Cleary (DC) vs Gibson (DC) Forum

[Anonymous User]

Curious of people’s thoughts re overall culture (and any other important considerations). I want to litigate and have an interest in antitrust. Thanks!

[Anonymous User]

Bump

[Anonymous User]

Gibson

[Anonymous User]

Unless you have no desire in life to do anything other than antitrust all the time, Gibson is a very easy choice.

[Anonymous User]

Unless you have no desire in life to do anything other than antitrust all the time, Gibson is a very easy choice.

And if I’m sure I want to do antitrust? I know both have great practices.

[Anonymous User]

Curious of people’s thoughts re overall culture (and any other important considerations). I want to litigate and have an interest in antitrust. Thanks!

Cleary for antitrust.

[Anonymous User]

Curious of people’s thoughts re overall culture (and any other important considerations). I want to litigate and have an interest in antitrust. Thanks!

Cleary for antitrust.

Is that based on Chambers ranking alone? Do you have any insight into the group culture or what it's like to work there?

[Anonymous User]

There are a lot of big egos in the Cleary antitrust group based on limited personal interactions and gossip. Don't know anything about GDC DC, though I'd guess they are probably filled with the same type of people.

But Cleary is well-known for having THE best antitrust group in the country, so if you're absolutely sure that's what you want, then go there. But AFAIK besides antitrust the only other big practice in their DC office is structured transactions and I know former Cleary associates who've been pushed out from antitrust into structured.

Basically unless you're married to the idea of doing antitrust - have an econ background, wants to go into DOJ/FTC at some point, etc I'd pick GDC.

[Anonymous User]

I'm an agency attorney who has worked opposite both firms' antitrust practices over the past 5-10 years. Both have solid antitrust practices. Not sure where the prior poster got the "Cleary is clearly the best" vibe from; they're impressive to be sure, but not noticeably better than the handful of other strong antitrust practices. Gibson has a fair number of former DOJ and FTC people, so it's not like Cleary is obviously better for those who want to transition to gov't after a few years. All in all, Gibson is probably the better option if you want strong lit practices across the board, without sacrificing quality of antitrust.

[thechosen1]

Not a clear answer either way

[Anonymous User]

Agree with an above poster about Gibson being the better overall pick. I’m an antitrust attorney and from my and my colleagues’ perspective, both are the top of the market in the field. Cleary is very good, as is Gibson. Edge for merger work likely goes to Cleary, while the edge for antitrust lit likely goes to Gibson. Both though do very well in both categories. I’d call antitrust mostly a wash. Gibson though is likely the better option for a number of other practices in DC, making them the better overall pick.

[Anonymous User]

For what it's worth, Dave Gelfand's retirement is a really major loss for Cleary's antitrust group. They have a bench and I think he is still "counsel" there part-time, but it's a blow.