PW vs. DPW vs. Skadden vs. Gibson for Lit (NYC) Forum

[agitateduvula]

Which of these firms would you choose? Leaning towards PW, but the DPW culture sell is strong. I'm a bit undecided about what exactly I want to do, so Skadden's specialization and "write-on" summer culture is a con for me. No idea how to rank Gibson's NYC office against the other three.

[Anonymous User]

People dramatically overstate the differences between these firms. As a junior associate in litigation, all these firms are the same. Just go where you think you'll be happiest and/or choose based on location of the physical office. (e.g., do you prefer Midtown to Hudson Yards, etc.)

[Anonymous User]

People dramatically overstate the differences between these firms. As a junior associate in litigation, all these firms are the same. Just go where you think you'll be happiest and/or choose based on location of the physical office. (e.g., do you prefer Midtown to Hudson Yards, etc.)

Agreed to an extent - the experience itself will be very similar.

But there are real differences between these firms in the types of clients and work they focus on. For example, PW or Gibson are your best bets at actual commercial litigation on this list. DPW is probably the best here for securities, antitrust, and white collar. I'm not sure why anyone purely interested in litigation would take Skadden over the other firms here.

[Dr Tobias Funke]

Well, Skadden has by far the strongest Chancery practice of the four, if you're into (1) Delaware cases that are interesting subject-matter-wise but have the most annoying procedures in the world; (2) you love reading cases that are 150 pages long when doing research; and (3) you love taking the Acela.

[Anonymous User]

I'll add only that saying DPW over Skadden for antitrust lit is wildly off base. Who's doing msft/activision? Not just that but come on; it's one area where Skadden excels. not super relevant for OP since the group is separate but still.

*GDC is excellent too so would put DPW behind either choice for future readers interested in antitrust, no clue where prior poster got the idea that they're the best

[Anonymous User]

DPW and PW have the best connections for AUSA jobs.

PW and GDC have strong appellate lit shops.

Skadden, as a prior poster noted, is the best for Chancery lit.

A lot comes down to vibes. DPW is very genteel. PW has more intense personalities and is very progressive. At Skadden, you have to hang out after work and go drinking all the time.

[agitateduvula]

Thanks all. Any thoughts on balancing Selendy Gay against these choices?

[Anonymous User]

Well, Skadden has by far the strongest Chancery practice of the four, if you're into (1) Delaware cases that are interesting subject-matter-wise but have the most annoying procedures in the world; (2) you love reading cases that are 150 pages long when doing research; and (3) you love taking the Acela.

My understanding is most of this work is done from the firm’s Wilmington office based on (a) talking with current/former Skadden WIL people and (b) my experience as a current Chancery clerk.

[Anonymous User]

Want to correct some of the incorrect things stated above about Skadden. First, Skadden's antitrust team is arguably one of the best in the country, especially in NY. Obviously you have Cleary/WSGR for tech in DC, but Skadden's easily one of the strongest antitrust teams in the country as noted above. Second, Skadden's Chancery Lit team is almost exclusively in Wilmington. Third, majority of Skadden's pure play litigation work will revolve around securities and mass torts (of which Skadden is a top firm for).

All that to say, you are correct in your read that the immediate specialization and write on process during the summer sucks. If I were litigation leaning I'd definitely be between PW and GDC. But wanted to give Skadden a fair shake here.

[Anonymous User]

DPW and PW have the best connections for AUSA jobs.

PW and GDC have strong appellate lit shops.

Skadden, as a prior poster noted, is the best for Chancery lit.

A lot comes down to vibes. DPW is very genteel. PW has more intense personalities and is very progressive. At Skadden, you have to hang out after work and go drinking all the time.

Cant's speak to GDC, but PW's appellate practice is almost entirely centered in DC. Just going off of friend's experiences there but, PW DC is dramatically more competitive in hiring and not everyone hired in DC even gets to do appellate work.

Basically inaccessible sans top credentials, including a clerkship, and should not play any role in someone's decision between these firms - especially if their offer is for NYC.

[Anonymous User]

Want to correct some of the incorrect things stated above about Skadden. First, Skadden's antitrust team is arguably one of the best in the country, especially in NY. Obviously you have Cleary/WSGR for tech in DC, but Skadden's easily one of the strongest antitrust teams in the country as noted above. Second, Skadden's Chancery Lit team is almost exclusively in Wilmington. Third, majority of Skadden's pure play litigation work will revolve around securities and mass torts (of which Skadden is a top firm for).

