Skadden (NY), GDC (LA), O'Melveny (LA), Quinn (LA), or Covington (LA)? Forum

[Anonymous User]

Interested in general commercial litigation, but would love to work on media & entertainment matters. Also interested in white collar work, albeit to a lesser extent. I have significant ties to both regions and would be more than happy in either NY or LA. Long-term goals are to go in-house!

[Anonymous User]

Got any meat to go with this question? What do you already know about the firms and what gaps do you need filled?

[aegor]

Got any meat to go with this question? What do you already know about the firms and what gaps do you need filled?

How dare you expect OP to do research and act like an adult contemplating a serious decision.

[The Lsat Airbender]

Got any meat to go with this question? What do you already know about the firms and what gaps do you need filled?

People asking these questions rarely want concrete advice and are instead casting a dragnet for facterinos about the firms in question, want to know which name sounds most impressive, are humblebragging, etc.

[Anonymous User]

Interested in general commercial litigation, but would love to work on media & entertainment matters. Also interested in white collar work, albeit to a lesser extent. I have significant ties to both regions and would be more than happy in either NY or LA. Long-term goals are to go in-house!

Skadden in NYC. Band 1 in general commercial lit in the world's financial capital. The California firms are stronger in media and entertainment, but at this stage in your career, you should be focused on getting the best generalist experience you can get. You may change your mind about media and entertainment, and will be happy you got a ton of experience doing general commercial lit for one of the most prestigious firms in the world.

[Anonymous User]

Biglaw partner in LA. I would take GDC or OMM, which are two of the best big firms for litigation in LA and do a substantial amount of media and entertainment-adjacent litigation. GDC LA and OMM LA will give you great training and have a lot of cachet, even compared to Skadden NYC (where you run a very high risk of not getting any meaningful substantive experience for several years).

Quinn is also a very good litigation shop, but given these options, I would not take it unless you absolutely, 100% know in your gut that it is the right culture and lifestyle for you. If your goal is to go in-house eventually, Quinn is probably not the right place for you. (I say this as someone who came very close to picking Quinn out of law school.) Covington is also a really good firm, but it's not a big player in the LA market and you have to work in Century City.

[Anonymous User]

… and you have to work in Century City.

If you’re a partner who can afford a nice house in Pasadena, DTLA isn’t so bad. But otherwise working in Century City is a bonus, not a ding.

[Anonymous User]

… and you have to work in Century City.

If you’re a partner who can afford a nice house in Pasadena, DTLA isn’t so bad. But otherwise working in Century City is a bonus, not a ding.

LA partner. Century City is a nightmare to commute into, and I’d rather drive into DTLA if I lived in Fairfax/Miracle Mile/Hancock Park or anywhere north or east of there. But yeah, if you want to live on the west side, I agree that Century City may be a bonus.

[Anonymous User]

Interested in general commercial litigation, but would love to work on media & entertainment matters. Also interested in white collar work, albeit to a lesser extent. I have significant ties to both regions and would be more than happy in either NY or LA. Long-term goals are to go in-house!

Skadden in NYC. Band 1 in general commercial lit in the world's financial capital. The California firms are stronger in media and entertainment, but at this stage in your career, you should be focused on getting the best generalist experience you can get. You may change your mind about media and entertainment, and will be happy you got a ton of experience doing general commercial lit for one of the most prestigious firms in the world.

This is a really NY-centric view. Sure, securities and certain other specialty litigation practices tend to be strongest and most active in NY. But if you're interested in litigation more generally, Chicago, Texas, and LA all offer (imo) a better variety of GCL work with better opportunities for early substantive experience.

Also, keep in mind Skadden makes you choose your practice group at the end of the summer and does not guarantee litigation. I personally know several Skadden summers who got forced into corporate, including then-future 2d Cir. clerks. Wouldn't be my firm of choice in NY, that's for sure.

[Rule23andMe]

Got any meat to go with this question? What do you already know about the firms and what gaps do you need filled?

People asking these questions rarely want concrete advice and are instead casting a dragnet for facterinos about the firms in question, want to know which name sounds most impressive, are humblebragging, etc.

Yeah... I hereby request future "which firm" posters like this to narrow down their choices to ~three firms before posting. Crazy to think OP is seriously torn between 5 firms

[Anonymous User]

Interested in general commercial litigation, but would love to work on media & entertainment matters. Also interested in white collar work, albeit to a lesser extent. I have significant ties to both regions and would be more than happy in either NY or LA. Long-term goals are to go in-house!

