Choosing Biglaw SA
| insecure tank | 08/17/17 | | Adventurous Kink-friendly Dilemma | 08/17/17 | | insecure tank | 08/17/17 | | Adventurous Kink-friendly Dilemma | 08/17/17 | | stirring tattoo | 08/17/17 | | Bateful turquoise foreskin | 08/17/17 | | Adventurous Kink-friendly Dilemma | 08/17/17 | | stirring tattoo | 08/17/17 | | Bateful turquoise foreskin | 08/17/17 | | abnormal curious chad | 08/17/17 | | Bateful turquoise foreskin | 08/17/17 | | abnormal curious chad | 08/17/17 | | Bateful turquoise foreskin | 08/17/17 | | abnormal curious chad | 08/17/17 | | stirring tattoo | 08/17/17 | | Bateful turquoise foreskin | 08/17/17 | | stirring tattoo | 08/17/17 | | Bateful turquoise foreskin | 08/17/17 | | laughsome locale half-breed | 08/17/17 | | Gold menage | 08/17/17 | | Umber Soul-stirring Messiness Marketing Idea | 08/17/17 | | Gold menage | 08/17/17 | | abnormal curious chad | 08/17/17 | | Bateful turquoise foreskin | 08/17/17 | | fluffy principal's office philosopher-king | 08/17/17 | | Bateful turquoise foreskin | 08/17/17 | | insecure tank | 08/17/17 | | fluffy principal's office philosopher-king | 08/17/17 | | motley sex offender area | 08/17/17 | | wine buck-toothed lettuce | 08/17/17 | | Violent genital piercing | 08/17/17 | | Glassy Locus | 08/17/17 | | insecure tank | 08/17/17 | | Violent genital piercing | 08/17/17 | | insecure tank | 08/17/17 | | Violent genital piercing | 08/17/17 | | nubile aphrodisiac national giraffe | 08/17/17 | | insecure tank | 08/17/17 | | Gold menage | 08/17/17 | | stimulating address gaping | 08/17/17 | | insecure tank | 08/17/17 | | laughsome locale half-breed | 08/17/17 | | insecure tank | 08/19/17 | | Useless flesh stead cuckold | 08/17/17 | | indigo hideous deer antler | 08/17/17 | | Bateful turquoise foreskin | 08/17/17 | | Primrose impressive field main people | 08/17/17 | | Bateful turquoise foreskin | 08/17/17 | | Primrose impressive field main people | 08/17/17 | | Bateful turquoise foreskin | 08/17/17 | | Primrose impressive field main people | 08/17/17 | | aqua free-loading affirmative action trailer park | 08/17/17 | | Bateful turquoise foreskin | 08/17/17 | | aqua free-loading affirmative action trailer park | 08/17/17 | | Useless flesh stead cuckold | 08/17/17 | | indigo hideous deer antler | 08/17/17 | | Primrose impressive field main people | 08/17/17 | | indigo hideous deer antler | 08/17/17 | | Primrose impressive field main people | 08/17/17 | | indigo hideous deer antler | 08/17/17 | | Primrose impressive field main people | 08/17/17 | | indigo hideous deer antler | 08/17/17 | | Topaz flatulent sneaky criminal | 08/17/17 | | Useless flesh stead cuckold | 08/17/17 | | indigo hideous deer antler | 08/17/17 | | Useless flesh stead cuckold | 08/17/17 | | Topaz flatulent sneaky criminal | 08/17/17 | | laughsome locale half-breed | 08/17/17 |
Poast new message in this thread
|
Date: August 17th, 2017 7:56 PM Author: abnormal curious chad
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: abnormal curious chad
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: Bateful turquoise foreskin
>>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: Topaz flatulent sneaky criminal
NYC litigation ranking?
PW, DPW, &c?
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3704162&forum_id=2#34015400) |
|
|