Cleary vs. Debevoise vs. Weil? Forum

[Anonymous User]

For nyc corporate, Wachtell > Cravath/S&C/Davis Polk > Skadden/Simpson > Kirkland/Latham/Cleary/Debevoise > Weil/Paul, Weiss

This is 100% correct for the biggest corp. practices and changes somewhat as u get more niche. Ofc u have to decide for urself how much u care about generic prestige/reputation (it doesn't feed you or make u happier lol) but this is the general picture.

I can't tell if these are just a bunch of law students trolling. For NYC corporate, it's Wachtell > Cravath/S&C/DPW/Skadden/STB and then something like Cleary > Kirkland/Latham/Debevoise > Weil/PW

STB and Skadden have corporate practices that are at the worst peers with the Cravath group. STB's PE practice is still top of the market (with Kirkland) and its CM practice is just a tick below DPW's. Skadden's general M&A practice is arguably the best right after Wachtell's. It's CM group is also in the Latham/STB tier, which is better than Cravath's or S&C's. Skadden's tax group is also widely considered to be the best in NY (and tax obviously ties heavily into M&A, etc.), etc. etc.

not the original anon but dude your list is almost exactly the same lol

where do you get putting cleary above the mega firms/deb? based on league tables/chambers that’s just not accurate

Not the quoted anon, but the list largely correlates with Chambers, with the exception of K&E (band 1) and Weil (surprisingly matching Cleary at band 2). Haven't checked out the league tables, but I'm pretty sure Cleary tops the international M&A deal volume (although Cleary emphasizes its international presence relative to its peers).

"surprisingly"

This list doesn't correlate with chambers, which is more accurate than median T6 students' perception of prestige.

[Anonymous User]

For nyc corporate, Wachtell > Cravath/S&C/Davis Polk > Skadden/Simpson > Kirkland/Latham/Cleary/Debevoise > Weil/Paul, Weiss

This is 100% correct for the biggest corp. practices and changes somewhat as u get more niche. Ofc u have to decide for urself how much u care about generic prestige/reputation (it doesn't feed you or make u happier lol) but this is the general picture.

I can't tell if these are just a bunch of law students trolling. For NYC corporate, it's Wachtell > Cravath/S&C/DPW/Skadden/STB and then something like Cleary > Kirkland/Latham/Debevoise > Weil/PW

STB and Skadden have corporate practices that are at the worst peers with the Cravath group. STB's PE practice is still top of the market (with Kirkland) and its CM practice is just a tick below DPW's. Skadden's general M&A practice is arguably the best right after Wachtell's. It's CM group is also in the Latham/STB tier, which is better than Cravath's or S&C's. Skadden's tax group is also widely considered to be the best in NY (and tax obviously ties heavily into M&A, etc.), etc. etc.

not the original anon but dude your list is almost exactly the same lol

where do you get putting cleary above the mega firms/deb? based on league tables/chambers that’s just not accurate

Not the quoted anon, but the list largely correlates with Chambers, with the exception of K&E (band 1) and Weil (surprisingly matching Cleary at band 2). Haven't checked out the league tables, but I'm pretty sure Cleary tops the international M&A deal volume (although Cleary emphasizes its international presence relative to its peers).

"surprisingly"

This list doesn't correlate with chambers, which is more accurate than median T6 students' perception of prestige.

By that logic, Wachtell is on par with other firms which clearly is not the case. I think the original anon nailed it - considering selectivity, general prestige, or quality of work of these firms.

[Anonymous User]

For nyc corporate, Wachtell > Cravath/S&C/Davis Polk > Skadden/Simpson > Kirkland/Latham/Cleary/Debevoise > Weil/Paul, Weiss

This is 100% correct for the biggest corp. practices and changes somewhat as u get more niche. Ofc u have to decide for urself how much u care about generic prestige/reputation (it doesn't feed you or make u happier lol) but this is the general picture.

