Cleary vs. Gibson vs. Weil vs. Milbank? Forum

[Anonymous User]

Currently considering Cleary, Gibson, Weil, and Milbank. I'm leaning corporate but honestly have no idea what I want to do. I like Cleary and Milbank for their international work, but will probably take Cleary over Milbank. I LOVE Gibson people and am drawn to their open market system; I know Gibson corporate might not be as strong as the others. I would like to explore different practices before settling on one, so Weil is at the bottom. Any advice would be appreciated.

[Anonymous User]

I have friends who have been or are in corporate departments at each of these firms. It seems to me the Gibson folks are consistently the most satisfied with their experience and their firm in general.

For M&A I don't think there would be a noticeable difference between a Gibson and a Cleary experience (though Chambers ranks Cleary higher). Others may feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but my friends at both firms have done equally cool deals. Cleary also lost some solid M&A partners to Freshfields and Milbank last year -- I don't know if this has or will affect their practice, but it's something to look into.

If you had said you wanted restructuring, taking daily joy levels out of the equation, I'd say you should choose Weil or Milbank.

Also, unless you plan to go to work in a firm's foreign office, in my experience international work is a pain in the butt. The major parts of a deal are largely the same as domestic but now added are (1) time zones that mean you have to be up at odd hours (2) battles to get in contact with local counsels and (3) [space filler for another annoying aspect I'm sure I'll think of later].

[Anonymous User]

Want to do restructuring? Choose Weil. Litigation? Cleary or Gibson. General Corp Work? Cleary or Weil.

I think at the very least you can rule Milbank out here since their strength is restructuring, but Weil's is better and is a more well rounded firm.

[cls2019eip]

Want to do restructuring? Choose Weil. Litigation? Cleary or Gibson. General Corp Work? Cleary or Weil.

I think at the very least you can rule Milbank out here since their strength is restructuring, but Weil's is better and is a more well rounded firm.

I think this is good advice and would note that if you're not sure what you want to do between corporate and lit, Cleary is the one in the middle of that venn diagram. And if you're leaning corporate, I would trust your gut on choose one of the firms that's better on corporate. Since you ruled out Weil seemingly because they don't let you start as generalist (I got an offer from them but don't remember enough details about them now) that leaves Cleary. But definitely do second looks; if you really like Gibson people and the open market system, you might not be happy there even though on paper it's the best match.

[Anonymous User]

Thanks everyone! I turned down Weil and Milbank and now am down to Gibson and Cleary. I've done some more introspection (lol) and second looks, and international work might not be as appealling to me anymore. I do like Gibson people more and the junior corporate folks I talked to seem to enjoy their experiences. I do like Cleary for the flexibility to explore - I heard that it's not impossible to move between corporate, litigation, or other practices there. I do have to make a decision today, so it might come down to a last-minute gut check .

[Anonymous User]

Thanks everyone! I turned down Weil and Milbank and now am down to Gibson and Cleary. I've done some more introspection (lol) and second looks, and international work might not be as appealling to me anymore. I do like Gibson people more and the junior corporate folks I talked to seem to enjoy their experiences. I do like Cleary for the flexibility to explore - I heard that it's not impossible to move between corporate, litigation, or other practices there. I do have to make a decision today, so it might come down to a last-minute gut check .

Can confirm the above on Cleary

[Anonymous User]

Thanks everyone! I turned down Weil and Milbank and now am down to Gibson and Cleary. I've done some more introspection (lol) and second looks, and international work might not be as appealling to me anymore. I do like Gibson people more and the junior corporate folks I talked to seem to enjoy their experiences. I do like Cleary for the flexibility to explore - I heard that it's not impossible to move between corporate, litigation, or other practices there. I do have to make a decision today, so it might come down to a last-minute gut check .

Can confirm the above on Cleary

Why can't you explore at Gibson? Free market means you can choose different areas to explore, no?

[Anonymous User]

I’d go with cleary over Gibson, but both great choices.

Good call cancelling milbank—the other firms are in a different tier.

