Top Law Schools

Interested in corporate, not sure what practice

I voted for S&C — if you aren’t drawn to a particular niche like restructuring or project finance, there’s probably no strong reason to go to Kirkland or Milbank.

(P.S. I don’t work there so I’m not an authority on this, but nobody calls it “Sullivan.” Colloquially, it’s either “SullCrom” or “S and C.”)

Honestly, take SullCrom then lateral to Kirkland for a fat signing bonus in a couple years if you decide it's more up your alley.

If you do end up lateralling, you'll be at Kirkland anyway, have had good training and be $100,000+ richer.

Violet2000 wrote: ↑

Thu Aug 19, 2021 2:25 pm

Interested in corporate, not sure what practice

Only reason to choose Milbank is PF. If you're not into PF, you're down to SullCrom vs. K&E. I'm of the minority opinion that either can be a defensible choice based on your unique practice area interests/preferences. K&E is much more WFH friendly than SullCrom and that alone would make me choose it, but that my not be your case.

I believe SullCrom and K&E are in the same-tier for Corporate work. Thus, for me, the decision would turn largely on cultural fit, which I think is better understood by talking to as many people as you can outside of the formal recruiting channels.

Also, personally, I think the theory of starting at firm X and lateraling to K&E (or another firm that takes laterals) down the line has some meaningful risks, particularly if firm X is not a great cultural fit. I think early-on in one's career it can be really helpful to have great mentors and colleagues that motivate you. If your starting firm has a stellar reputation, but for whatever reason does not provide the environment/mentorship that works for you, the whole experience could turn you off from Corporate law/big law and dissuade you from staying the course. Relatedly, I think there is something to be said about building a network/social capital at a given firm from day 1.