates a generous stipend. It amounted to ~$29,000 ($19K stipend, $10K advance). Generous as it was, it was below-market. An advance is a debt you have to pay back through your salary. While first-year associates at peer firms will be making 190K when they join in 2021, first-years at SullCrom will be making 180K. There is one way for SullCrom to match the market: forgive the advance. I'm a little surprised that they haven't done that, to be honest. It makes me a little wary about accepting an S&C offer.

2. SullCrom reduced their support staff?
I talked to some associates at S&C's peer firms who gave glowing reviews of their paralegals and secretaries. The pitch is that these folks can make a brutal job in big law a bit more bearable. But S&C apparently gutted their support staff and outsourced these functions to back-office third-party providers. (See Law.com article linked below). I've heard that first-year associates at S&C now operate without secretaries. It seems kind of silly to think about as a law student, but do people think this is a legitimate thing to weigh and consider when deciding between firms? How much does it matter?

3. SullCrom had weaker substantive training for incoming first-year associates?
I also heard that incoming first-years during COVID-19 had just two days of training before being thrown into the pit. Interested in how other firms responded to COVID with regard to training new first-year associates. Has anyone heard anything?

*https://www.law.com/americanlawyer/2020 ... urces-say/

Ehhh this seems to me like overthinking it tbh. As to the market-pay, a current offeree will make market I'm sure (I'd be shocked if it was otherwise but maybe I'll be proven wrong). The other stuff seems very ancillary. The reality is S&C is a big-name institution that will set you up well when you inevitably want to leave.You will undoubtedly get some valuable legal experience and I'm not sure formal training is that important.

Its downsides are obviously going to be limited to no work/life balance and there have been endless TLS posts over last 20 yrs about a harsher culture.In my personal experience, the downsides apply to any big name firm in NY but ofc you have to consider them. At the end of the day, its Sullivan & Cromwell, you're gonna be more than fine if you end up there for a few years LOL.

Sure, obviously S&C is one of the best firms and its name on your resume will take you far, which is why people are still even bidding on S&C in the first place. Isn't it telling though that all of S&C's peers paid their summers in full, while S&C cheaped out? I think you're right to be skeptical, and it's definitely something to keep in mind when deciding. Always look at how a firm (or, in the future, a company) treats its most expendable and powerless employees, in this case, summers and staff. Cutting pay, not because it's necessary or even the market standard, but just because you can? Not a good look.

Point #3 of your original post is, IMO, irrelevant and should bear no weight on your decision. You are not going to learn anything of substantive value in your "orientation" training, whether it is 2 days or 2 months (aside for maybe some entirely non-legal tips from senior associates on how to navigate tough work situations). The things you will learn to be a good associate will come from doing work, not from formal training.

Point #2 - The degree to which an associate uses his/her secretary varies from associate to associate. I haven't read the articles about the changes S&C made with respect to their support staff, so no thoughts on that. But aside for maybe assisting with time entries or mailing out expense reimbursements, you won't need an overwhelming amount of support from a secretary as a junior associate. As a former S&C associate, I found their support staff outstanding (and way better than my current firm). I've used my assistant on two occasions since COVID started in March as a senior associate. In short, I also wouldn't let this be a significant factor in your deciding between firms.

2L here weighing an S&C offer, plus offers from several of its peer firms. Building off OP’s point #2, is there meaningful variation in the level/quality of support available to juniors across the v10 firms? (NY offices, excl. WLRK) Any firm stand out for being particularly good or bad? It sounds like this should be a non-factor, but every now and then I hear somebody claim that a secretary or doc processing was some kind of godsend and made their lives much, much easier.

While we’re discussing the minutiae of tippy-top firms, is there any meaning to DPW leading on COVID bonuses versus Cravath arguably following a few months later with the combined year-end bonus?

Obviously neither place — nor S&C, despite its summer snafu — is short on cash/financially unstable, but it just seems that DPW was a bit more outwardly appreciative of its associates.

As a current 2L I did not bid on S&C because I had a pre-OCI offer at a comparable firm. I was worried about finances. S&C owns their building and thus are exposed to the currently awful NYC real estate market, which may or may not explain the financial decisions you alluded to. But if I had gone into OCI without any offers I'd have definitely bid them, since they are a top NYC player and will be for the foreseeable future (for example, the Goldman GC is a former SullCrom partner). I think if you have offers at places like Cravath, DPW, etc., I'd pick those places over S&C. But it's certainly not a bad place to land and possibly worth the $10k pay decrease over maybe a V30 or so (depending on practice area). But I am a law student so what do I know. These are good questions for a second look.

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 27, 2021 2:01 pm

As a current 2L I did not bid on S&C because I had a pre-OCI offer at a comparable firm. I was worried about finances. S&C owns their building and thus are exposed to the currently awful NYC real estate market, which may or may not explain the financial decisions you alluded to. But if I had gone into OCI without any offers I'd have definitely bid them, since they are a top NYC player and will be for the foreseeable future (for example, the Goldman GC is a former SullCrom partner). I think if you have offers at places like Cravath, DPW, etc., I'd pick those places over S&C. But it's certainly not a bad place to land and possibly worth the $10k pay decrease over maybe a V30 or so (depending on practice area). But I am a law student so what do I know. These are good questions for a second look.

I mean I think its about a 0.00% chance a person who gets an offer this year isn't paid exactly the same as someone at Cravath/DPW. I honestly think these top firms are indistinguishable but if you prefer a generalist practice go to S&C and if you like rotational go to Cravath. If you like securities/derivatives work then DPW may be the best. Assuming the average 2-3 yr commitment, I'm not sure any of the factors listed above outside of vague notions of firm culture matter at all.

