The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
Just accepted at Sullivan, accepting praise and taking questions
Poast new message in this thread
Date: October 27th, 2006 4:11 PM Author: Gold Temple Nibblets Please feel free to tell me how awesome/prestigious I am and/or how jealous of my awesomeness/prestige you are.
Alternatively, I will take questions about the S&C recruiting process or my choice to accept there. |
 |
Date: October 27th, 2006 4:37 PM Author: rebellious godawful parlour dinged by wachtell and cravath? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6871228) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 4:52 PM Author: Gold Temple Nibblets Yes. Dinged by both. Not sure I would have chosen Wachtell. Would have been tough to turn down Cravath. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6871313) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 4:57 PM Author: misanthropic kitchen yeah right (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6871342) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 5:02 PM Author: Gold Temple Nibblets "yeah right" to what? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6871368) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 5:35 PM Author: rebellious godawful parlour you would have chosen either over sullivan. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6871491) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 5:52 PM Author: Gold Temple Nibblets This is certainly possible. I indicated that I would have probably chosen Cravath over S&C. As for Wachtell, the hours and QOL hit represent a meaningful difference - and one I would have had to think about seriously. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6871549) |
|
Date: October 29th, 2006 4:21 AM Author: Claret fat ankles hall Whatever, S&C is the most famous from a historic perspective. HTH. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6879492) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 4:46 PM Author: opaque office corn cake http://www.sullcrom.com/lawyers/detail.aspx?attorney=632 (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6871278) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 4:52 PM Author: Gold Temple Nibblets Please elaborate. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6871310) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 4:58 PM Author: fluffy menage water buffalo He posted here. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6871347) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 5:03 PM Author: Mauve Splenetic Resort my opinion of sullcrom just dropped through the floor (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6871378) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 8:17 PM Author: Internet-worthy son of senegal Subject: Congratulations! Based on your reaction to getting the offer, this is probably the best thing that could have hever appened to you. I encourage you to enjoy the summer and take accept their offer as nothing in the world will cure you of your prestige obsession quicker than some time at S&C.
During orientation, they'll give you an S&C shoulderbag and you'll wear it with the S&C logo facing outward so any other commuters in the know can see it and you'll just know that they're either impressed or envious. And that will make you happy and proud. And then you'll try to figure out the best way to ensure that you're sworn in as soon as possible after receiving your bar results because then you'll get the box full of business cards that say "Sullivan & Cromwell LLP" with your actual name underneath. You'll be giddy at the thought of casually passing one (mid-conversation) to some acquaintance from undergrad you've lost touch with.
You'll start working and you'll notice that there are an awful lot of "Farewell" emails and someone will tell you that the farewell emails can only contain 4 names at a time per firm policy because the partners decided sometime in 2004 that emails indicating 6 or 7 people were leaving the firm in a two week period might cause some unhelpful whispering. You'll talk to a midlevel associate who is super-psyched to work at S&C and you'll find out that he (not a lot of shes) lateralled from some firm that frankly you would never have considered working for (too TTT for you). When you get back to your office, this will trouble you a bit, you'll wonder if your own escutcheon is being blemished by the presence of this type of person (i.e., non-elite) at your S&C. But that feeling will pass as you'll find plenty of other like-minded first years who equally relish the prestige as you you head for a drink at Ulysses (shoulderbag logo facing outward).
Then you'll get staffed on your first big deal and you'll work late night after late night and then on the weekend and on to the next weekend and then on to the weekend when you had planned to go to a friend's wedding. And you won't go because the work has to get done and you have dues to pay (or so you'll be told). You'll get a little bit upset about this turn of events, but the arrival of those business cards will soften the blow.
You'll meet more and more laterals from firms that you would never work for (some you've never even heard of). You'll note in the farewell emails that some of the junior and midlevel associates leaving S&C are going to those very same firms. Survival of the fittest you'll say. But late at night, when the air conditioning clicks down from a barely perceptible hissing sound to complete silence, these things will bother you. But you'll tell yourself you're just tired and frustrated and anyway you have work to do.
You'll have lunch with Rodge and he'll tell you that business is good and that he's listening to associates' concerns about quality of life issues. You'll notice that some of the senior associates visibly roll their eyes at each other when this comes up, but you won't mind that much because, really, what other firm's managing partner regulalry has lunch with associates to hear their concerns (and takes notes!)
A few months will pass, a few marathon deals will happen, you'll have to re-schedule a vacation but you'll tell yourself that that is to be expected.
About a year in, a couple of your classmates will crack and start talking about how much the job sucks. They'll very likely have gone to Yale Law School. You'll joke that they couldn't hack it when they leave the firm for a clerkship, or an academic position or to go to a firm in another city.
Things will go on in this pattern and you'll notice the fact that you're working a lot harder than your friends who went to "peer" firms. At first you'll be proud of this and brag about it, but after a while you'll find yourself downplaying it. At least when you have the time to get out and socialize with your law school friends.
Something will happen: a partner will scream at you, a senior associate gunning for partner will blame you for her mistake, the partner will tell you that the trip to Europe your spouse meticulously planned just won't be able to happen (he'll be really sorry and will tell you a funny story about the exotic vacation he missed or cut short). Doesn't matter what, but you'll get really pissed and you'll start to take some of the 4 or 5 calls from headhunters that you'll receive every day at that point (vultures spell blood). They'll give you the names of firms that you laughed on in the days when you posted on the XOXO board, but you'll find yourself looking into them. The headhunter will encourage to just listen to their offer and you'll consider doing so. But you won't leave because then you'd have to give up your business cards. And stop wearing the shoulder bag. And the bonus is only x months away so you'll start thinking about it then.
Until one day you won't be able to take it any more and you'll find yourself arranging to meet with people from a lightly regarded firm for a position in their New York office. And you'll worry that the XOXO crowd will see you.
And you don't believe any of this will happen, but I suggest you print this out and keep it in the top desk of your drawer so late at night when you're feeling sorry for yourself, you can add to the list of reasons to be miserable this fact: someone told you this was going to happen and you thought that person was crazy.
|
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 8:37 PM Author: electric deep chapel dopamine Great post, very accurate I think.
