Cahill vs. SullCrom vs. Cleary (NY, probably lit) Forum

[Anonymous User]

Looking for opinions on these firms for litigation, though that's not a hard rule for me at this point and I'm open to exploring.

The way I see it right now:

Cahill
Pros
-Smaller, less likely to get lost in the shuffle
-First Am practice is interesting, though fading (?)
-Extra bonus
-Free market system gives me a little bit more control over work

Cons
-If it turns out I don't like litigation this summer, it pushes me into a very specialized corporate practice.
-Firm is less resilient to a potential counter-cycle (?)
-Maybe I can't handle a full-on free market approach

SullCrom
Pros
-Seems like more commitment to training (?)
-Great practice in tons of different areas, so less likely to get trapped in a niche field
-Better exit options if I did corporate?
-Flexibility within each department to find the right type of work, at least for the early part of the career, but not quite a Cahill-style free market

Cons
-Culture concerns. Hours will be bad everywhere, the quality of the hours spent in the office probably matters a lot, and you hear things about SullCrom.
-One of the biggest, most faceless, easy to get lost in the big class (?)

Cleary
Pros
-Broad practice like SullCrom
-Positive vibes during interviews and on forums (intangible, probably insignificant)
-Lots of focus on cool international work

Cons
-Seems like almost everything Cleary does, SullCrom does just a hair better
-Clearly stronger corporate than lit

Right now Cleary seems like a decent balance of factors, but I'm genuinely torn and wondering if there is something I'm missing/mistaken about or should otherwise consider.

[Anonymous User]

I honestly think sull crom is prolly the right choice here.

[Anonymous User]

I honestly think sull crom is prolly the right choice here.

Interesting, could you give me your reasoning? Really trying to work through this

[Anonymous User]

I honestly think sull crom is prolly the right choice here.

I second SullCrom based on what OP has laid out.

[Anonymous User]

Obviously what buckets matter to you is personal preference but my breakdown would be:
Prestige: s&c>cleary>Cahill
Litigation work: s&c>cleary/Cahill
Work/life: prolly v bad everywhere but worse sull crom
Exit ops: s&c name just carries further but prolly no difference than cleary. Unless you really want Wall St exits then s&c may have An advantage.
Culture: obviously tls is v negative on s&c culture but firm culture is so dependent on what partners u end up working for that I think it’s basically a crapshoot. But let’s just say sull crom is last for arguments sake.
Given what you laid out I would take the Higher prestige and slightly better rep in complex litigation for a sacrifice on culture/balance if ur just the average big law junior who’s gonna dip in 2-3 years. You could even lateral to cleary/Cahill or whatever and still keep the s&c name. Just my two cents

[Anonymous User]

start at S&C, you can lateral down vault list basically however you want. But if you start lower and later want to move up the rank, probably gonna be with less ease

[Iowahawk]

start at S&C, you can lateral down vault list basically however you want. But if you start lower and later want to move up the rank, probably gonna be with less ease

I feel like anon things like this must be written by law students, there isn’t going to be a substantial difference in ability to lateral between S&C and Cleary