Skadden in NYC. Band 1 in general commercial lit in the world's financial capital. The California firms are stronger in media and entertainment, but at this stage in your career, you should be focused on getting the best generalist experience you can get. You may change your mind about media and entertainment, and will be happy you got a ton of experience doing general commercial lit for one of the most prestigious firms in the world.

This is a really NY-centric view. Sure, securities and certain other specialty litigation practices tend to be strongest and most active in NY. But if you're interested in litigation more generally, Chicago, Texas, and LA all offer (imo) a better variety of GCL work with better opportunities for early substantive experience.

Also, keep in mind Skadden makes you choose your practice group at the end of the summer and does not guarantee litigation. I personally know several Skadden summers who got forced into corporate, including then-future 2d Cir. clerks. Wouldn't be my firm of choice in NY, that's for sure.

I suspect the anon you’re responding to is our friendly local pro-Skadden troll.

[The Great Gadfly]

Interested in general commercial litigation, but would love to work on media & entertainment matters. Also interested in white collar work, albeit to a lesser extent. I have significant ties to both regions and would be more than happy in either NY or LA. Long-term goals are to go in-house!

Skadden in NYC. Band 1 in general commercial lit in the world's financial capital. The California firms are stronger in media and entertainment, but at this stage in your career, you should be focused on getting the best generalist experience you can get. You may change your mind about media and entertainment, and will be happy you got a ton of experience doing general commercial lit for one of the most prestigious firms in the world.

This is a really NY-centric view. Sure, securities and certain other specialty litigation practices tend to be strongest and most active in NY. But if you're interested in litigation more generally, Chicago, Texas, and LA all offer (imo) a better variety of GCL work with better opportunities for early substantive experience.

Also, keep in mind Skadden makes you choose your practice group at the end of the summer and does not guarantee litigation. I personally know several Skadden summers who got forced into corporate, including then-future 2d Cir. clerks. Wouldn't be my firm of choice in NY, that's for sure.

I suspect the anon you’re responding to is our friendly local pro-Skadden troll.

My advice comes from hard-earned experience and from working in the very area OP is interested in. If that's trolling, then that really speaks to the kinds of arguments people make on TLS. And is mine a NY-centric view? I suppose so, but then again it's a NY-centric field.

OP, you're just starting your legal journey. You're probably going to change your mind about your interests a million times over. Go to the best generalist firm with the best name recognition possible. Skadden excels at everything you want to do, including the types of work you don't realize you're interested in yet

[existentialcrisis]

Interested in general commercial litigation, but would love to work on media & entertainment matters. Also interested in white collar work, albeit to a lesser extent. I have significant ties to both regions and would be more than happy in either NY or LA. Long-term goals are to go in-house!

Skadden in NYC. Band 1 in general commercial lit in the world's financial capital. The California firms are stronger in media and entertainment, but at this stage in your career, you should be focused on getting the best generalist experience you can get. You may change your mind about media and entertainment, and will be happy you got a ton of experience doing general commercial lit for one of the most prestigious firms in the world.

This is a really NY-centric view. Sure, securities and certain other specialty litigation practices tend to be strongest and most active in NY. But if you're interested in litigation more generally, Chicago, Texas, and LA all offer (imo) a better variety of GCL work with better opportunities for early substantive experience.

Also, keep in mind Skadden makes you choose your practice group at the end of the summer and does not guarantee litigation. I personally know several Skadden summers who got forced into corporate, including then-future 2d Cir. clerks. Wouldn't be my firm of choice in NY, that's for sure.

I suspect the anon you’re responding to is our friendly local pro-Skadden troll.

My advice comes from hard-earned experience and from working in the very area OP is interested in. If that's trolling, then that really speaks to the kinds of arguments people make on TLS. And is mine a NY-centric view? I suppose so, but then again it's a NY-centric field.

OP, you're just starting your legal journey. You're probably going to change your mind about your interests a million times over. Go to the best generalist firm with the best name recognition possible. Skadden excels at everything you want to do, including the types of work you don't realize you're interested in yet

Isn’t Gibson just straight up better at litigation than Skadden?

[The Great Gadfly]

Interested in general commercial litigation, but would love to work on media & entertainment matters. Also interested in white collar work, albeit to a lesser extent. I have significant ties to both regions and would be more than happy in either NY or LA. Long-term goals are to go in-house!

Skadden in NYC. Band 1 in general commercial lit in the world's financial capital. The California firms are stronger in media and entertainment, but at this stage in your career, you should be focused on getting the best generalist experience you can get. You may change your mind about media and entertainment, and will be happy you got a ton of experience doing general commercial lit for one of the most prestigious firms in the world.

This is a really NY-centric view. Sure, securities and certain other specialty litigation practices tend to be strongest and most active in NY. But if you're interested in litigation more generally, Chicago, Texas, and LA all offer (imo) a better variety of GCL work with better opportunities for early substantive experience.