And why do Sullivan people always carry those bags around? Is it required or something? |
|
Date: April 15th, 2008 7:27 PM Author: Slippery Bawdyhouse Ape S&C does not make associates cancel vacations.
They may abuse associates, but even they have their limits. |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 9:18 PM Author: Lascivious turdskin this doesn't sound so bad. there are millions (ok, maybe not millions, thousands) of people going through the same experience. at least this guy has some prestige that seems truly to make him happy and isn't in it just for the money.
also, PSA: many people initially love their jobs, then hate their jobs and then leave them. lawyers are not special. |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 9:27 PM Author: Dashing bespoke principal's office fantastic post (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6872691) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 10:42 PM Author: Gold Temple Nibblets Noted and printed.
I actually don't think you are crazy. But I do think you are misguided if you believe that the same progression of misery would not just as likely befall me at any other big law firm. And as you mention, when it does, the fact that I endured that misery at a firm as well regarded as S&C will leave me with plenty of options when deciding where to go to dry my eyes. |
|
Date: October 28th, 2006 1:31 PM Author: opaque office corn cake "But I do think you are misguided if you believe that the same progression of misery would not just as likely befall me at any other big law firm. "
tiNtcr |
|
Date: October 28th, 2006 12:47 AM Author: Twinkling Insanely Creepy Den i stopped reading at escutcheon. i don't like words that can be interpreted as either a coat of arms or a shiny shield for a shower implement. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6874084) |
|
Date: October 28th, 2006 1:30 AM Author: avocado vibrant home travel guidebook "And you'll worry that the XOXO crowd will see you."
i think i'll be OK. i'd never hang out with anyone who posts here. |
|
Date: October 28th, 2006 2:27 PM Author: Turquoise Anal Psychic Pistol lurvely. odd spell for smell though. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6875820) |
|
Date: October 28th, 2006 2:35 PM Author: supple antidepressant drug set 180 (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6875850) |
|
Date: October 28th, 2006 9:54 PM Author: Cobalt hot plaza One of the greatest xoxo posts ever; perfect, canonical, devastating, every bit as good and important as Renada's great UChicago post. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6877863) |
|
Date: October 28th, 2006 10:13 PM Author: flushed beady-eyed macaca But is it any better elsewhere in the V10? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6877970) |
|
Date: October 29th, 2006 1:44 PM Author: Cobalt hot plaza No. If you read this as a post about S&C you're badly missing the point. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6880417) |
|
Date: October 29th, 2006 2:41 PM Author: Free-loading business firm legend But the post doesn't apply to Cravath, which doesn't take literals :) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6880652) |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 12:42 AM Author: Cobalt hot plaza Freudian typo. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6884414) |
|
Date: October 29th, 2006 1:58 PM Author: rebellious godawful parlour a half-notch below, i think; not quite as well written or as feverish but still devastating (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6880498) |
|
Date: October 29th, 2006 9:34 PM Author: curious pocket flask LInk? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6883128) |
|
Date: October 28th, 2006 10:05 PM Author: Flirting useless ratface LOVE IT (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6877934) |
|
Date: October 29th, 2006 12:23 AM Author: scarlet sandwich Mostly true, though S&C associates who've managed to stick around for 3-4 years place very well.
However, for the next few graduating classes, the mid-levels at most of these firms are going to be laterals. Ya'll better get over the superiority complex when your boss ends up being a new york law grad. |
|
Date: October 29th, 2006 1:49 PM Author: autistic domesticated dingle berry Juuuuuuuuust in case:
Date: October 27th, 2006 8:17 PM Author: Mason27 Subject: Congratulations!
Based on your reaction to getting the offer, this is probably the best thing that could have hever appened to you. I encourage you to enjoy the summer and take accept their offer as nothing in the world will cure you of your prestige obsession quicker than some time at S&C.
During orientation, they'll give you an S&C shoulderbag and you'll wear it with the S&C logo facing outward so any other commuters in the know can see it and you'll just know that they're either impressed or envious. And that will make you happy and proud. And then you'll try to figure out the best way to ensure that you're sworn in as soon as possible after receiving your bar results because then you'll get the box full of business cards that say "Sullivan & Cromwell LLP" with your actual name underneath. You'll be giddy at the thought of casually passing one (mid-conversation) to some acquaintance from undergrad you've lost touch with.
You'll start working and you'll notice that there are an awful lot of "Farewell" emails and someone will tell you that the farewell emails can only contain 4 names at a time per firm policy because the partners decided sometime in 2004 that emails indicating 6 or 7 people were leaving the firm in a two week period might cause some unhelpful whispering. You'll talk to a midlevel associate who is super-psyched to work at S&C and you'll find out that he (not a lot of shes) lateralled from some firm that frankly you would never have considered working for (too TTT for you). When you get back to your office, this will trouble you a bit, you'll wonder if your own escutcheon is being blemished by the presence of this type of person (i.e., non-elite) at your S&C. But that feeling will pass as you'll find plenty of other like-minded first years who equally relish the prestige as you you head for a drink at Ulysses (shoulderbag logo facing outward).
Then you'll get staffed on your first big deal and you'll work late night after late night and then on the weekend and on to the next weekend and then on to the weekend when you had planned to go to a friend's wedding. And you won't go because the work has to get done and you have dues to pay (or so you'll be told). You'll get a little bit upset about this turn of events, but the arrival of those business cards will soften the blow.
You'll meet more and more laterals from firms that you would never work for (some you've never even heard of). You'll note in the farewell emails that some of the junior and midlevel associates leaving S&C are going to those very same firms. Survival of the fittest you'll say. But late at night, when the air conditioning clicks down from a barely perceptible hissing sound to complete silence, these things will bother you. But you'll tell yourself you're just tired and frustrated and anyway you have work to do.
You'll have lunch with Rodge and he'll tell you that business is good and that he's listening to associates' concerns about quality of life issues. You'll notice that some of the senior associates visibly roll their eyes at each other when this comes up, but you won't mind that much because, really, what other firm's managing partner regulalry has lunch with associates to hear their concerns (and takes notes!)
A few months will pass, a few marathon deals will happen, you'll have to re-schedule a vacation but you'll tell yourself that that is to be expected.
