Skadden (NY) vs S&C (NY) Forum

[Anonymous User]

With regard to general corporate. Anon bc pertains to employment decision.

[Anonymous User]

I voted S&C, but I'm posting to state the obvious: the culture at these firms could not be more different. Biglaw sucks, so if you feel like you're going to jive better with the attorneys at Skadden in a way that allows you to work harder/stay longer, then it may be worth ignoring any potential/marginal benefit in preftige/experience/exits you might get from S&C and pick Skaddy instead. Without knowing anything about your personality, goals, etc. S&C is the clear choice, though.

[Anonymous User]

Are you a former frat boy who unironically uses "bro" in everyday conversation (or the female equivalent of this if you're a woman)? Then go Skadden.

Are you sorta nerdy, status-conscious, and did you show up to your law school classes in a button-down shirt that you stuffed into your jeans? Then go to S&C.

[Anonymous User]

Are you a former frat boy who unironically uses "bro" in everyday conversation (or the female equivalent of this if you're a woman)? Then go Skadden.

Are you sorta nerdy, status-conscious, and did you show up to your law school classes in a button-down shirt that you stuffed into your jeans? Then go to S&C.

Currently sitting at Skadden with a button down shirt stuffed into my jeans rolling my eyes at frat boy summer associates who won’t shut the fuck up down the hall. would rather be at S&C, can confirm.

[Anonymous User]

Depends on whether you wanna work for a V5, I guess.

[Anonymous User]

Considered offers at both a few years ago. (Ultimately spent the summer at Skadden and ended up elsewhere post-clerkship.) One point I will note for purposes of corporate focus--S&C advertises a more "generalist" approach to corporate training, while Skadden runs you through two rotations (usually M&A and Capital Markets, by headcount) and then sticks you in a practice group. Assuming you're considering summer offers and don't plan to take another bite at the apple like I did, it might be worth considering the relative merits of each approach. (I have friends at Skadden who got stuck in practice groups, either for a rotation or more permanently, that they didn't much like; most of them are no longer at Skadden.)

[Anonymous User]

Depends on whether you wanna work for a V5, I guess.

V5 only matters if they go to a T3 like YSC.

[Anonymous User]

Would this still hold S&C > Skadden for lit?

[Anonymous User]

Would this still hold S&C > Skadden for lit?

I would almost certainly say yes for most litigation practice groups. The only one that comes to my mind where Skadden has a clear edge would be (int.) arbitration and related international practices. Abroad, S&C is very narrowly CapM and M&A focused.

[Anonymous User]

Would this still hold S&C > Skadden for lit?

Yes

[Res Ipsa Loquitter]

This may be lost among vault obsessed law students, but in New York, S&C is generally considered the better law firm

[parkslope]

Would this still hold S&C > Skadden for lit?

No dog in this fight, but Skadden/S&C are both Band 1 for NY general litigation, securities litigation and white collar according to Chambers. I think people often overemphasize practice group differences between, say, the top 10 NY firms. In a lot of cases, the big NY firms all have a lot of lawyers doing similar stuff.

[Anonymous User]

Go with your gut. Everything is very personal but prestige wise, you can’t go wrong either way so truly just pick wherever you felt most comfortable. S&C i’d say has more eclectic people and diversity whereas Skadden is a frat.

[Anonymous User]

Would this still hold S&C > Skadden for lit?

I would almost certainly say yes for most litigation practice groups. The only one that comes to my mind where Skadden has a clear edge would be (int.) arbitration and related international practices. Abroad, S&C is very narrowly CapM and M&A focused.

Skadden >> S&C for antitrust as well

[Anonymous User]

I voted S&C, but I'm posting to state the obvious: the culture at these firms could not be more different. Biglaw sucks, so if you feel like you're going to jive better with the attorneys at Skadden in a way that allows you to work harder/stay longer, then it may be worth ignoring any potential/marginal benefit in preftige/experience/exits you might get from S&C and pick Skaddy instead. Without knowing anything about your personality, goals, etc. S&C is the clear choice, though.

This is honestly surprising. Had both S&C and Skadden offers, but chose Skadden. Ignoring the fact that I thought Skadden associates were way more fun to be around, Skadden's breadth of practice was impressive to me. S&C may have great litigation and M&A practices, but Skadden has incredibly strong M&A/Lit/Antitrust/Tax/CapM practices. I don't think the decision is as clear as you make it out to be.

[Anonymous User]

Would this still hold S&C > Skadden for lit?

I would almost certainly say yes for most litigation practice groups. The only one that comes to my mind where Skadden has a clear edge would be (int.) arbitration and related international practices. Abroad, S&C is very narrowly CapM and M&A focused.

Skadden >> S&C for antitrust as well

Skadden also has a market-leading tax practice that--unlike most others--actually generates interesting business on the corporate side, FWIW.

[VentureMBA]

Considered offers at both a few years ago. (Ultimately spent the summer at Skadden and ended up elsewhere post-clerkship.) One point I will note for purposes of corporate focus--S&C advertises a more "generalist" approach to corporate training, while Skadden runs you through two rotations (usually M&A and Capital Markets, by headcount) and then sticks you in a practice group. Assuming you're considering summer offers and don't plan to take another bite at the apple like I did, it might be worth considering the relative merits of each approach. (I have friends at Skadden who got stuck in practice groups, either for a rotation or more permanently, that they didn't much like; most of them are no longer at Skadden.)

This happened to me. I started my career at Skadden, got stuck in a practice group I hated and left after my 2nd year.

[Anonymous User]

Would this still hold S&C > Skadden for lit?

I would almost certainly say yes for most litigation practice groups. The only one that comes to my mind where Skadden has a clear edge would be (int.) arbitration and related international practices. Abroad, S&C is very narrowly CapM and M&A focused.

Skadden >> S&C for antitrust as well

Skadden also has a market-leading tax practice that--unlike most others--actually generates interesting business on the corporate side, FWIW.

Uhh so does S&C

[Anonymous User]

Would this still hold S&C > Skadden for lit?

I would almost certainly say yes for most litigation practice groups. The only one that comes to my mind where Skadden has a clear edge would be (int.) arbitration and related international practices. Abroad, S&C is very narrowly CapM and M&A focused.

Skadden >> S&C for antitrust as well

Skadden also has a market-leading tax practice that--unlike most others--actually generates interesting business on the corporate side, FWIW.

Uhh so does S&C

Skadden's tax practice is probably best in the country.

[Anonymous User]

In terms of pure prestige - both are in that tier where prestige really stops mattering. You can’t go wrong with either. Anyone saying that there is a clear drop-off or difference is being ridiculous.