[Anonymous User]

Thanks everyone! I turned down Weil and Milbank and now am down to Gibson and Cleary. I've done some more introspection (lol) and second looks, and international work might not be as appealling to me anymore. I do like Gibson people more and the junior corporate folks I talked to seem to enjoy their experiences. I do like Cleary for the flexibility to explore - I heard that it's not impossible to move between corporate, litigation, or other practices there. I do have to make a decision today, so it might come down to a last-minute gut check .

Can confirm the above on Cleary

Why can't you explore at Gibson? Free market means you can choose different areas to explore, no?

My impression is that you can choose different areas to explore under the corporate or litigation umbrellas, but it would be a bit difficult to move around if you realize corporate or litigation is not right for you. Others please feel free to chime in about this.

[Anonymous User]

I’d go with cleary over Gibson, but both great choices.

Good call cancelling milbank—the other firms are in a different tier.

May I ask why Cleary over Gibson?

[Anonymous User]

Thanks everyone! I turned down Weil and Milbank and now am down to Gibson and Cleary. I've done some more introspection (lol) and second looks, and international work might not be as appealling to me anymore. I do like Gibson people more and the junior corporate folks I talked to seem to enjoy their experiences. I do like Cleary for the flexibility to explore - I heard that it's not impossible to move between corporate, litigation, or other practices there. I do have to make a decision today, so it might come down to a last-minute gut check .

Can confirm the above on Cleary

Why can't you explore at Gibson? Free market means you can choose different areas to explore, no?

My impression is that you can choose different areas to explore under the corporate or litigation umbrellas, but it would be a bit difficult to move around if you realize corporate or litigation is not right for you. Others please feel free to chime in about this.

Interesting... I didn't get that impression in callbacks. Would definitely be interested to hear from people who know more.

Perhaps OP can ask about it directly since he already has an offer in hand.

[TheoO]

I have friends who have been or are in corporate departments at each of these firms. It seems to me the Gibson folks are consistently the most satisfied with their experience and their firm in general.

For M&A I don't think there would be a noticeable difference between a Gibson and a Cleary experience (though Chambers ranks Cleary higher). Others may feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but my friends at both firms have done equally cool deals. Cleary also lost some solid M&A partners to Freshfields and Milbank last year -- I don't know if this has or will affect their practice, but it's something to look into.

If you had said you wanted restructuring, taking daily joy levels out of the equation, I'd say you should choose Weil or Milbank.

Also, unless you plan to go to work in a firm's foreign office, in my experience international work is a pain in the butt. The major parts of a deal are largely the same as domestic but now added are (1) time zones that mean you have to be up at odd hours (2) battles to get in contact with local counsels and (3) [space filler for another annoying aspect I'm sure I'll think of later].

Deep accents. No joke--I was dealing with an Irish counsel who was originally Italian Swiss, so was like two degrees removed if not more from the English I was used to. I had to ask for repeated takes on many portions of the convos. Do that at 8am in the morning NY time enough times and it can be such a pain.

[Anonymous User]

You can move between corporate and lit or otherwise during your first two years at GDC and it isn’t uncommon. [Anon GDC Associate]

[Anonymous User]

I have friends who have been or are in corporate departments at each of these firms. It seems to me the Gibson folks are consistently the most satisfied with their experience and their firm in general.

For M&A I don't think there would be a noticeable difference between a Gibson and a Cleary experience (though Chambers ranks Cleary higher). Others may feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but my friends at both firms have done equally cool deals. Cleary also lost some solid M&A partners to Freshfields and Milbank last year -- I don't know if this has or will affect their practice, but it's something to look into.

If you had said you wanted restructuring, taking daily joy levels out of the equation, I'd say you should choose Weil or Milbank.

Also, unless you plan to go to work in a firm's foreign office, in my experience international work is a pain in the butt. The major parts of a deal are largely the same as domestic but now added are (1) time zones that mean you have to be up at odd hours (2) battles to get in contact with local counsels and (3) [space filler for another annoying aspect I'm sure I'll think of later].

