Choosing Biglaw SA
| sinister voyeur | 08/17/17 | | Stimulating shrine boltzmann | 08/17/17 | | sinister voyeur | 08/17/17 | | Stimulating shrine boltzmann | 08/17/17 | | Galvanic Crotch | 08/17/17 | | Vibrant indian lodge multi-billionaire | 08/17/17 | | Stimulating shrine boltzmann | 08/17/17 | | Galvanic Crotch | 08/17/17 | | Vibrant indian lodge multi-billionaire | 08/17/17 | | Sable toilet seat | 08/17/17 | | Vibrant indian lodge multi-billionaire | 08/17/17 | | Sable toilet seat | 08/17/17 | | Vibrant indian lodge multi-billionaire | 08/17/17 | | Sable toilet seat | 08/17/17 | | Galvanic Crotch | 08/17/17 | | Vibrant indian lodge multi-billionaire | 08/17/17 | | Galvanic Crotch | 08/17/17 | | Vibrant indian lodge multi-billionaire | 08/17/17 | | deranged greedy roommate site | 08/17/17 | | mustard idea he suggested | 08/17/17 | | Exciting really tough guy nursing home | 08/17/17 | | mustard idea he suggested | 08/17/17 | | Sable toilet seat | 08/17/17 | | Vibrant indian lodge multi-billionaire | 08/17/17 | | Irradiated peach becky | 08/17/17 | | Vibrant indian lodge multi-billionaire | 08/17/17 | | sinister voyeur | 08/17/17 | | Irradiated peach becky | 08/17/17 | | mind-boggling juggernaut | 08/17/17 | | lilac piazza | 08/17/17 | | Bearded milk | 08/17/17 | | swashbuckling office | 08/17/17 | | sinister voyeur | 08/17/17 | | Bearded milk | 08/17/17 | | sinister voyeur | 08/17/17 | | Bearded milk | 08/17/17 | | thriller avocado station liquid oxygen | 08/17/17 | | sinister voyeur | 08/17/17 | | mustard idea he suggested | 08/17/17 | | Fragrant nowag | 08/17/17 | | sinister voyeur | 08/17/17 | | deranged greedy roommate site | 08/17/17 | | sinister voyeur | 08/19/17 | | Snowy irate church building rigor | 08/17/17 | | histrionic plaza | 08/17/17 | | Vibrant indian lodge multi-billionaire | 08/17/17 | | Misunderstood beady-eyed senate elastic band | 08/17/17 | | Vibrant indian lodge multi-billionaire | 08/17/17 | | Misunderstood beady-eyed senate elastic band | 08/17/17 | | Vibrant indian lodge multi-billionaire | 08/17/17 | | Misunderstood beady-eyed senate elastic band | 08/17/17 | | comical yellow public bath codepig | 08/17/17 | | Vibrant indian lodge multi-billionaire | 08/17/17 | | comical yellow public bath codepig | 08/17/17 | | Snowy irate church building rigor | 08/17/17 | | histrionic plaza | 08/17/17 | | Misunderstood beady-eyed senate elastic band | 08/17/17 | | histrionic plaza | 08/17/17 | | Misunderstood beady-eyed senate elastic band | 08/17/17 | | histrionic plaza | 08/17/17 | | Misunderstood beady-eyed senate elastic band | 08/17/17 | | histrionic plaza | 08/17/17 | | soggy cerebral casino | 08/17/17 | | Snowy irate church building rigor | 08/17/17 | | histrionic plaza | 08/17/17 | | Snowy irate church building rigor | 08/17/17 | | soggy cerebral casino | 08/17/17 | | deranged greedy roommate site | 08/17/17 |
Poast new message in this thread
|
Date: August 17th, 2017 7:56 PM Author: Sable toilet seat
You can get equal experience at the firms, but what Nutella is talking about is that for in-house you're normally interviewing for a specialized area (not some general corporate position) so your firm's prestige/reputation w/r/t that specialized area is important, i.e., specialized area >>> vault ranking when interviewing for inhouse. So, like, you've probably never heard of Seward & Kissel, but if you're doing fund work they are about as good as any other shop.
Once you go in-house, attorneys don't want to train someone from the ground up. Sure, there is some leeway, but not much. They'll figure, shit I can get a K&E associate but then I'd have to train them to do X type of work, and what if they hate it. Ohh fuck it, I'll just go with Firm Y that is known for it b/c the fucker already knows the basics and likes it enough to practice in that area.
I'm training a junior attorney that we copped straight out of LS. And, it's been a real pain in the ass. My boss just says, "CC Special, you can help him right? Work with him." Fuck me. I can see that his eyes glaze over when I talk about various fed regs.
Edit: But if you don't know what the fuck you want to do, it's generally a safe bet to go with the highest rank firm that you can somewhat tolerate (e.g., location, etc.)
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3704162&forum_id=2#34014219) |
Date: August 17th, 2017 3:55 PM Author: Sable toilet seat
Prestige firm does matter to a certain extent, but if you're looking at V10s, then you can prbly just pick anyone and be fine. You may want to focus on practice group/ranking, which will be more important once you look going inhouse. I know some firms do a rotation system, which kinda sets you back a bit.
Going in-house will depend a lot on experience and personality. I'd rather take someone from a lower ranked firm that has relevant experience and a decent personality than some douche with so-so experience from a V5.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3704162&forum_id=2#34012546) |
Date: August 17th, 2017 3:58 PM Author: Vibrant indian lodge multi-billionaire
>>Should I just choose the most prestigious firm?
yes, unless one is known as a particular hellhole
>>Do firms like cravath or the other v5 firms provide associates with an easier time lateraling or going inhouse?
#5 v #6, no. there isnt some magical v5 cutuff.
v5 vs. shitty biglaw, yes.
>>Is there really any difference between firms in terms of the amount of work or responsiveness that's required?
all this will be heavily dependent on who you end up working for. absolutely no way to predict.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3704162&forum_id=2#34012564) |
Date: August 17th, 2017 10:27 PM Author: soggy cerebral casino
NYC litigation ranking?
PW, DPW, &c?
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3704162&forum_id=2#34015400) |
|
|