I can't tell if these are just a bunch of law students trolling. For NYC corporate, it's Wachtell > Cravath/S&C/DPW/Skadden/STB and then something like Cleary > Kirkland/Latham/Debevoise > Weil/PW

STB and Skadden have corporate practices that are at the worst peers with the Cravath group. STB's PE practice is still top of the market (with Kirkland) and its CM practice is just a tick below DPW's. Skadden's general M&A practice is arguably the best right after Wachtell's. It's CM group is also in the Latham/STB tier, which is better than Cravath's or S&C's. Skadden's tax group is also widely considered to be the best in NY (and tax obviously ties heavily into M&A, etc.), etc. etc.

not the original anon but dude your list is almost exactly the same lol

where do you get putting cleary above the mega firms/deb? based on league tables/chambers that’s just not accurate

Not the quoted anon, but the list largely correlates with Chambers, with the exception of K&E (band 1) and Weil (surprisingly matching Cleary at band 2). Haven't checked out the league tables, but I'm pretty sure Cleary tops the international M&A deal volume (although Cleary emphasizes its international presence relative to its peers).

"surprisingly"

This list doesn't correlate with chambers, which is more accurate than median T6 students' perception of prestige.

By that logic, Wachtell is on par with other firms which clearly is not the case. I think the original anon nailed it - considering selectivity, general prestige, or quality of work of these firms.

Wachtell is easily the most selective corporate firm and has the most general prestige. But when it comes to quality of work, I wouldn't exactly say they're better than Cravath/S&C/Skadden/STB/DPW? Maybe a smidge? But quality of work is pretty much even across these firms imo.

[Anonymous User]

For nyc corporate, Wachtell > Cravath/S&C/Davis Polk > Skadden/Simpson > Kirkland/Latham/Cleary/Debevoise > Weil/Paul, Weiss

This is 100% correct for the biggest corp. practices and changes somewhat as u get more niche. Ofc u have to decide for urself how much u care about generic prestige/reputation (it doesn't feed you or make u happier lol) but this is the general picture.

I can't tell if these are just a bunch of law students trolling. For NYC corporate, it's Wachtell > Cravath/S&C/DPW/Skadden/STB and then something like Cleary > Kirkland/Latham/Debevoise > Weil/PW

STB and Skadden have corporate practices that are at the worst peers with the Cravath group. STB's PE practice is still top of the market (with Kirkland) and its CM practice is just a tick below DPW's. Skadden's general M&A practice is arguably the best right after Wachtell's. It's CM group is also in the Latham/STB tier, which is better than Cravath's or S&C's. Skadden's tax group is also widely considered to be the best in NY (and tax obviously ties heavily into M&A, etc.), etc. etc.

not the original anon but dude your list is almost exactly the same lol

where do you get putting cleary above the mega firms/deb? based on league tables/chambers that’s just not accurate

Not the quoted anon, but the list largely correlates with Chambers, with the exception of K&E (band 1) and Weil (surprisingly matching Cleary at band 2). Haven't checked out the league tables, but I'm pretty sure Cleary tops the international M&A deal volume (although Cleary emphasizes its international presence relative to its peers).

"surprisingly"

This list doesn't correlate with chambers, which is more accurate than median T6 students' perception of prestige.

Quoted anon here. Other than K&E and Weil, where does the correlation stop? At some point people really need to stop typing their intuitions and actually look at the Chambers bands...

[Anonymous User]

I went to a T6 and I put Cleary ahead of Deb in prestige, and Deb ahead of Weil. I would say Cleary's selectivity and perceived eliteness is on par with STB/DPW/S&C/CSM, notwithstanding the relatively poor financial performance recently. (Note that Cleary has a disproportionate number of foreign offices, and I'm not surprised that their metrics are getting dragged down as a result. I am quite sure Cleary NYC is performing at parity with the aforementioned firms.)

I would choose Cleary over Deb, and Deb over Weil. This is also the traditional New York view.

[Anonymous User]

I went to a T6 and I put Cleary ahead of Deb in prestige, and Deb ahead of Weil. I would say Cleary's selectivity and perceived eliteness is on par with STB/DPW/S&C/CSM, notwithstanding the relatively poor financial performance recently. (Note that Cleary has a disproportionate number of foreign offices, and I'm not surprised that their metrics are getting dragged down as a result. I am quite sure Cleary NYC is performing at parity with the aforementioned firms.)

I would choose Cleary over Deb, and Deb over Weil. This is also the traditional New York view.

This. And as an incoming junior associate, why do you care about relative financial performance? How will that affect you in any way?

[Anonymous User]

I went to a T6 and I put Cleary ahead of Deb in prestige, and Deb ahead of Weil. I would say Cleary's selectivity and perceived eliteness is on par with STB/DPW/S&C/CSM, notwithstanding the relatively poor financial performance recently. (Note that Cleary has a disproportionate number of foreign offices, and I'm not surprised that their metrics are getting dragged down as a result. I am quite sure Cleary NYC is performing at parity with the aforementioned firms.)