About a year in, a couple of your classmates will crack and start talking about how much the job sucks. They'll very likely have gone to Yale Law School. You'll joke that they couldn't hack it when they leave the firm for a clerkship, or an academic position or to go to a firm in another city.
Things will go on in this pattern and you'll notice the fact that you're working a lot harder than your friends who went to "peer" firms. At first you'll be proud of this and brag about it, but after a while you'll find yourself downplaying it. At least when you have the time to get out and socialize with your law school friends.
Something will happen: a partner will scream at you, a senior associate gunning for partner will blame you for her mistake, the partner will tell you that the trip to Europe your spouse meticulously planned just won't be able to happen (he'll be really sorry and will tell you a funny story about the exotic vacation he missed or cut short). Doesn't matter what, but you'll get really pissed and you'll start to take some of the 4 or 5 calls from headhunters that you'll receive every day at that point (vultures spell blood). They'll give you the names of firms that you laughed on in the days when you posted on the XOXO board, but you'll find yourself looking into them. The headhunter will encourage to just listen to their offer and you'll consider doing so. But you won't leave because then you'd have to give up your business cards. And stop wearing the shoulder bag. And the bonus is only x months away so you'll start thinking about it then.
Until one day you won't be able to take it any more and you'll find yourself arranging to meet with people from a lightly regarded firm for a position in their New York office. And you'll worry that the XOXO crowd will see you.
And you don't believe any of this will happen, but I suggest you print this out and keep it in the top desk of your drawer so late at night when you're feeling sorry for yourself, you can add to the list of reasons to be miserable this fact: someone told you this was going to happen and you thought that person was crazy.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6872237) |
|
Date: October 29th, 2006 3:04 PM Author: nudist cowardly point jewess did you go in house this May to a major IBank? If so, I think I know you (don't worry, I won't out you) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6880811) |
|
Date: July 21st, 2007 10:45 AM Author: Big mad-dog skullcap gaming laptop this is my favorite xo post EVAH (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#8415577) |
|
Date: September 26th, 2007 3:30 PM Author: aromatic naked azn fanboi MASON 27 is a DEMI-GOD. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#8692518) |
|
Date: April 15th, 2008 6:03 PM Author: Red market someone mentioned this in the WOW post, thought i'd bump (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#9633214) |
|
Date: May 30th, 2008 1:52 AM Author: Rambunctious Know-it-all Rigor i wonder what became of sullcrom_dot_com
chances he's still there, two years later? |
|
Date: June 4th, 2008 9:59 AM Author: alcoholic racy orchestra pit jap Bump for the summers. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#9856778) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 11:43 PM Author: Wine parlor hunting ground I pwn3d the hell out of a shitty brief written by two S&C attorneys last month. Frankly, I was shocked at the poor quality - don't be the guy that diminishes the firm in the eyes of its inferiors. Ty. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6873609) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 11:46 PM Author: electric deep chapel dopamine If it's any consolation, you probably didn't pwn them. You're just too TTT to realize that they cock-slapped you back to the bottom of the Vault list. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6873626) |
|
Date: October 28th, 2006 12:26 AM Author: Wine parlor hunting ground Guess the judge was TTT too. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6873936) |
|
Date: September 26th, 2007 3:57 PM Author: indigo brethren doctorate what the hell is sullivan? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#8692628) |
Date: October 27th, 2006 4:12 PM Author: Dead hell bbw What was your hardest interview question?
Also, obligatory "banking pwns law" |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 4:34 PM Author: Gold Temple Nibblets I didn't encounter any hard interview questions at any firm I went to - they just don't ask you tough questions. Maybe they do in banking interviews, but not law firms. Because the screening interviews are so short, they provide little opportunity for probative questions, and interviewers tend to just yawn their way through a day of 20 interviews and pick a handful of the best transcripts at the end of it. Then, once you get to the callback, they are more concerned about recruiting you (as there is typically a presumption that you are qualified at that point) so nobody wants to be a dick and ask tough questions. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6871214) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 4:45 PM Author: Dead hell bbw LOL
Lawyers are tards |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 5:58 PM Author: spectacular cuckold bankers have to ask questions because they recruit history and econ majors who are taught zero about banking. law school is a pretty fair judge i guess of how well one knows the law or legal theory, so they dont need to ask questions (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6871584) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 6:23 PM Author: White laughsome field incel law school doesnt teach you anything about the practice of law, you learn more in 11 weeks as a summer than you do in 2 years of law school. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6871724) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 6:30 PM Author: Gold Temple Nibblets Yes, but how well you are able to learn and do in law school (i.e., your grades) serve as a pretty reliable predictor of how well you will be able to learn and do at a law firm. Thus, they have reliable information on which to base a decision without asking any tough questions. The same cannot be said of an i-bank interviewing a liberal arts major. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6871779) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 11:15 PM Author: soul-stirring public bath feces I doubt this.
Everyone knows the legal doctrine and can apply it well enough (anyone above the median at a T14 anyway). Issue spotting and being able to crank out a good paper in time span of 3 1/2 hours is a different skill.
|
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 4:18 PM Author: Hilarious saffron hospital trust fund List the aspects of your personality that you believe were pros or cons to you getting the job. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6871157) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 4:41 PM Author: Gold Temple Nibblets I am a very cool and sociable person. I found that interviewers found this to be very refreshing. They are used to meeting with unbelievable losers during these interviews. Either interviewer is cool and are relieved to finally meet somebody they can actually talk to, or they are similarly losers and revert back to middle school tendencies and try their best to impress me and get me to like them too. Either way, when I leave, they are left with the impression that I am somebody they would like to work with, which is what their decision really boils down to (presuming you have the grades). (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6871251) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 4:48 PM Author: Razzle pearl mental disorder Well, its obvious you're cool and sociable. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6871289) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 5:53 PM Author: Narrow-minded pit definitely. what part of the interview did you most show off your coolness and sociability? the part where you told them how awesome and prestigious you are? or the part where you told them you'd be taking questions on your awesomeness and prestigiousness? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6871552) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 5:55 PM Author: Gold Temple Nibblets The whole thing. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6871565) |
|
Date: October 29th, 2006 9:57 AM Author: adventurous stead LOL
Macho always setting people straight. |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 4:19 PM Author: sepia up-to-no-good puppy what aspects of the prestige of Sullivan will get you through the months of 80 hour weeks? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6871165) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 4:21 PM Author: Hilarious saffron hospital trust fund The prestigious aspects....duh. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6871176) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 4:29 PM Author: Gold Temple Nibblets Credited.