All that to say, you are correct in your read that the immediate specialization and write on process during the summer sucks. If I were litigation leaning I'd definitely be between PW and GDC. But wanted to give Skadden a fair shake here.

I work at Skadden so can provide some first-hand views here. Agree that specialization is a polarizing topic. Some people love it (namely, those who know what speciality they want and get into that group) and some people don't love it (especially students who don't want to have to make the specialty decision during the summer). Not sure what "write on" process means. I've been at Skadden a while and have never heard that term. As for the specific lit groups, they are as follows:

Complex Litigation and Trials (f/k/a "Litigation") - this is the general litigation group. As some have mentioned, in NY there is a fair bit of securities work (and the firm has a strong reputation in that area as one of the best in the country), but also general commercial litigation. This group will also work with other groups below when cases are larger or go to trial and need additional lit support.

Antitrust - as someone mentioned above, Skadden's antitrust group is one of the best in the country.

International arbitration - this group has partners sitting in NY, as well as a couple other offices around the world

IP litigation - small group specializing in patent lit and some soft IP lit as well

Mass Torts - a separate and well-regarded group specializing in mass torts (both MDL work and trial work)

Government Enforcement and White Collar Crime - smallish group focused almost exclusively on white collar work and some other government investigations work; most if not all of the partners in this group are former AUSAs.

In addition to these, there are also separate groups for Restructuring (which, in addition deal work, handles bankruptcy litigation, often in conjunction with the general litigation group), and Labor & Employment (a very small group that does some employment lit in addition to their labor work).

[Anonymous User]

Personally, getting stuck in the mass torts group at Skadden at the end of a summer would be my worst nightmare in big law (see: Johnson & Johnson talc case). But I also don’t want to spend my free time drinking with coworkers, so to each their own.

[Anonymous User]

Personally, getting stuck in the mass torts group at Skadden at the end of a summer would be my worst nightmare in big law (see: Johnson & Johnson talc case). But I also don’t want to spend my free time drinking with coworkers, so to each their own.

Yeah Skadden's mass torts team definitely does some of the most ethically gray litigation. But they are very very good at what they do if you don't care about that.

[Anonymous User]

Personally, getting stuck in the mass torts group at Skadden at the end of a summer would be my worst nightmare in big law (see: Johnson & Johnson talc case). But I also don’t want to spend my free time drinking with coworkers, so to each their own.

Yeah Skadden's mass torts team definitely does some of the most ethically gray litigation. But they are very very good at what they do if you don't care about that.

As opposed to the notoriously ethical work done by mass tort groups at other firms?

[Anonymous User]

Personally, getting stuck in the mass torts group at Skadden at the end of a summer would be my worst nightmare in big law (see: Johnson & Johnson talc case). But I also don’t want to spend my free time drinking with coworkers, so to each their own.

Yeah Skadden's mass torts team definitely does some of the most ethically gray litigation. But they are very very good at what they do if you don't care about that.

As opposed to the notoriously ethical work done by mass tort groups at other firms?

I am not aware of a peer firm where you can come in as a litigation-focused summer and get stuck doing only mass torts from your first year on.

[agitateduvula]

This is all very helpful, thanks everyone! My one follow-up is - does Gibson's conservative litigation bent (mostly stemming from their DC office) affect their NY litigation groups? How does that factor into the NY litigation experience?

[Anonymous User]

Personally, getting stuck in the mass torts group at Skadden at the end of a summer would be my worst nightmare in big law (see: Johnson & Johnson talc case). But I also don’t want to spend my free time drinking with coworkers, so to each their own.

It’s impossible to be stuck in mass torts as they only take a couple summers at most and if you don’t rank it in your top choices you won’t be in that group.

[Anonymous User]

Personally, getting stuck in the mass torts group at Skadden at the end of a summer would be my worst nightmare in big law (see: Johnson & Johnson talc case). But I also don’t want to spend my free time drinking with coworkers, so to each their own.

It’s impossible to be stuck in mass torts as they only take a couple summers at most and if you don’t rank it in your top choices you won’t be in that group.

The same principle applies that you can be put in a somewhat narrow group that you don’t prefer. Even if it’s not as immediately off-putting as mass torts. When I was going through OCI I was also warned Skadden NY had a rep for sticking people in transactional groups when they wanted lit, more so than peer firms.

