PH or Deb (Restructuring in NY) Forum

[Anonymous User]

Sorry to water down the forum even more with these firm pics, but I’ve narrowed down my offers to these two firms. I’m really interested in RX and I know PH recently acquired a really great group that honestly seem like a great team. That being said, I haven’t heard too much about Deb’s RX practice but they do seem to be an excellent firm with great people all around. If anyone has any insight - that’d be super helpful!

[Anonymous User]

Deb

[Anonymous User]

The PH rx team that was recently acquired are known for being awful to associates. A lot of old-school hazing.

[Anonymous User]

The PH rx team that was recently acquired are known for being awful to associates. A lot of old-school hazing.

Personally, I’m trying to live out my unfulfilled frat aspirations so that’s a huge plus

[Anonymous User]

Depends on what you want. That former Stroock group will be on more Rx deals but it’ll be the same type of representation every time - some formulation of unsecured creditors or out of the money stakeholders. It will taste more litigation-y because of that.

Debevoise isn’t a consistent player but their representations are more varied and straddle both debtor and secured creditor reps. Growing that group is probably a priority for the firm so TBD if they start landing more engagements by hustling or hiring more lateral partners.

Personally I think you start at Deb, and if it’s too sleepy after a year then lateral somewhere else. Still junior enough to train up and you’ll have a persuasive reason for why you’re looking.

[Anonymous User]

Depends on what you want. That former Stroock group will be on more Rx deals but it’ll be the same type of representation every time - some formulation of unsecured creditors or out of the money stakeholders. It will taste more litigation-y because of that.

Debevoise isn’t a consistent player but their representations are more varied and straddle both debtor and secured creditor reps. Growing that group is probably a priority for the firm so TBD if they start landing more engagements by hustling or hiring more lateral partners.

Personally I think you start at Deb, and if it’s too sleepy after a year then lateral somewhere else. Still junior enough to train up and you’ll have a persuasive reason for why you’re looking.

this is just categorically wrong.

1) I can’t think of the last time Deb had a meaningful rep in any major matter. They are not a serious player in the space.

2) the Stroock group that they pulled is a largely senior debtholder mandate. They normally represent banks and secured bonds, not unsecureds fighting to increase recovery from $.06 to $.13

[Anonymous User]

Depends on what you want. That former Stroock group will be on more Rx deals but it’ll be the same type of representation every time - some formulation of unsecured creditors or out of the money stakeholders. It will taste more litigation-y because of that.

Debevoise isn’t a consistent player but their representations are more varied and straddle both debtor and secured creditor reps. Growing that group is probably a priority for the firm so TBD if they start landing more engagements by hustling or hiring more lateral partners.

Personally I think you start at Deb, and if it’s too sleepy after a year then lateral somewhere else. Still junior enough to train up and you’ll have a persuasive reason for why you’re looking.

this is just categorically wrong.

1) I can’t think of the last time Deb had a meaningful rep in any major matter. They are not a serious player in the space.

2) the Stroock group that they pulled is a largely senior debtholder mandate. They normally represent banks and secured bonds, not unsecureds fighting to increase recovery from $.06 to $.13

True about 2) but I don't agree with 1). Deb won the debtor mandate for Dave's Bridal a few years ago and they pulled off Philippine Airlines last year. Given their strong PE practice, they probably have a decent amount of portfolio companies out-of-restructuring/special situations that happened behind the curtain.

Right that Stroock/Paul Hastings is a tier above Debevoise, but I think the difference is at best marginal. Speaking as someone from a big rx shop I honestly don't think neither of them as a seriously player, so might as well go work at place where you like the people the most.

[Anonymous User]

Rx lawyer at a Band 1/V10 practice, FWIW. Would choose Debevoise and not think twice. The PH team has a pretty shabby reputation, as others have noted; I think it'd be pretty easy to get pigeonholed as a "certain" kind of Rx lawyer and probably end up hating your life with fairly limited options to move. Debevoise isn't *really* a player, sure. But given all indications in the current environment, I think it'd be pretty easy to shift to a more reputable practice over the next couple years to the extent you wanted to do that to yourself.

[Anonymous User]

Rx lawyer at a Band 1/V10 practice, FWIW. Would choose Debevoise and not think twice. The PH team has a pretty shabby reputation, as others have noted; I think it'd be pretty easy to get pigeonholed as a "certain" kind of Rx lawyer and probably end up hating your life with fairly limited options to move. Debevoise isn't *really* a player, sure. But given all indications in the current environment, I think it'd be pretty easy to shift to a more reputable practice over the next couple years to the extent you wanted to do that to yourself.

I’m v10 finance, have worked on a ton of rx matters both in/out of court—I’ve seen the stroock group a lot, they’ve been involved in a lot of real ($5B+) matters and they tend to be among the smartest you have to deal with. I’m sure Deb isn’t a slouch but if their PE clients have a real issue with a $1B+ portco I wonder if there isn’t an extremely strong pull to hand the work to Weil or Kirkland.