But more to the point, there is no chance I am working months of 80 hour weeks. Its just not realistic. An occasional 80 hour week? Maybe.
Semi-regular 70 hour weeks will likely suck a lot, but I anticipate that knowing that I am at the top of the legal profession and will essentially have the freedom to choose whatever I want the next step in my career to be will help me get through it for a couple of years. |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 4:36 PM Author: sepia up-to-no-good puppy "Semi-regular 70 hour weeks will likely suck a lot, but I anticipate that knowing that I am at the top of the legal profession and will essentially have the freedom to choose whatever I want the next step in my career to be will help me get through it for a couple of years."
litigation or corporate? If corporate, you are at the top of the legal profession, and the bottom of the finance profession, so it isn't too exciting. If litigation, you can get similar training in any major market with considerably less hours. |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 4:39 PM Author: garnet adulterous heaven "bottom of the finance profession"
143 |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 4:40 PM Author: Mauve Splenetic Resort except that it's true. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6871245) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 5:59 PM Author: Talented pisswyrm twinkling uncleanness except that it isn't. You aren't in the finance profession if you are corporate lawyer. That is as dumb as saying an analyst at morgan stanley is at the top of the legal profession. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6871594) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 4:41 PM Author: Razzle pearl mental disorder True corporate lawyers have to deal with the fact that they are not the main professional talent involved in the deals that they are working on. They also make less $$$ than the bankers. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6871249) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 4:44 PM Author: Gold Temple Nibblets "bottom of the finance profession"
This is funny. And I agree. Corporate lawyers make no sense to me - why go into debt just to be doing less glamorous financial work than you could have done right out of college?
I want to do litigation, and specifically securities litigation. |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 4:47 PM Author: opaque office corn cake DOCREVIEWPWN3D!!!
Have fun being the most junior person on their team of 25 lawyers in In re IPO Sec Litig. |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 4:48 PM Author: sepia up-to-no-good puppy so then what are these great exit options? I understand corporate, because half of corporate lawyers want to be bankers or in business, but if you are in litigation you aren't going into business. There is big time securities litigation all over the place, not just NYC. Where are you going to exit to anyway, another lawfirm or in house as an inhouse litigation expert? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6871287) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 4:48 PM Author: Mauve Splenetic Resort you'll be doing lots of glamorous work as a 1st year on a securities litigation case. there's no doc review what so ever on securities litigation cases, none at all. |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 4:55 PM Author: Gold Temple Nibblets Who said anything about glamorous work? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6871323) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 4:57 PM Author: Mauve Splenetic Resort "why go into debt just to be doing less glamorous financial work than you could have done right out of college?
I want to do litigation, and specifically securities litigation."
you did, you made the implicit distinction between less glamorous financial corporate work and impliedly more glamorous securities litigation, and all the glamorous doc review that goes along with it.
|
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 5:05 PM Author: Gold Temple Nibblets Work on reading comprehension.
I said that the financial work you do as a corporate lawyer is less glamorous than the financial work a recent college grad does (at, say, an i-bank).
I drew no comparison between the glamor of first year associate corporate work and litigation work. |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 5:44 PM Author: Flirting useless ratface Sullivan for lit? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6871518) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 5:54 PM Author: Gold Temple Nibblets Yep. They're very good at the lit I think I want to do, and they are strong across all practice areas and have a big international presence, which were both important to me. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6871561) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 4:38 PM Author: Razzle pearl mental disorder You will work 80 hours a week at Sullivan, sometimes 90, sometimes more.
Your prestige is tempered by your credulity. |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 4:39 PM Author: well-lubricated histrionic cuckoldry "and will essentially have the freedom to choose whatever I want the next step in my career..."
I've never understood this thinking. Why not just figure out where you want to be and go there?? Why pick a firm for its exit strategy? |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 4:40 PM Author: garnet adulterous heaven gotta pay your dues, like everyone else, just that high-end corporate lawyers have to go to law school first (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6871244) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 4:51 PM Author: Gold Temple Nibblets "Why not just figure out where you want to be and go there? Why pick a firm for its exit strategy?"
This is like asking: Why go to law school? If you know you want to be a lawyer, why not just start at a law firm?
Well, firms won't hire you without a legal degree - you won't consider you qualified to work for them until you have been trained in this regard. And the better school you come from, the more likely the more competitive firms will want you.
The same logic applies for the next step in one's career (at least mine). The jobs I would like to end up doing wouldn't hire me straight out of law school. They will hire somebody after three years of BigLaw experience, and will be more likely to do so if they have been trained at a better firm. |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 4:58 PM Author: well-lubricated histrionic cuckoldry I assume that if someone can get a job at Sullivan that same person could get a job at any boutique firm he wanted. Instead, OP will go through three years of misery at Sullivan for the prestigue and move on to the firm that he should have chosen to begin with. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6871346) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 5:06 PM Author: Gold Temple Nibblets Boutique firm is one option. In-house i another option. Justice is another option. There are lots. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6871399) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 5:17 PM Author: well-lubricated histrionic cuckoldry so did you bother applying to any of these options? did they actually tell you that you need a few years of BIGLAW experience in order to qualify? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6871432) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 5:18 PM Author: Dashing bespoke principal's office shh, don't make him think. the biglaw lemming herd pauses for no one (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6871435) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 5:22 PM Author: Gold Temple Nibblets First, let's take a step back. This is for a summer position at this point. I will certainly be exploring my options after the summer, and will be asking myself and many others the very questions that you raise. My sense at the moment is that you have many more options after a few years of BigLaw experience than you do at graduation.
At the very least, a summer at a firm like S&C will look good coming out if it turns out I'm wrong and I decide to do something else directly after graduation. So either way, I am happy. |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 5:22 PM Author: multi-colored community account "I assume that if someone can get a job at Sullivan that same person could get a job at any boutique firm he wanted."