Deep accents. No joke--I was dealing with an Irish counsel who was originally Italian Swiss, so was like two degrees removed if not more from the English I was used to. I had to ask for repeated takes on many portions of the convos. Do that at 8am in the morning NY time enough times and it can be such a pain.

I was thinking it, but didn't want to say it

The accents can be tough. I really respect that in such cases they are multilingual and I'm not, but even so... tough!

The worst is when you're not the one leading the call but have to take notes and the call leader seems to be following, so isn't asking for repeats.

[Anonymous User]

You can move between corporate and lit or otherwise during your first two years at GDC and it isn’t uncommon. [Anon GDC Associate]

(Different Anon GDC Associate). Can Confirm. Its called the "Unassigned" system at Gibson, where they start you in either Corporate or Lit (your choice), and then after a year they have you switch to the other group for a year, before forcing you to choose between the two at the end of year two. I understand that you can also choose one of the more niche groups for one of your unassigned years, like tax or bankruptcy, if you wanted. Its pretty common, and even folks who only want to do Lit or Corporate are technically considered "Unassigned" for their first two years, even though they are allowed to stay in their preferred group for both years.

[Anonymous User]

Not to derail, but why has Cleary's RPL & PPEP stagnated over the past couple years while peer firms are growing? Going off reputation and "prestige" alone, it seems weird to me that Cleary has lower PPEP ($3.1M) than a firm like Milbank ($3.8M).

Is this just because Cleary has more international exposure (lower billing rates, less growth)? Should an incoming 2L be worried at all?

[Anonymous User]

Not to derail, but why has Cleary's RPL & PPEP stagnated over the past couple years while peer firms are growing? Going off reputation and "prestige" alone, it seems weird to me that Cleary has lower PPEP ($3.1M) than a firm like Milbank ($3.8M).

Is this just because Cleary has more international exposure (lower billing rates, less growth)? Should an incoming 2L be worried at all?

interested in this as well

[Anonymous User]

Not to derail, but why has Cleary's RPL & PPEP stagnated over the past couple years while peer firms are growing? Going off reputation and "prestige" alone, it seems weird to me that Cleary has lower PPEP ($3.1M) than a firm like Milbank ($3.8M).

Is this just because Cleary has more international exposure (lower billing rates, less growth)? Should an incoming 2L be worried at all?

Milbank is an incredibly successful firm financially, shoulder to shoulder with firms like Weil and Debevoise that are supposedly in a different "tier." Prestige is a weird thing.

I think Cleary has a lower PPP because of their lockstep model.

[Anonymous User]

Not to derail, but why has Cleary's RPL & PPEP stagnated over the past couple years while peer firms are growing? Going off reputation and "prestige" alone, it seems weird to me that Cleary has lower PPEP ($3.1M) than a firm like Milbank ($3.8M).

Is this just because Cleary has more international exposure (lower billing rates, less growth)? Should an incoming 2L be worried at all?

Milbank is an incredibly successful firm financially, shoulder to shoulder with firms like Weil and Debevoise that are supposedly in a different "tier." Prestige is a weird thing.

I think Cleary has a lower PPP because of their lockstep model.

I think you meant Debevoise has lower PPP because of their lockstep model. PPP is not the best metric for associates to be going off imo. I would look at Chambers and see what groups you are interested in and go from there. Saying Milbank is "shoulder to shoulder" with firms based on their PPP is extremely misleading. Cleary is overall a much better firm than Milbank outside of a few groups.

[Anonymous User]

I have friends who have been or are in corporate departments at each of these firms. It seems to me the Gibson folks are consistently the most satisfied with their experience and their firm in general.

For M&A I don't think there would be a noticeable difference between a Gibson and a Cleary experience (though Chambers ranks Cleary higher). Others may feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but my friends at both firms have done equally cool deals. Cleary also lost some solid M&A partners to Freshfields and Milbank last year -- I don't know if this has or will affect their practice, but it's something to look into.

If you had said you wanted restructuring, taking daily joy levels out of the equation, I'd say you should choose Weil or Milbank.