[Anonymous User]

At my T14, Skadden seemed to have the lowest standards for hiring of the bunch. I heard from a Gibson NY summer that the conservative rep was confined to the DC and Dallas offices. PW DC also seems to have a conservative skew — more of a DC thing in general vs NY.

[Anonymous User]

Personally, getting stuck in the mass torts group at Skadden at the end of a summer would be my worst nightmare in big law (see: Johnson & Johnson talc case). But I also don’t want to spend my free time drinking with coworkers, so to each their own.

It’s impossible to be stuck in mass torts as they only take a couple summers at most and if you don’t rank it in your top choices you won’t be in that group.

The same principle applies that you can be put in a somewhat narrow group that you don’t prefer. Even if it’s not as immediately off-putting as mass torts. When I was going through OCI I was also warned Skadden NY had a rep for sticking people in transactional groups when they wanted lit, more so than peer firms.

I have worked here a long time and have never heard of that happening (being placed in transactional when only ranking lit groups), and certainly have never heard of such a widespread practice that the firm has a "rep" for it. If there exists such a rep, it is fabricated. Like I said before, there are definitely pros and cons to litigation specialization at Skadden, and not getting your top choice of specific lit practices is one of them (though almost always it is someone missing out on a preferred narrower practice like white collar or antitrust and being placed in the larger general lit group, then vice versa). But just trying to set the record straight from the inside on some of this other stuff.

[Anonymous User]

Personally, getting stuck in the mass torts group at Skadden at the end of a summer would be my worst nightmare in big law (see: Johnson & Johnson talc case). But I also don’t want to spend my free time drinking with coworkers, so to each their own.

It’s impossible to be stuck in mass torts as they only take a couple summers at most and if you don’t rank it in your top choices you won’t be in that group.

The same principle applies that you can be put in a somewhat narrow group that you don’t prefer. Even if it’s not as immediately off-putting as mass torts. When I was going through OCI I was also warned Skadden NY had a rep for sticking people in transactional groups when they wanted lit, more so than peer firms.

I have worked here a long time and have never heard of that happening (being placed in transactional when only ranking lit groups), and certainly have never heard of such a widespread practice that the firm has a "rep" for it. If there exists such a rep, it is fabricated. Like I said before, there are definitely pros and cons to litigation specialization at Skadden, and not getting your top choice of specific lit practices is one of them (though almost always it is someone missing out on a preferred narrower practice like white collar or antitrust and being placed in the larger general lit group, then vice versa). But just trying to set the record straight from the inside on some of this other stuff.

Agreed. I'm a junior associate so pretty in tune with the recruiting efforts of the past few years and I have friends that just went through or are going through the recruiting process with Skadden. I've always been transactional but of my friends and the people I know that went lit in Skadden none have ever been forced into transactional. (Though they didn't always get the smaller groups they wanted like white collar), they were just placed in complex lit.

[Anonymous User]

Personally, getting stuck in the mass torts group at Skadden at the end of a summer would be my worst nightmare in big law (see: Johnson & Johnson talc case). But I also don’t want to spend my free time drinking with coworkers, so to each their own.

It’s impossible to be stuck in mass torts as they only take a couple summers at most and if you don’t rank it in your top choices you won’t be in that group.

The same principle applies that you can be put in a somewhat narrow group that you don’t prefer. Even if it’s not as immediately off-putting as mass torts. When I was going through OCI I was also warned Skadden NY had a rep for sticking people in transactional groups when they wanted lit, more so than peer firms.

I have worked here a long time and have never heard of that happening (being placed in transactional when only ranking lit groups), and certainly have never heard of such a widespread practice that the firm has a "rep" for it. If there exists such a rep, it is fabricated. Like I said before, there are definitely pros and cons to litigation specialization at Skadden, and not getting your top choice of specific lit practices is one of them (though almost always it is someone missing out on a preferred narrower practice like white collar or antitrust and being placed in the larger general lit group, then vice versa). But just trying to set the record straight from the inside on some of this other stuff.

I straight up know someone this happened to. Wanted lit, summered in lit, got placed into cross border m&a due to need (also, they were bilingual, which they thought contributed to it). Tried to get switched, couldn't and lateraled

[Anonymous User]

Personally, getting stuck in the mass torts group at Skadden at the end of a summer would be my worst nightmare in big law (see: Johnson & Johnson talc case). But I also don’t want to spend my free time drinking with coworkers, so to each their own.

It’s impossible to be stuck in mass torts as they only take a couple summers at most and if you don’t rank it in your top choices you won’t be in that group.