Not true. Sullivan is fairly prestigious and selective, but they take a lot of bodies. Smaller boutiques might be more selective or they might take very few people. |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 5:45 PM Author: Flirting useless ratface "I assume that if someone can get a job at Sullivan that same person could get a job at any boutique firm he wanted."
bold |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 5:55 PM Author: Talented pisswyrm twinkling uncleanness A-1 Bold. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6871563) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 6:28 PM Author: rebellious godawful parlour overly so (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6871759) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 4:36 PM Author: Startled Base French Chef Will this job worsen or improve your self-esteem issues? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6871222) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 4:55 PM Author: Gold Temple Nibblets It has improved my self-esteem. But it may well worsen my self-esteem issues by confirming that I require success such as this to make me feel good about myself. Only time will tell, I guess. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6871321) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 4:57 PM Author: Startled Base French Chef that's a refreshingly honest answer. good luck and i'm sure you will succeed. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6871339) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 5:07 PM Author: Gold Temple Nibblets Thanks. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6871403) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 4:37 PM Author: Sickened Stimulating Space NYC? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6871225) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 4:56 PM Author: Gold Temple Nibblets Yes, NYC. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6871330) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 4:50 PM Author: Razzle pearl mental disorder I think this guy is flame. Look at how everyone is just tearing into him. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6871297) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 4:50 PM Author: Mauve Splenetic Resort either that, or he's dumb. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6871302) |
|
Date: October 29th, 2006 2:08 PM Author: rebellious godawful parlour yeah it's strange. by most traditional xoxo standards he is a shining success story, and yet one person after another piles on to express horror at his prospects. are we going all softbatch and work-life-balancy here and turning away from our collective belief that prestige is a bitter but essential medicine? or is it just envy speaking? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6880532) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 6:01 PM Author: 180 voyeur yeah i have a question (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6871604) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 6:02 PM Author: Gold Temple Nibblets Shoot. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6871609) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 6:15 PM Author: 180 voyeur 1. where did you go to law school (range?) 2. what was your gpa |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 6:21 PM Author: Gold Temple Nibblets Do not want to give out any personal information.
My school/rank were good enough to get me an offer from S&C (but you knew that already) and 5 other v10s. |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 6:22 PM Author: 180 voyeur actually, i didnt know. im not very interested, and only asked because im bored and waiting to go out (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6871721) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 6:30 PM Author: swollen orchid locus really tough guy the prospect of working with people like you makes me want to rescind my acceptance at s&c. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6871776) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 6:32 PM Author: Gold Temple Nibblets Cool. Look forward to working with you. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6871788) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 6:14 PM Author: Nubile range Should I take Cravath over Sullcrom? Do you perceive any difference in hours worked at these two firms? I'd imagine it'd be fairly easy for me to lateral to Sullcrom from Cravath whereas it'd be a lot harder the other way around? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6871663) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 6:27 PM Author: Gold Temple Nibblets Your assessment is probably accurate. Cravath historically does not hire any laterals (though I have heard rumors that they have started to do so). I don't know that it would be "fairly easy" to lateral to S&C, but I may be wrong about that.
As for hours, I think you will work slightly more at Cravath, but that the difference will be largely negligible. From what I hear, you will definitely work a lot more over the summer.
As far as I'm concerned, a Cravath v. S&C decision should probably come down to how comfortable you are with being handcuffed to a single partner at Cravath. If you are ok with the risks associated with that system (or even prefer it) and you can handle working first year associate hours over the summer, I would choose Cravath. If either or both of these things bother you, I would choose S&C. Everything else seems pretty comparable between the two, with these minor potential drawbacks being weighed against the minor bump in prestige.
Either way, you can't really go wrong. Good luck. |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 6:28 PM Author: rebellious godawful parlour (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6871766) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 6:24 PM Author: brindle cocky headpube boiling water Subject: Dinged at Cadwalader? enjoy your TTT (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6871736) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 6:28 PM Author: Gold Temple Nibblets Laughable. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6871765) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 6:36 PM Author: brindle cocky headpube boiling water Subject: the fact that you seem to think I was serious is disturbing... but then again, on this board everything is TTT except HY and Wachtell... (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6871817) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 6:32 PM Author: Nubile range Did you get an offer from Davis Polk and would you have taken it over S&C? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6871787) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 6:34 PM Author: Gold Temple Nibblets I did, and as I chose not to take it, no.
I didn't buy their nice guy schtick for a second and neither should anybody else.
That being said, it is of course a great firm. I just thought S&C was better. |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 8:26 PM Author: doobsian lodge karate Excellent choice. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6872282) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 8:40 PM Author: Zippy appetizing potus S&C is a TTT in decline... sorry.
Wouldn't be surprised if they shut down some of their overseas offices. My impression is that they would be nothing if it wasn't for Goldman Sachs and Lehman Brothers. |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 8:45 PM Author: rebellious godawful parlour if anything it is cravath that is in decline relative to S&C (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6872399) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 9:01 PM Author: Zippy appetizing potus True. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6872512) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 8:41 PM Author: Exciting Center Marketing Idea whats the pay package like?
list base, any bonuses that you may receive and allowances |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 10:59 PM Author: Trip Theatre How does it make you feel to be in the presence of someone obviously more prestigious than you? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6873275) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 11:15 PM Author: Gold Temple Nibblets A little bit intimidated, to be honest.
But this intimidation is tempered quite a bit by the fact that I am only in the internet presence of such a person. If you and I were in the same room IRL, I would fear and revere you. |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 11:29 PM Author: Trip Theatre TITCR (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6873524) |
|
Date: October 28th, 2006 12:03 AM Author: rebellious godawful parlour do you feel the same way in the presence of someone at wachtell? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6873725) |
|
Date: October 28th, 2006 12:16 AM Author: Gold Temple Nibblets Being intimidated in the presence of somebody more prestigious than you is not a universal trait. I just know it to be one that I possess. This, of course, played into my deisre to end up at as prestigious a firm as possible (so as to minimize the amount of people in whose presence I would find myself intimidated).
So it's entirely possible he does not get intimidated in the presence of a Wachtell lawyer, though in his position, I would.