Also, unless you plan to go to work in a firm's foreign office, in my experience international work is a pain in the butt. The major parts of a deal are largely the same as domestic but now added are (1) time zones that mean you have to be up at odd hours (2) battles to get in contact with local counsels and (3) [space filler for another annoying aspect I'm sure I'll think of later].

Will echo that international work seems exciting as a law student, but in practice it just means waking up at 4 AM to listen to board meetings or interview C-Suite types.

[Anonymous User]

I’d go with cleary over Gibson, but both great choices.

Good call cancelling milbank—the other firms are in a different tier.

May I ask why Cleary over Gibson?

I was in a similar position as you. I am leaning towards corporate and was deciding between GDC/Latham/PW. Loved GDC's people but knew Latham/PW was stronger in Corporate. That being said I chose GDC bc of the people and as everyone there and even ppl I spoke to who left GDC said the Corporate group is strong and there is plenty of fantastic deals and work to go around. Even people from other firms corroborated GDC's Corporate strength. They are also rapidly expanding Corporate! Also leanly staffed deals which allow for greater learning opportunities as a junior. i was also advised by people that the ppl you vibe with most matters given that even if they have a stronger department, if you dont vibe with them youll likely not enjoy/be able to work with them as much as people you really click with. I am really happy I chose it. I figured if ever the corporate work isn't to your "standards" you can always easily lateral anyway. Good luck!!!

[Anonymous User]

.

[Anonymous User]

Not to derail, but why has Cleary's RPL & PPEP stagnated over the past couple years while peer firms are growing? Going off reputation and "prestige" alone, it seems weird to me that Cleary has lower PPEP ($3.1M) than a firm like Milbank ($3.8M).

Is this just because Cleary has more international exposure (lower billing rates, less growth)? Should an incoming 2L be worried at all?

Milbank is an incredibly successful firm financially, shoulder to shoulder with firms like Weil and Debevoise that are supposedly in a different "tier." Prestige is a weird thing.

I think Cleary has a lower PPP because of their lockstep model.

I think you meant Debevoise has lower PPP because of their lockstep model. PPP is not the best metric for associates to be going off imo. I would look at Chambers and see what groups you are interested in and go from there. Saying Milbank is "shoulder to shoulder" with firms based on their PPP is extremely misleading. Cleary is overall a much better firm than Milbank outside of a few groups.

One could also look at Revenue Per Lawyer. Cleary: 1.00M; Milbank: 1.39M; Debevoise: 1.47M; Weil: 1.34M.

I'd still choose Cleary because of the vibe, though.

Why do people on this board like to hate on Milbank? It has no hours bonus, is a comp leader unlike weil/cleary/etc and has equal or better financials than weil/cleary/etc. if anything milbank is consistently under ranked in vault

[Anonymous User]

Thanks everyone! I turned down Weil and Milbank and now am down to Gibson and Cleary. I've done some more introspection (lol) and second looks, and international work might not be as appealling to me anymore. I do like Gibson people more and the junior corporate folks I talked to seem to enjoy their experiences. I do like Cleary for the flexibility to explore - I heard that it's not impossible to move between corporate, litigation, or other practices there. I do have to make a decision today, so it might come down to a last-minute gut check .

Can confirm the above on Cleary

Why can't you explore at Gibson? Free market means you can choose different areas to explore, no?

My impression is that you can choose different areas to explore under the corporate or litigation umbrellas, but it would be a bit difficult to move around if you realize corporate or litigation is not right for you. Others please feel free to chime in about this.

not true about GDC. you can try both lit and corp as a junior associate

[Anonymous User]

Currently considering Cleary, Gibson, Weil, and Milbank. I'm leaning corporate but honestly have no idea what I want to do. I like Cleary and Milbank for their international work, but will probably take Cleary over Milbank. I LOVE Gibson people and am drawn to their open market system; I know Gibson corporate might not be as strong as the others. I would like to explore different practices before settling on one, so Weil is at the bottom. Any advice would be appreciated.

OP, out of curiosity, which did you end up picking between Cleary and GDC?