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 27, 2021 2:08 pm

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 27, 2021 2:01 pm

As a current 2L I did not bid on S&C because I had a pre-OCI offer at a comparable firm. I was worried about finances. S&C owns their building and thus are exposed to the currently awful NYC real estate market, which may or may not explain the financial decisions you alluded to. But if I had gone into OCI without any offers I'd have definitely bid them, since they are a top NYC player and will be for the foreseeable future (for example, the Goldman GC is a former SullCrom partner). I think if you have offers at places like Cravath, DPW, etc., I'd pick those places over S&C. But it's certainly not a bad place to land and possibly worth the $10k pay decrease over maybe a V30 or so (depending on practice area). But I am a law student so what do I know. These are good questions for a second look.

I mean I think its about a 0.00% chance a person who gets an offer this year isn't paid exactly the same as someone at Cravath/DPW. I honestly think these top firms are indistinguishable but if you prefer a generalist practice go to S&C and if you like rotational go to Cravath. If you like securities/derivatives work then DPW may be the best. Assuming the average 2-3 yr commitment, I'm not sure any of the factors listed above outside of vague notions of firm culture matter at all.

Or anyone deciding between these three could look at something more concrete. These three firms have vastly different assignment systems that fundamentally change the experience of junior associates. I think that trumps most other factors.

Everyone I know who worked at any of S&C, Cravath or DPW was extremely miserable, even by Biglaw standards.

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 27, 2021 2:25 pm

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 27, 2021 2:08 pm

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 27, 2021 2:01 pm

As a current 2L I did not bid on S&C because I had a pre-OCI offer at a comparable firm. I was worried about finances. S&C owns their building and thus are exposed to the currently awful NYC real estate market, which may or may not explain the financial decisions you alluded to. But if I had gone into OCI without any offers I'd have definitely bid them, since they are a top NYC player and will be for the foreseeable future (for example, the Goldman GC is a former SullCrom partner). I think if you have offers at places like Cravath, DPW, etc., I'd pick those places over S&C. But it's certainly not a bad place to land and possibly worth the $10k pay decrease over maybe a V30 or so (depending on practice area). But I am a law student so what do I know. These are good questions for a second look.

I mean I think its about a 0.00% chance a person who gets an offer this year isn't paid exactly the same as someone at Cravath/DPW. I honestly think these top firms are indistinguishable but if you prefer a generalist practice go to S&C and if you like rotational go to Cravath. If you like securities/derivatives work then DPW may be the best. Assuming the average 2-3 yr commitment, I'm not sure any of the factors listed above outside of vague notions of firm culture matter at all.

Or anyone deciding between these three could look at something more concrete. These three firms have vastly different assignment systems that fundamentally change the experience of junior associates. I think that trumps most other factors.

The assignment system and type of work you want to do govern all factors. S&C/DPW/CSM are functionally identical on a number of other metrics. Attorney training, secretarial support, etc., are not meter movers here.

A) Figure out how you want to actually practice law -- this is the assignment system point.

B) Figure out what you want to practice.

You're going to work roughly similar hours and be paid relatively the same, and the training/support are going to be distant considerations when you're in your 1st year, so focus on the things that matter.

When did S&C start its new associate class, early or late relative to other V10 firms in NY?

Elston Gunn wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 27, 2021 3:52 pm

Everyone I know who worked at any of S&C, Cravath or DPW was extremely miserable, even by Biglaw standards.

This is not universally true (appreciating that you qualified your post with "everyone i know"...). I am a former S&C associate that was very happy there and knew many others who felt the same.

dyemond wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 27, 2021 4:00 pm

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 27, 2021 2:25 pm

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 27, 2021 2:08 pm

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 27, 2021 2:01 pm

As a current 2L I did not bid on S&C because I had a pre-OCI offer at a comparable firm. I was worried about finances. S&C owns their building and thus are exposed to the currently awful NYC real estate market, which may or may not explain the financial decisions you alluded to. But if I had gone into OCI without any offers I'd have definitely bid them, since they are a top NYC player and will be for the foreseeable future (for example, the Goldman GC is a former SullCrom partner). I think if you have offers at places like Cravath, DPW, etc., I'd pick those places over S&C. But it's certainly not a bad place to land and possibly worth the $10k pay decrease over maybe a V30 or so (depending on practice area). But I am a law student so what do I know. These are good questions for a second look.

I mean I think its about a 0.00% chance a person who gets an offer this year isn't paid exactly the same as someone at Cravath/DPW. I honestly think these top firms are indistinguishable but if you prefer a generalist practice go to S&C and if you like rotational go to Cravath. If you like securities/derivatives work then DPW may be the best. Assuming the average 2-3 yr commitment, I'm not sure any of the factors listed above outside of vague notions of firm culture matter at all.

Or anyone deciding between these three could look at something more concrete. These three firms have vastly different assignment systems that fundamentally change the experience of junior associates. I think that trumps most other factors.

The assignment system and type of work you want to do govern all factors. S&C/DPW/CSM are functionally identical on a number of other metrics. Attorney training, secretarial support, etc., are not meter movers here.

A) Figure out how you want to actually practice law -- this is the assignment system point.

B) Figure out what you want to practice.

You're going to work roughly similar hours and be paid relatively the same, and the training/support are going to be distant considerations when you're in your 1st year, so focus on the things that matter.

The above is really the correct response. You should not be weighing these factors heavily (support staff, word processing capabilities) in picking a firm - the firms mentioned are all going to have more than enough to support you as a junior. There should be many many factors that come before these in your consideration.