The same principle applies that you can be put in a somewhat narrow group that you don’t prefer. Even if it’s not as immediately off-putting as mass torts. When I was going through OCI I was also warned Skadden NY had a rep for sticking people in transactional groups when they wanted lit, more so than peer firms.

I have worked here a long time and have never heard of that happening (being placed in transactional when only ranking lit groups), and certainly have never heard of such a widespread practice that the firm has a "rep" for it. If there exists such a rep, it is fabricated. Like I said before, there are definitely pros and cons to litigation specialization at Skadden, and not getting your top choice of specific lit practices is one of them (though almost always it is someone missing out on a preferred narrower practice like white collar or antitrust and being placed in the larger general lit group, then vice versa). But just trying to set the record straight from the inside on some of this other stuff.

I straight up know someone this happened to. Wanted lit, summered in lit, got placed into cross border m&a due to need (also, they were bilingual, which they thought contributed to it). Tried to get switched, couldn't and lateraled

Gotcha. That does suck. As I said, I think if it were widespread I would be aware of it, but I am sorry to hear your friend did not have a good experience. Incidentally, "cross border M&A" is not a practice at Skadden, so I assume your friend was placed in M&A, which I agree is not a good outcome for someone wanting litigation. There also is no such thing as "summer[ing] in lit." No one summers in any practice area. It's free market and you try assignments in any groups you want. But no matter how you slice it, your friend's experience is unfortunate and not one the firm would strive to repeat because there is no benefit to someone being unhappy and immediately lateraling.

[Anonymous User]

Personally, getting stuck in the mass torts group at Skadden at the end of a summer would be my worst nightmare in big law (see: Johnson & Johnson talc case). But I also don’t want to spend my free time drinking with coworkers, so to each their own.

It’s impossible to be stuck in mass torts as they only take a couple summers at most and if you don’t rank it in your top choices you won’t be in that group.

The same principle applies that you can be put in a somewhat narrow group that you don’t prefer. Even if it’s not as immediately off-putting as mass torts. When I was going through OCI I was also warned Skadden NY had a rep for sticking people in transactional groups when they wanted lit, more so than peer firms.

I have worked here a long time and have never heard of that happening (being placed in transactional when only ranking lit groups), and certainly have never heard of such a widespread practice that the firm has a "rep" for it. If there exists such a rep, it is fabricated. Like I said before, there are definitely pros and cons to litigation specialization at Skadden, and not getting your top choice of specific lit practices is one of them (though almost always it is someone missing out on a preferred narrower practice like white collar or antitrust and being placed in the larger general lit group, then vice versa). But just trying to set the record straight from the inside on some of this other stuff.

I straight up know someone this happened to. Wanted lit, summered in lit, got placed into cross border m&a due to need (also, they were bilingual, which they thought contributed to it). Tried to get switched, couldn't and lateraled

Gotcha. That does suck. As I said, I think if it were widespread I would be aware of it, but I am sorry to hear your friend did not have a good experience. Incidentally, "cross border M&A" is not a practice at Skadden, so I assume your friend was placed in M&A, which I agree is not a good outcome for someone wanting litigation. There also is no such thing as "summer[ing] in lit." No one summers in any practice area. It's free market and you try assignments in any groups you want. But no matter how you slice it, your friend's experience is unfortunate and not one the firm would strive to repeat because there is no benefit to someone being unhappy and immediately lateraling.

You're reading my comment a lot more literally than I intended it to be taken as!

Totally correct that they were placed into M&A, but by virtue of bilingual proficiency ended up doing almost entirely cross border work.

I meant "summered in lit" as "they exclusively took lit assignments during their summer" and were assured there was enough room for them in lit

Not unique to Skadden at all tho, I know people who got stuck into CapM/M&A at DPW/STB despite doing lit rotations during peak SPAC mania. Just something that happens at firms where you accept offers without knowing what you will do

[Anonymous User]

At my T14, Skadden seemed to have the lowest standards for hiring of the bunch. I heard from a Gibson NY summer that the conservative rep was confined to the DC and Dallas offices. PW DC also seems to have a conservative skew — more of a DC thing in general vs NY.

Idk if "hiring standards" means anything in the first instance when the distinctions are so fine. FWIW, at my T14, Skadden had the highest callback/offer medians of the three and DPW was noticeably "softer" relative to their peers in NYC. Each [School > Firm] pipeline is its own little microculture.