Also, keep in mind Skadden makes you choose your practice group at the end of the summer and does not guarantee litigation. I personally know several Skadden summers who got forced into corporate, including then-future 2d Cir. clerks. Wouldn't be my firm of choice in NY, that's for sure.

I suspect the anon you’re responding to is our friendly local pro-Skadden troll.

My advice comes from hard-earned experience and from working in the very area OP is interested in. If that's trolling, then that really speaks to the kinds of arguments people make on TLS. And is mine a NY-centric view? I suppose so, but then again it's a NY-centric field.

OP, you're just starting your legal journey. You're probably going to change your mind about your interests a million times over. Go to the best generalist firm with the best name recognition possible. Skadden excels at everything you want to do, including the types of work you don't realize you're interested in yet

Isn’t Gibson just straight up better at litigation than Skadden?

No. If OP wanted to do appellate litigation, I'd have a different answer. Skadden is Band 1 in every type of litigation it offers. Very few better places to be a generalist litigator.

[BigLawPartner]

Interested in general commercial litigation, but would love to work on media & entertainment matters. Also interested in white collar work, albeit to a lesser extent. I have significant ties to both regions and would be more than happy in either NY or LA. Long-term goals are to go in-house!

Skadden in NYC. Band 1 in general commercial lit in the world's financial capital. The California firms are stronger in media and entertainment, but at this stage in your career, you should be focused on getting the best generalist experience you can get. You may change your mind about media and entertainment, and will be happy you got a ton of experience doing general commercial lit for one of the most prestigious firms in the world.

This is a really NY-centric view. Sure, securities and certain other specialty litigation practices tend to be strongest and most active in NY. But if you're interested in litigation more generally, Chicago, Texas, and LA all offer (imo) a better variety of GCL work with better opportunities for early substantive experience.

Also, keep in mind Skadden makes you choose your practice group at the end of the summer and does not guarantee litigation. I personally know several Skadden summers who got forced into corporate, including then-future 2d Cir. clerks. Wouldn't be my firm of choice in NY, that's for sure.

I suspect the anon you’re responding to is our friendly local pro-Skadden troll.

My advice comes from hard-earned experience and from working in the very area OP is interested in. If that's trolling, then that really speaks to the kinds of arguments people make on TLS. And is mine a NY-centric view? I suppose so, but then again it's a NY-centric field.

OP, you're just starting your legal journey. You're probably going to change your mind about your interests a million times over. Go to the best generalist firm with the best name recognition possible. Skadden excels at everything you want to do, including the types of work you don't realize you're interested in yet

Isn’t Gibson just straight up better at litigation than Skadden?

No. But that aside, the difference is not large enough that I would go to Skadden NY if I had a preference for living in LA. Gibson is a great firm, so if LA were my preference, I would choose that over Skadden NY because the firm quality is similar.

[Anonymous User]

I summered at Skadden NY many years ago and am now a litigator in LA. A few things I'd consider in making this decision:

- All things equal, BigLaw in LA is going to give you a better qualify of life than BigLaw in New York, and Skadden NY certainly isn't a work/life balance place. So if that's important to you, and you don't really care about living in NY, I'd consider ruling out Skadden for that reason alone.

- I respect the people (person?) defending Skadden's litigation practice in this thread; I worked with very good litigators there. However, the reality of the matter is that Skadden as a firm is dominated by transactional work. Even in New York, its litigation practice has less cachet than most (if not all) of the rest of the V10, with the possible exception of litigation related to its transactional work (i.e., M&A litigation). If you want to be a litigator, and particularly if you think you might want to go for partner, I think there's a benefit to going to a firm that is more weighted toward litigation. All the LA offices you listed meet that description. Even if you're not looking to make partner, I think a firm like GDC is going to look better on your resume for your next litigation-focused job than Skadden.

- I think there is a benefit, particularly if you want to climb the ladder, of being in the headquarters office of a firm. So, from your list, that would be GDC, OMM, and (I think?) Quinn (and of course Skadden).

--From someone practicing in LA, I view GDC (and probably Munger) as the most prestigious litigation firms in the city (putting aside boutiques like Hueston Hennigan). OMM is very close to them and has much more prestige in LA than it does in New York and elsewhere. However, I know some people who work there and they put in A LOT of hours--more, it seems like, than people at other big firms. So, if you care about hours, OMM might not be the right place. My impression is that Covington is probably the chillest hours-wise of the firms you listed, but LA is a secondary office for the firm, and it has less prominence and prestige in the market, if that's something you care about.