Thoughts on Selendy? Forum

[Anonymous User]

anyone have any recent intel on the place? Thinking about a move!

[Anonymous User]

anyone have any recent intel on the place? Thinking about a move!

Probably the most up and coming complex litigation boutique in NYC right now. I wouldn't at all be surprised if it rivals Susman within a few years

[Anonymous User]

Came off as weirdos in my interview then I didn't get an offer, maybe I'm the weirdo?

[Anonymous User]

It's an elite litigation boutique that's not quite as prestigious as Susman Godfrey (the crown jewel of litigation boutiques), but is still very well respected.

[Anonymous User]

How does it compare to BSF/Quinn? Worse hours? Better opportunities?

[Anonymous User]

How does it compare to BSF/Quinn? Worse hours? Better opportunities?

BSF and Quinn are biglaw, so yeah. All else equal, better hours and better opportunities. But the standard caveat applies that it depends on the partners you're working for, the clients, and the specific matters.

[Anonymous User]

Any thoughts on how David Elsberg's departure will affect the firm's outlook?

[Anonymous User]

The firm may be collapsing. One of the founding partners just left: https://news.bloomberglaw.com/business- ... er-elsberg

Proceed with caution. I have also heard pretty bad things. They may be similar to Quinn in many respects, but they are a much smaller firm, so it is not necessarily possible to escape bad partners...

[Anonymous User]

How does it compare to BSF/Quinn? Worse hours? Better opportunities?

BSF and Quinn are biglaw, so yeah. All else equal, better hours and better opportunities. But the standard caveat applies that it depends on the partners you're working for, the clients, and the specific matters.

Hours are much worse than Quinn. They took a few of the most extreme workaholics from Quinn and built a whole firm around them..

[Anonymous User]

How does it compare to BSF/Quinn? Worse hours? Better opportunities?

BSF and Quinn are biglaw, so yeah. All else equal, better hours and better opportunities. But the standard caveat applies that it depends on the partners you're working for, the clients, and the specific matters.

BSF is not big law.

[Anonymous User]

It's an elite litigation boutique that's not quite as prestigious as Susman Godfrey (the crown jewel of litigation boutiques), but is still very well respected.

These two are not in the same league of selectivity.

[Anonymous User]

It's an elite litigation boutique that's not quite as prestigious as Susman Godfrey (the crown jewel of litigation boutiques), but is still very well respected.

These two are not in the same league of selectivity.

Did the comment you're replying to imply otherwise?

[Anonymous User]

It's an elite litigation boutique that's not quite as prestigious as Susman Godfrey (the crown jewel of litigation boutiques), but is still very well respected.

These two are not in the same league of selectivity.

I wouldn't go that far. I'd say the top tier of boutiques is Susman, Kellogg, and Bartlit, the best boutiques in their respective markets. Selendy is in the tier just below, along with Molo, Hueston, and some others. It's still very reputable, just not the top choice for clerks with the grades to go anywhere they please.

[Anonymous User]

It's an elite litigation boutique that's not quite as prestigious as Susman Godfrey (the crown jewel of litigation boutiques), but is still very well respected.

These two are not in the same league of selectivity.

I wouldn't go that far. I'd say the top tier of boutiques is Susman, Kellogg, and Bartlit, the best boutiques in their respective markets. Selendy is in the tier just below, along with Molo, Hueston, and some others. It's still very reputable, just not the top choice for clerks with the grades to go anywhere they please.

Would you say Wilkinson Stekloff and Selendy are on the same level?

[Anonymous User]

It's an elite litigation boutique that's not quite as prestigious as Susman Godfrey (the crown jewel of litigation boutiques), but is still very well respected.

These two are not in the same league of selectivity.

I wouldn't go that far. I'd say the top tier of boutiques is Susman, Kellogg, and Bartlit, the best boutiques in their respective markets. Selendy is in the tier just below, along with Molo, Hueston, and some others. It's still very reputable, just not the top choice for clerks with the grades to go anywhere they please.

Would you say Wilkinson Stekloff and Selendy are on the same level?

Yes, I put Wilkinson in that very next tier also. It's a reputable boutique with a superstar name partner, but it has not yet become a household name to the point where it would survive, unchanged, if Beth Wilkinson retired. Susman has already had several succesful leadership handoffs, and at Kellogg and Bartlit the name partners have begun to step back and hand the reins over to a new generation of stars they helped train.

[Anonymous User]

anyone have any recent intel on the place? Thinking about a move!

Probably the most up and coming complex litigation boutique in NYC right now. I wouldn't at all be surprised if it rivals Susman within a few years

Not sure this is a good or helpful comparison for people thinking about working at one or the other. My understanding is that Selendy's leverage ratio looks a lot more like a normal biglaw shop and the work associates do is pretty similar as well. Think: larger teams, more associates per case, etc.

Contrast that with Susman, where the staffing is incredibly lean (often just 1 partner/1 associate) and associates are taking depositions, etc, within a few months of starting.

[Anonymous User]

Selendy is certainly not as selective as Molo or Wilkinson. Can't speak for Hueston as it seems to be expanding really fast and I'm not sure what its status is. I have also heard that Selendy took a lot of the most toxic partners from Quinn and would really hesitate to advise someone to work there.

[Anonymous User]

OP I know this is beyond the scope of your question but have you given thought to why you want to work for a lit boutique? The range of offerings and practice groups are typically narrower than you get at a comparably elite larger firm in NY.

[Anonymous User]

Elsberg has "officially" gone off on his own: https://www.elsberglaw.com/

would be fascinated to know more about why and what kind of work he's taking with him

[Anonymous User]

Elsberg has "officially" gone off on his own: https://www.elsberglaw.com/

would be fascinated to know more about why and what kind of work he's taking with him

All the partners seem like they do corporate governance / securities litigation / Delaware Chancery type of work but not sure. The motivation would be super interesting to learn more about, although I'm sure the toxicity of Selendy didn't help.

[Anonymous User]

Selendy is certainly not as selective as Molo or Wilkinson. Can't speak for Hueston as it seems to be expanding really fast and I'm not sure what its status is. I have also heard that Selendy took a lot of the most toxic partners from Quinn and would really hesitate to advise someone to work there.

Agreed on this. Molo/Wilkinson/Hueston are a tier above Selendy, both in terms of their selectivity, and matters handled.

[Anonymous User]

All of the above has truth. Very high expectations and intense culture. SG is progressive and has elite commercial bet-the-company litigation matters (both plaintiff and defense) and leading pro bono cases. Recently, DE started a firm with partners from Quinn and several newly made SG partners. That firm will also be quite strong, as DE has a big book - bankruptcy, DE Chancery, high-stakes commercial cases, etc.

[Anonymous User]

These litigation boutiques sprout up like cockroaches. Here today, gone tomorrow.

[Anonymous User]

I have some talented friends who work there. When I considered Selendy, the range of litigation work was too narrow for my taste, but that was years ago and times may have changed.

[Anonymous User]

Psycho gunners with no chill running pretty high-profile litigation.