And knowing him to be more prestigious than I (and experiencing the concommitant intimidation), I would not readily attribute this trait to him, as it is one that I see as a weakness in myself and would thus not assume that my prestige superiors possess it. |
|
Date: October 28th, 2006 12:58 AM Author: rebellious godawful parlour but i wasn't talking to you (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6874157) |
|
Date: October 27th, 2006 11:39 PM Author: painfully honest glittery candlestick maker church building Subject: tell us more about the decision i heard that partner contact at S&C is horrible - thoughts? what other firms were you considering? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6873581) |
|
Date: October 28th, 2006 12:10 AM Author: Gold Temple Nibblets I was only seriously considering DPW and Cleary.
Partner contact means little to me, and even if it didn't, I see no reliable way to obtain truthful information about this metric, or many others for that matter. This is the type of thing you have to experience yourself, not something you can get from talking to others. People at various firms will tell you whatever they want you to think because they are recruiting you, and even seemingly neutral parties (friends you know who work there and will shoot straight with you, for instance) can not be relied upon because most of these things are completely subjective and depend largely on the personality of the individual assessing them. For example, a very introverted person may say that partner contact sucks at S&C, when he would probably have the same gripe about any other firm had he ended up there instead.
So, basically, I determined that relying on information like that (whether promulgated by other firms or insiders "in the know") was foolish. So it came down to prestige, both firm-wide and within the practice areas that interest me, taking into account perceived prestige within the larger legal community, quality of clients, etc. These metrics are much easier to objectively verify. A firm's clients are a matter of fact, and reputation and prestige are subjective assessments that can be objectively measured (i.e., by Vault, C&P, etc.).
Weighing these factors, I arrived at S&C pretty easily. |
|
Date: October 28th, 2006 12:12 AM Author: flushed beady-eyed macaca mildly suspicious this is flame (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6873801) |
|
Date: October 28th, 2006 12:19 AM Author: Mauve Splenetic Resort it's the ghost of aaron nagano (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6873866) |
|
Date: October 28th, 2006 12:21 AM Author: Gold Temple Nibblets Why do you say that? What about my response do you disagree with or think is so outrageous that it could be flame?
I believe I chose wisely. Others may think there is some value in searching out reliable information on these metrics, and that's fine. I'm not concerned with them. I was asked about how I made my decision, and I answered truthfully, while providing what I think (and hope) is useful information for others similarly situated.
Oh, now I see why you think its flame. I was being honest and trying to be helpful. Thats a no-no around here. |
|
Date: October 28th, 2006 12:54 AM Author: Twinkling Insanely Creepy Den do the mountains make you think of Busch beer? i don't think i could work at a firm whose website reminds me of Busch beer. i prefer blinding websites. blinding. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6874134) |
|
Date: October 28th, 2006 1:18 AM Author: Gold Temple Nibblets I'm a Natty Lite man, myself, so it doesn't bother me. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6874288) |
|
Date: October 28th, 2006 1:22 AM Author: Twinkling Insanely Creepy Den are you 16? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6874306) |
|
Date: October 28th, 2006 1:10 AM Author: painfully honest glittery candlestick maker church building no, that sounds legit to me. so between DPW and S&C you were able to objectively decide that S&C was materially better than DPW in the practice groups you were interested in and overall, putting aside all other factors that you found unreliable (partner contact, "niceness," etc)? good for you. was just curious as i'm still trying to sort firms out. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6874251) |
|
Date: October 28th, 2006 1:35 AM Author: Gold Temple Nibblets Correct. That's what I was able to do. But I realize that not everybody is capable of that, which is completely fine. I am really just trying to present an alternative to all the people who say you should really just look for "fit" and "culture" and how well you get along with the people because I think those are impossible to get any meaningful sense of during the recruiting process.
If I had one piece of advice that I would stress over all others, it would be not to buy the "niceness" routine (from DPW or anybody else, for that matter). It simply cannot be true, and even if it were, I can't see how it would possibly improve your quality of life in any meaningful way.
In fact, I consider "niceness" to be a slight drawback. I would rather have a partner or senior associate be blunt about what exactly is wrong with my work than spend the whole time walking back to my desk wondering how far I missed the mark because whoever was giving me feedback was trying to be nice and soften the blow. Some people say the nice-guy reputation just means they use nicer words and calmer tones when they chew you out. I don't see this as the problem. The problem is the hazy expectations that comes when one tries to be kind with their criticism.
So, as a firm, you can either always strive to be nice and get shittier and less consistent work, or you can tell your attorneys everything they do wrong, so they can fix it and improve in the future. I'd rather work for the latter. And I honestly think that any firm worth shit would rather be the latter - hence my skepticism that any firms actually fulfill the nice guy role that some purport to. |
|
Date: October 28th, 2006 1:56 AM Author: painfully honest glittery candlestick maker church building yeah, i agree with you that finding "your own" method of looking at firms is important. i am trying to isolate those things that are important to me too.
i was asking about partner interaction because i had an associate there tell me that he doesn't know partners at all. i found this odd and was wondering if you had picked up on this while going through the recruiting process. i know it's an individual thing and not a firm thing, but thought i would throw it out there and see what you thought. if you don't like it, just throw it back. |
|
Date: October 28th, 2006 2:08 AM Author: Gold Temple Nibblets It sounds like you are going about things better than most people I know.
I agree with the things you have identified as important, and I too place a lot of importance on them. As far as I'm concerned, the sole purpose should be finding the place that will help you become the best lawyer possible (as you say). The quality of your ineractions with supervisors, etc. is a big part of that. But as I have said, I don't think there's any meaningful or reliable way to predict that from going through recruiting. So if this dimension (and other similar ones) are largely a crapshoot (and thus as likely to be good or bad at one firm as the next), I figured I'd base my decision on things I could know with some certainty - prestige, practice area strength, clients, etc.
It's funny, most of the people I spoke with at S&C were actually quite pleased with their experiences with partners. But I put very little faith in these assessments, for the reasons I have discussed. I would have done the same had the assessments been negative. While a negative assessment may seem more readily believable (what incentive do they have to lie about a bad aspect about the firm?), you can't ignore that these things are mostly driven by the individual (as you recgnize) and can do little to tell you how you might actually experience that aspect of the firm.