I would choose Cleary over Deb, and Deb over Weil. This is also the traditional New York view.

This. And as an incoming junior associate, why do you care about relative financial performance? How will that affect you in any way?

I totally agree that the TLS preoccupation with relative financial performance is silly from a junior associate perspective.

As a different T6 alum, my perception of the “eliteness” and selectivity of these NY firms (omitting many others) is more like: CSM=DPW=S&C > STB > Deb=Cleary > Weil

Caveat that, at this level, the prestige of the firm also (like financials) has little bearing on the junior associate experience. Narcissism of small differences, etc. etc.

[Anonymous User]

I went to a T6 and I put Cleary ahead of Deb in prestige, and Deb ahead of Weil. I would say Cleary's selectivity and perceived eliteness is on par with STB/DPW/S&C/CSM, notwithstanding the relatively poor financial performance recently. (Note that Cleary has a disproportionate number of foreign offices, and I'm not surprised that their metrics are getting dragged down as a result. I am quite sure Cleary NYC is performing at parity with the aforementioned firms.)

I would choose Cleary over Deb, and Deb over Weil. This is also the traditional New York view.

This. And as an incoming junior associate, why do you care about relative financial performance? How will that affect you in any way?

I totally agree that the TLS preoccupation with relative financial performance is silly from a junior associate perspective.

As a different T6 alum, my perception of the “eliteness” and selectivity of these NY firms (omitting many others) is more like: CSM=DPW=S&C > STB > Deb=Cleary > Weil

Caveat that, at this level, the prestige of the firm also (like financials) has little bearing on the junior associate experience. Narcissism of small differences, etc. etc.

If a financial crisis is in the foreseeable future, wouldn't it be a safer bet to start at a firm with stronger financials?

[Anonymous User]

I went to a T6 and I put Cleary ahead of Deb in prestige, and Deb ahead of Weil. I would say Cleary's selectivity and perceived eliteness is on par with STB/DPW/S&C/CSM, notwithstanding the relatively poor financial performance recently. (Note that Cleary has a disproportionate number of foreign offices, and I'm not surprised that their metrics are getting dragged down as a result. I am quite sure Cleary NYC is performing at parity with the aforementioned firms.)

I would choose Cleary over Deb, and Deb over Weil. This is also the traditional New York view.

This. And as an incoming junior associate, why do you care about relative financial performance? How will that affect you in any way?

I totally agree that the TLS preoccupation with relative financial performance is silly from a junior associate perspective.

As a different T6 alum, my perception of the “eliteness” and selectivity of these NY firms (omitting many others) is more like: CSM=DPW=S&C > STB > Deb=Cleary > Weil

Caveat that, at this level, the prestige of the firm also (like financials) has little bearing on the junior associate experience. Narcissism of small differences, etc. etc.

LMFAO you couldn’t even write a parody of this shit. “Uh as a junior I care more that my firm prefers top 40% at NYU over top 25% at Vandy than the financial prowess of the firm.”

[SGTslaughter]

I went to a T6 and I put Cleary ahead of Deb in prestige, and Deb ahead of Weil. I would say Cleary's selectivity and perceived eliteness is on par with STB/DPW/S&C/CSM, notwithstanding the relatively poor financial performance recently. (Note that Cleary has a disproportionate number of foreign offices, and I'm not surprised that their metrics are getting dragged down as a result. I am quite sure Cleary NYC is performing at parity with the aforementioned firms.)

I would choose Cleary over Deb, and Deb over Weil. This is also the traditional New York view.

This. And as an incoming junior associate, why do you care about relative financial performance? How will that affect you in any way?

I totally agree that the TLS preoccupation with relative financial performance is silly from a junior associate perspective.

As a different T6 alum, my perception of the “eliteness” and selectivity of these NY firms (omitting many others) is more like: CSM=DPW=S&C > STB > Deb=Cleary > Weil

Caveat that, at this level, the prestige of the firm also (like financials) has little bearing on the junior associate experience. Narcissism of small differences, etc. etc.

LMFAO you couldn’t even write a parody of this shit. “Uh as a junior I care more that my firm prefers top 40% at NYU over top 25% at Vandy than the financial prowess of the firm.”

Not to mention how absolutely dumb it is to think the financial health of a firm doesn't effect associates... The second the M&A rush dries back up and firms are going to have to start making pull backs, you'll find out.