Top Law Schools

After being forced to navigate dozens of these due to the hiring season I want to commiserate. Inspiration for this thread is Cooley's website, which is fairly average as far as navigation goes, but has that "graphic design is my passion" vibe.

Also way too common: a ridiculous number of practice areas listed in the search options, where a good 2/3rds of them are redundant or are basically illusory.

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Sun Feb 07, 2021 10:21 pm

After being forced to navigate dozens of these due to the hiring season I want to commiserate. Inspiration for this thread is Cooley's website, which is fairly average as far as navigation goes, but has that "graphic design is my passion" vibe.

Also way too common: a ridiculous number of practice areas listed in the search options, where a good 2/3rds of them are redundant or are basically illusory.

Ngl, Cooley has a cool website. Kirkland is nice too. Latham probably the worst.

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Sun Feb 07, 2021 10:45 pm

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Sun Feb 07, 2021 10:21 pm

After being forced to navigate dozens of these due to the hiring season I want to commiserate. Inspiration for this thread is Cooley's website, which is fairly average as far as navigation goes, but has that "graphic design is my passion" vibe.

Also way too common: a ridiculous number of practice areas listed in the search options, where a good 2/3rds of them are redundant or are basically illusory.

Ngl, Cooley has a cool website. Kirkland is nice too. Latham probably the worst.

It has a bit of personality, which I guess is nice, even if I don't love it.

Latham's is pretty bad. It's not the worst to navigate, but it seems super outdated, like it was put together in the early 2000s and hasn't changed since.

Another 2L here - I think Cleary has a neat look that stands apart from other firms.

Also, DPW: why are half the education panels on the righthand side of the page, and the other half down at the bottom? It seems like they’re using two different templates on bio pages, which is odd.

Paul Weiss has improved but still looks a bit amateur.

I strongly dislike Gibson's. Although it's got some modern design aspects (very big font, seemingly meant to be viewed on mobile), I don't love its search function, and it doesn't show pictures until you get to an attorney's actual page, which makes it very hard to figure out who that Gibson attorney you just met is.

Similarly, Cravath literally doesn't have individual pages or images for its associates. Why?

(Also, it's hilarious that every other post in his topic is anonymous. What is sensitive about making fun of a firm's website?)

Paul Weiss' is so bad

polareagle wrote: ↑

Sun Feb 07, 2021 11:08 pm

I strongly dislike Gibson's. Although it's got some modern design aspects (very big font, seemingly meant to be viewed on mobile), I don't love its search function, and it doesn't show pictures until you get to an attorney's actual page, which makes it very hard to figure out who that Gibson attorney you just met is.

Similarly, Cravath literally doesn't have individual pages or images for its associates. Why?

(Also, it's hilarious that every other post in his topic is anonymous. What is sensitive about making fun of a firm's website?)

I concur that Gibson's is bad. I am a fan of Quinn's. I also think that Jones Day has a solid website.

I don't understand why every firm doesn't sink money into their website to have it look nice. Like, some websites really reflect poorly on the firm,

Latham and DPW are in my opinion the worst aesthetically--they look like they came out of the '90s, and perhaps did.

Latham and DPW are def the worst. I also feel like Skadden thought they had a cool idea for their layout, but it's kind of dumb.

S&C, Simpson, and Debevoise all have pretty clean ones. W&C and Cleary have kinda unique ones too.

polareagle wrote: ↑

Sun Feb 07, 2021 11:08 pm

I strongly dislike Gibson's. Although it's got some modern design aspects (very big font, seemingly meant to be viewed on mobile), I don't love its search function, and it doesn't show pictures until you get to an attorney's actual page, which makes it very hard to figure out who that Gibson attorney you just met is.

Similarly, Cravath literally doesn't have individual pages or images for its associates. Why?

(Also, it's hilarious that every other post in his topic is anonymous. What is sensitive about making fun of a firm's website?)

Anonymous because I'm at Cravath (other people might be anon for the same reason, because they don't want their firm to feel a certain way about their thoughts on it, in case they get outted).

We had the shittiest website among the V100 until recently. It was like Latham's, but even less modern. It's gotten better, but could still use work.

Having said that, there's a point at which a firm tries to go too far modern. Cooley's website is too busy. If that's what is considered a good website, people have bad taste. You want it simple enough that clients or potential clients can visit and easily find stuff.

I really dislike the Roman numeral section headings on Wilmer Hale's website. It just seems so weird for a website to me.

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Sun Feb 07, 2021 11:46 pm

Latham and DPW are def the worst. I also feel like Skadden thought they had a cool idea for their layout, but it's kind of dumb.

S&C, Simpson, and Debevoise all have pretty clean ones. W&C and Cleary have kinda unique ones too.

Is W&C used to refer to White & Case or Williams & Connolly?

Worst Design: Latham
Best Personality: Quinn

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Sun Feb 07, 2021 11:36 pm

Latham and DPW are in my opinion the worst aesthetically--they look like they came out of the '90s, and perhaps did.

+1. Ropes & Gray is very, very close too.

I actually like Latham's website since it gives more detailed description of the juniors than other firms (think - Paul, Weiss or S&C). But aesthetically, it's not good.

The landing photo on the WLRK website gives me a woozy feeling of vertigo

Latham is the worst design-wise; difficult to navigate, ugly, and outdated. I don't like how Cravath doesn't have pages and photos for associates.

polareagle wrote: ↑

Sun Feb 07, 2021 11:08 pm

(Also, it's hilarious that every other post in his topic is anonymous. What is sensitive about making fun of a firm's website?)

People abuse the anon feature so hard now, and the spineless mods aren't remotely interested in actually outing people who abuse it. Might as well just post everything anon.

Shocked that we've gotten this many responses without a vote for Weil. Awful website IMO

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 09, 2021 12:35 am

Shocked that we've gotten this many responses without a vote for Weil. Awful website IMO

I legitimately think the inability to filter by law school on weil.com is a nice touch in an industry dominated by preftige

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 09, 2021 12:35 am

Shocked that we've gotten this many responses without a vote for Weil. Awful website IMO

I know someone who didn't apply to Weil bc of the colors

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 09, 2021 2:01 am

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 09, 2021 12:35 am

Shocked that we've gotten this many responses without a vote for Weil. Awful website IMO

I know someone who didn't apply to Weil bc of the colors

It looks like old versions of Techcrunch. I actually kind of like it, but I can see why someone wouldn't.

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 09, 2021 2:01 am

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 09, 2021 12:35 am

Shocked that we've gotten this many responses without a vote for Weil. Awful website IMO

I know someone who didn't apply to Weil bc of the colors

Who could work at a firm that advertises that awful shade of green?

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Mon Feb 08, 2021 1:31 am

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Sun Feb 07, 2021 11:46 pm

Latham and DPW are def the worst. I also feel like Skadden thought they had a cool idea for their layout, but it's kind of dumb.

S&C, Simpson, and Debevoise all have pretty clean ones. W&C and Cleary have kinda unique ones too.

Is W&C used to refer to White & Case or Williams & Connolly?

Good question. imo Williams & Connolly's website is old school and not that interesting

Robbins Russell has a surprisingly crappy website for such a high end firm. It's incredibly basic in a way that comes off as cheap, like it was made off a template or something.