Anyway, it sounds like you are going about things the best possible way. I wish you luck. |
|
Date: October 28th, 2006 3:04 AM Author: painfully honest glittery candlestick maker church building thanks, i wish you luck. i'm still debating, but maybe i'll see you there.
thanks for your insights during the recruiting process, i appreciate it. |
|
Date: October 28th, 2006 11:55 PM Author: scarlet sandwich "If I had one piece of advice that I would stress over all others, it would be not to buy the "niceness" routine (from DPW or anybody else, for that matter). It simply cannot be true, and even if it were, I can't see how it would possibly improve your quality of life in any meaningful way.
In fact, I consider "niceness" to be a slight drawback. I would rather have a partner or senior associate be blunt about what exactly is wrong with my work than spend the whole time walking back to my desk wondering how far I missed the mark because whoever was giving me feedback was trying to be nice and soften the blow. Some people say the nice-guy reputation just means they use nicer words and calmer tones when they chew you out. I don't see this as the problem. The problem is the hazy expectations that comes when one tries to be kind with their criticism. "
This is typical logic I hear for rejecting a firm with a culture, but corporate cultures are a real phenomenon and there is no reason to think they can't exist at a law firm. Just look at some of the mergers that have bombed because the corporate cultures didn't mix - it is a real thing. To say "it cannot be true" is just an ignorant statement, as well thought-out as it might be. A lot of people, both working there now and alumni, really seem to believe that it has a better working environment than other firms.
Davis Polk is a top quality law firm that is just as successful at S&C. To assume that there is some inefficency because associates don't get criticized enough or that partners waste time trying to figure out how to break it nice to you is silly. It isn't about "hazy expectations" - they have very high expectations and everyone knows that. The question is - do they throw a phone at you (actually happens at Cravath), or do they tell you you screwed up - say it is OK that you screwed up - and help you fix the problem? You can be very clear about your expectations without being obnoxious or dismissive of the person's intelligence.
Congrats, though, on your choice. |
|
Date: October 29th, 2006 2:12 PM Author: rebellious godawful parlour so very credited. abuse is never desirable. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6880550) |
|
Date: October 29th, 2006 2:17 PM Author: doobsian lodge karate Abuse is definitely a huge drawback. Thing is, the great majority of people at S&C are actually nice and polite, as I'm sure people are at most firms. Applicants shouldn't draw upon the conventional wisdom too much in making their decisions, as it is quite flawed. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6880564) |
|
Date: October 28th, 2006 1:34 AM Author: cerebral piazza Are you a virgin? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6874353) |
|
Date: October 28th, 2006 1:38 AM Author: Gold Temple Nibblets I suppose this is where the tough-guy poster (me) is supposed to assert that he fucks so many hot chicks that it would make your head spin.
I don't. But I have had intercourse before. With another person. |
|
Date: October 28th, 2006 1:42 AM Author: cerebral piazza Congratulations on that. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6874373) |
|
Date: October 28th, 2006 1:46 AM Author: Gold Temple Nibblets Thanks. I feel good about it. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6874381) |
|
Date: October 28th, 2006 3:56 AM Author: rebellious godawful parlour "With another person"
what an odd way to phrase it |
|
Date: October 28th, 2006 9:41 PM Author: light associate Yeah. Pretty vague. According to Singer, apes are persons. Maybe pigs, too. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6877777) |
|
Date: October 28th, 2006 2:07 AM Author: Lavender Effete Gunner what made you decide to go the Biglaw route and not non-profit (i.e. National Lawyers Guild, ACLU, and etc).
Do you feel any guilt that you are working for a firm that represents clients such as Goldman Sachs and Lehman Brothers?
Did you do it mostly because of the money factor? |
|
Date: October 28th, 2006 2:14 AM Author: Gold Temple Nibblets I am actually quite interested in non-profit or public interest work, and I think something along those lines may well be my next step after after a stint in big law. I just believe I can get better training at a big firm with lots of resources, which I think is the most important thing to a young legal career, regardless of what you want to do long-term.
Why should I feel guilty about that?
Money was not a motivating factor for me. I do not pay tuition, and thus have incurred no debt, and I have plenty of personal money to live comfortably without a high paying job. |
|
Date: October 28th, 2006 2:20 AM Author: Lavender Effete Gunner How is working for Sullivan going to prepare you for the ACLU? Sullivan mostly represents corporation and business firms that has nothing to do with civil liberties. I think you're a bit idealistic if corporate law will help you with civil liberties and constitutional litigation.
Overturning the death penalty in the courts does not equal helping corporations make a bang for their buck. HTH! |
|
Date: October 28th, 2006 2:25 AM Author: Gold Temple Nibblets First of all, I am doing litigation, not corporate.
Learning how to litigate big cases (discovery, etc.) is a skill that can be transferrable. Presumably working on securities litigation will help teach me how to litigate a case, which is what public interest legal organizations do a lot of.
Many other legal skills (research, writing, etc.) are also transferrable, and learning and honing them under very smart people for very demanding clients is certain to help. |
|
Date: October 29th, 2006 2:15 PM Author: rebellious godawful parlour "Presumably working on securities litigation will help teach me how to litigate a case"
no more than studying the alphabet will make you a better writer |
|
Date: September 26th, 2007 3:44 PM Author: rose balding therapy awful analogy (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#8692573) |
|
Date: October 28th, 2006 1:20 PM Author: lilac bateful volcanic crater shrine (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6875509) |
|
Date: October 28th, 2006 1:20 PM Author: lilac bateful volcanic crater shrine Golman Sachs benefits America and the world far more than the ACLU does. Your question is backwards; one should feel guilty working for the ACLU. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6875511) |
|
Date: October 28th, 2006 1:21 PM Author: 180 voyeur ?
Edit: now, come on, you can't really believe this. This claim just can't be adequately justified.
