Skadden NY vs. Latham NY vs. Gibson NY vs. S&C NY vs. Cravath NY vs. PW NY vs. DPW NY for litigation? Forum

[amenablecontract]

Interested in white collar and securities litigation, my career office told me not to rely on white collar though with Trump in office so also possibly interested into restructuring and antitrust. Definitely want to get into securities though. These firms seem indistinguishable and have very similar Chambers bands. Would love to get any helpful insight on intangible differences between these firms that may not show up on paper/their website.

[Anonymous User]

There is probably no single person in the world who can answer this question fully. Still very few have insider knowledge of litigation at even two of these firms. The short answer is they're all very similar. You will find securities litigation at all of these firms. Chambers can tell you which have the best/most active restructuring and antitrust departments. The best way for you to find out more is to apply to all of them and try to catch a vibe. Seriously.

[Anonymous User]

There is probably no single person in the world who can answer this question fully. Still very few have insider knowledge of litigation at even two of these firms. The short answer is they're all very similar. You will find securities litigation at all of these firms. Chambers can tell you which have the best/most active restructuring and antitrust departments. The best way for you to find out more is to apply to all of them and try to catch a vibe. Seriously.

It's obvious that OP is a high-performing 1L who leans lit over corp but has no idea what they want to do. In that scenario, the best choice is the most flexible one. Choosing DPW for white collar, for example, would turn out to be a suboptimal (but still great) choice if OP realizes later on that OP wants to do civil lit instead.

Ignoring recent Trump developments , the best all-around choices are S&C or Cravath. Both have strengths in all the areas OP mentioned, unlike most others on this list. The two are indistinguishable except for S&C's lower clerkship bonus and Cravath's rotation system.

[amenablecontract]

There is probably no single person in the world who can answer this question fully. Still very few have insider knowledge of litigation at even two of these firms. The short answer is they're all very similar. You will find securities litigation at all of these firms. Chambers can tell you which have the best/most active restructuring and antitrust departments. The best way for you to find out more is to apply to all of them and try to catch a vibe. Seriously.

It's obvious that OP is a high-performing 1L who leans lit over corp but has no idea what they want to do. In that scenario, the best choice is the most flexible one. Choosing DPW for white collar, for example, would turn out to be a suboptimal (but still great) choice if OP realizes later on that OP wants to do civil lit instead.

Ignoring recent Trump developments , the best all-around choices are S&C or Cravath. Both have strengths in all the areas OP mentioned, unlike most others on this list. The two are indistinguishable except for S&C's lower clerkship bonus and Cravath's rotation system.

Thank you for your response. Yeah, I am just trying to glean the differences because of the gaps in recruiting between firms now. So I would like to know if I were to be offered by one of these firms, if it is something I should accept or possibly decline it because it is not that good and worth taking before hearing back from others. And I would hate to make a misinformed decision haha. E.g., being offered by X firm who opened recruiting early and Y firm hasn't even opened their applications yet and declining X because I think it is not worth taking, or vice versa.

I agree on the taking the best all-around choice available; that is probably going to be my approach in the end, along with noting things I notice in the interview. Although, PW is Band 1 in CCL, and all the practice groups I mentioned. How much credence do you think I should give the Chambers ranking?

[Anonymous User]

There is probably no single person in the world who can answer this question fully. Still very few have insider knowledge of litigation at even two of these firms. The short answer is they're all very similar. You will find securities litigation at all of these firms. Chambers can tell you which have the best/most active restructuring and antitrust departments. The best way for you to find out more is to apply to all of them and try to catch a vibe. Seriously.

It's obvious that OP is a high-performing 1L who leans lit over corp but has no idea what they want to do. In that scenario, the best choice is the most flexible one. Choosing DPW for white collar, for example, would turn out to be a suboptimal (but still great) choice if OP realizes later on that OP wants to do civil lit instead.

Ignoring recent Trump developments , the best all-around choices are S&C or Cravath. Both have strengths in all the areas OP mentioned, unlike most others on this list. The two are indistinguishable except for S&C's lower clerkship bonus and Cravath's rotation system.

Thank you for your response. Yeah, I am just trying to glean the differences because of the gaps in recruiting between firms now. So I would like to know if I were to be offered by one of these firms, if it is something I should accept or possibly decline it because it is not that good and worth taking before hearing back from others. And I would hate to make a misinformed decision haha. E.g., being offered by X firm who opened recruiting early and Y firm hasn't even opened their applications yet and declining X because I think it is not worth taking, or vice versa.

I agree on the taking the best all-around choice available; that is probably going to be my approach in the end, along with noting things I notice in the interview. Although, PW is Band 1 in CCL, and all the practice groups I mentioned. How much credence do you think I should give the Chambers ranking?

Different anon. The best all-around choice is PW. DPW is also pretty well rounded (although weaker in civil lit). Outside of PW and DPW, the other firms are weaker in restructuring. Cravath is also not a major player in white collar.

[siri949]

Seems like there's no consensus pick out of the originally listed firms, just that PW, Cravath, and S&C are all in the mix. Curious whether the answer changes if you include K&E or Simpson Thacher? Or are they in the same ballpark for general lit.

[Anonymous User]

For litigation, I'd put Simpson below every other firm mentioned in this thread.

Kirkland is a good firm, but not as well rounded as the others. In particular, its white collar and appellate groups are basically last in the pack. Good for general lit, though.

[Anonymous User]

For litigation, I'd put Simpson below every other firm mentioned in this thread.

Kirkland is a good firm, but not as well rounded as the others. In particular, its white collar and appellate groups are basically last in the pack. Good for general lit, though.

Kirkland has a better appellate practice than Cravath. But otherwise agreed.