Here are this morning’s firms (in Vault 100 order, prestige scores in parentheses):
36. Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati (6.308)
37. Linklaters (6.301)
38. Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe (6.244)
39. Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer LLP (6.204)
40. Proskauer Rose LLP (6.195)
You’ll note that one of these firms is Linklaters, which we recently wrote about. We reprint two emails from Linklaters sources, taking issue with our prior coverage, after the jump.
The Vault Top 100 Law Firms [Vault]
Earlier: Vault 1-5; Vault 6-10; Vault 11-15; Vault 16-20; Vault 21-25; Vault 26-30; Vault 31-35
From a Linklaters SA from this year:
I am not sure who tipped you about the “terrible” summer program experience, but it is somewhere between completely inaccurate and extremely inaccurate. I myself have been a summer associate this past few months with Links, and I know how many fellow summers feel about the firm personally. By the end of the summer program we’re pretty good friends so I believe I know their feelings about the firm, and in addition, there is really no incentive for me to lie in this anonymous email to Above the Law.
With the above said, I’d like to say that many of us had a blast at Links, both in London and New York. I’m sure one or two people might have had some problems with certain aspects of the firm, but it can’t possibly be anything near “terrible”. We are treated very well at Links, and we did a decent amount of real associate work to get some good experiences. The HR put serious efforts into making the program good, since it’s their largest summer class so far. And their efforts are certainly not in vain.
I liked (and continue to like) my fellow summers, as well as the firm itself. I was rather shocked to find anybody describing the experience as “terrible”. I don’t really know how to convince you, but the snippet about Links felt so different from what I’ve personally experienced, it almost felt like somebody accusing the Bush administration from spending too much money on education and neglecting the oil industry. It’s just weird. Even if somebody might not have thought it a perfect fit for them, it’s far, far away from “terrible.”
Far, far away.
No I’m not smoking.
And from a current Linklaters associate:
I am greatly disappointed by the recent piece you did on Linklaters’ summer program. It’s distressing that you might take the word of one or two disgruntled summer associates as indicative of a systemic issue at that firm, and I struggle to comprehend as to why you might choose to run such information at a critical time in the recruiting season without further corroboration or investigation….
[B]ased on my observations, the members of Linklaters’ summer class enjoyed their summer and AFAIK the majority intend to return next year.
I wonder if disaffected S&C, Cravath or Skadden associates will now come out of the woodwork with similar claims, and if so, will you risk the ire of those firms by publishing similarly spurious rumors about those firms’ summer associate programs?
Our response to this reader: “Rest assured I’d go to town with such claims if they involved S&C, Cravath, or Skadden. You may recall my coverage of Charney v. Sullivan & Cromwell, which hasn’t exactly put that firm in a very flattering light. I’m not terribly afraid of their ire.”