Edit (2nd): plus, it's Goldman not "Golman." |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 8:42 AM Author: lilac bateful volcanic crater shrine NAMBLA isn't really helping America. And I don't want to hear some treatise on the nobility of robust speech. It's freaking gay kiddie porn. I honestly believe that helping companies grow, participate in the market, etc. does more good for America than clogging the gov't docket with cases for terrorist muslims and gay molesters. I don't think that's so far fetched. |
|
Date: October 30th, 2006 8:43 AM Author: lilac bateful volcanic crater shrine I'm glad you told me it's Goldman. I really thought it was Golman. I've been spared from certain humiliation. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6885350) |
|
Date: October 28th, 2006 1:40 PM Author: rebellious godawful parlour they make more money, but the ACLU's victories create a lot of positive externalities -- so while the ACLU doesn't make as much, it might still promote more social welfare (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6875619) |
|
Date: October 29th, 2006 12:31 AM Author: light associate Profound. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6878694) |
|
Date: October 28th, 2006 1:32 PM Author: flushed beady-eyed macaca this is getting ridiculous.
could someone give some real reasons why one's life will be so much worse at S&C versus STB or DPW or Cleary? |
|
Date: October 28th, 2006 1:34 PM Author: opaque office corn cake It won't. But I wouldn't go to any of those places to be a litigator. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6875589) |
|
Date: October 28th, 2006 1:35 PM Author: flushed beady-eyed macaca oh ok. that "congratulations!" post freaked me out (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6875593) |
|
Date: October 28th, 2006 1:37 PM Author: opaque office corn cake Well, it's probably accurate. It'd be accurate at the other firms you mention too though.
If I were a young litigator, there are probably 15-20 firms I'd go to before any of em. |
|
Date: October 28th, 2006 2:23 PM Author: flushed beady-eyed macaca and for corporate? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6875806) |
|
Date: October 28th, 2006 2:36 PM Author: opaque office corn cake For corporate, I actually think there's a difference in the substance that the top NY places perform and real differences in exit options based on things like relationships with important banks, etc. You're just not going to have the same opportunity at, say, a chicago firm or the DC office of a national firm or whatever. Litigation is litigation though, and for junior people smaller cases can be a lot better experience. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6875863) |
|
Date: October 28th, 2006 2:25 PM Author: multi-colored community account What are these 15-20 firms? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6875814) |
|
Date: October 28th, 2006 2:34 PM Author: opaque office corn cake Let's see. Off the top of my head, I think youre better off at:
Quinn Emmanuel, Munger, Irell, Williams & Connolly, Covington, Gibson Dunn, Arnold & Porter, O'Melveny (some offices), Debevoise, Paul Weiss, Kirkland (maybe)
That's just off the top of my head. These are places that, from what I gather, you're actually going to get real litigation experience, will actually be challenged to perform, will be encouraged to sharpen your skills with pro bono work, and won't exactly stain your resume in the process. |
|
Date: October 28th, 2006 9:18 PM Author: Gold Temple Nibblets "Quinn Emmanuel"
Maybe. Certainly very good lit - can't argue with that. But too small for my tastes. Especially in NY.
"Munger, Irell"
Don't want to live on the west coast. Ever. Seriously, ever.
"Williams & Connolly, Covington, Gibson Dunn"
Sure, if you want to be in DC and do appellate work. And anybody who interviews with their DC office and believes they will be doing a lot of appellate work is an idiot.
"Arnold & Porter, O'Melveny (some offices)"
See above, but far less prestigious and even more stupid.
"Debevoise"
This has to be a joke.
"Paul Weiss"
Good point. Very legit at litigation. But a true one trick pony. Not that impressive of a firm overall.
"Kirkland (maybe)"
Maybe not. Thanks. |
|
Date: October 28th, 2006 9:36 PM Author: Flirting useless ratface """Williams & Connolly, Covington, Gibson Dunn""
"Sure, if you want to be in DC and do appellate work. And anybody who interviews with their DC office and believes they will be doing a lot of appellate work is an idiot. "
Hilarious. |
|
Date: October 28th, 2006 11:51 PM Author: opaque office corn cake Does W&C even have an appellate specialty? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6878502) |
|
Date: October 29th, 2006 12:11 AM Author: Flirting useless ratface it's primarily a trial place. which accounts for only a small part of the stupidity of the post i responded to. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6878601) |
|
Date: October 29th, 2006 3:34 AM Author: opaque office corn cake What's prestigious about being a 5th year associate who's never taken a deposition? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6879440) |
|
Date: October 28th, 2006 11:50 PM Author: opaque office corn cake Hey, suit yourself. You'll never be a great litigator, but at least you'll get the beach bag. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6878496) |
|
Date: October 29th, 2006 12:01 AM Author: Crusty khaki juggernaut Paul Weiss has a rep of being powerhouse litigators (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6878545) |
|
Date: October 29th, 2006 3:58 PM Author: opaque office corn cake In the real world, all of the places I listed have that reputation. Only a law student obsessed with the Vault would go to S&C over any of them. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6881103) |
|
Date: October 29th, 2006 8:18 AM Author: brindle cocky headpube boiling water Subject: You are going to fit in so well at S&C I can just tell by the sound of your posts. Your first friend will be the S&C 2nd year associate who interviewed at my law school. He talked for about 5 minutes in a Thurston Howell-ish accent about how great everything is at "Esh and Shee," and spent the rest of the time talking about baseball. Insecurity and frattishness oozed out of every pore, and he usually maintained a kind of forced, studied modesty, but you could see that he just couldn't contain his pride every time he remembered where he worked. He was happy as a pig in shit. |
|
Date: October 29th, 2006 10:03 AM Author: Hateful Odious Senate If it helps, I summered at S&C and hated it, so much that I declined their offer and went to another V5.
STAY AWAY FROM S&C. The hours are shitty. Offices are shitty. |
|
Date: October 29th, 2006 9:28 PM Author: Nubile range You mentioned hours being a concern -- did you end up going to DPW instead? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#6883087) |
|
Date: May 22nd, 2007 11:32 AM Author: Stirring knife idea he suggested Wonder how this dude is doing. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#8152168) |
|
Date: July 21st, 2007 10:49 AM Author: Diverse bistre meetinghouse http://www.xoxohth.com/thread.php?thread_id=465648&mc=165&forum_id=2#6350865 ? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=514098&forum_id=2#8415585) |