Not First!

To say Lat hates CWT.

cadwalader to 190!... err 157!

Lat,

How about the Republican energy rally going on on the House floor? Not sure if it's still going at this point...

http://www.politico.com/blogs/thecrypt/0808/House_Dems_turn_out_out_the_light_but_GOP_keep_talking.html?showall

http://www.politico.com/blogs/thecrypt/0808/Dems_turn_out_the_light_but_GOP_wont_go_home_Part_II.html

http://www.politico.com/blogs/thecrypt/0808/GOP_talkathon_Part_III_No_shirt_no_tie_No_problem.html?showall

2 - No joke. I wonder if Lat thinks any 2Ls should interview with CWT.

If you were a 2L, would YOU interview with CWT?

The place may not even be around 12 months from now.

A better title: CWT goes down all week and emerges with a sparkly pearl necklace.

CWT aside, what does and what should the Midlevel Associate Satisfaction rankings mean to law students preparing for OCI?

My feeling, perhaps incorrectly, is that by the time those of us applying now are midlevel associates there is a high chance that these firms have moved significantly up or down (many with low rankings might actually make efforts to fix it..).

Does my assumption seem correct or should I be hesitant with Firms that i otherwise liked in my research but have a low score in that survey?

8: I think law students should review the survey results from years past and try to spot a pattern. As to many firms, looking at results from only one year won't give a complete picture.

Its too late to take CWT off my OCI schedule, any suggestions on how to keep a straight face for the 20 minutes of pure awkwardness?

10-Who cares? Enjoy it. Make the interviewer squirm for a change.

In terms of patterns / yearly movement, CWT didn't do that great in 2007 either - #153.

10 - when asked a question, read selected comments from ATL posters

Least surprising post of the day. The only thing associates hate more than being too busy is being too slow.

10- same. I am just going to use it to practice for a real interview.

why are associates at Stroock & Stroock & Lavan so unhappy? Is it because of their firm's ridiculous name?

8 - if the midlevel you are working for is not a happy person, you will not be a happy person.

16, they're so unhappy because of this:

http://www.stroock.com/sitecontent.cfm?contentID=58&itemID=258

can someone with an AmLaw subscription post the top 10? am curious.

CWT has like 5 last place finishes in the last decade. I believe they have crawled out of the bottom ten two times or fewer.

It is an awful, awful, awful place filled with miserable inhumane jerks and has been so consistently ever since the mustachioed one his little sidekick rightsized the place in the mid-90s.

1 5 Nutter McClennen, Boston 4.607 17 (65%)
2 6 Miles & Stockbridge, Baltimore 4.540 11 (42%)
3 27 Finnegan, Henderson, Washington, D.C. 4.444 19 (36%)
4 8 Faegre & Benson, Minneapolis 4.405 14 (16%)
5 28 Patterson Belknap, New York 4.349 18 (43%)
6 38 Gibson, Dunn, National 4.311 64 (27%)
7 31 Latham & Watkins, National 4.300 225 (36%)
8 37 Thompson Hine, Cleveland 4.292 12 (18%)
9 11 Benesch, Friedlander, Cleveland 4.287 18 (95%)
10 7 Thompson Coburn, St. Louis 4.280 25 (48%)
11 108 Schnader Harrison, Philadelphia 4.278 16 (73%)
12 72 Cleary Gottlieb, New York 4.261 25 (17%)
13 10 Vedder, Price, Chicago 4.251 20 (59%)
14 12 Chapman and Cutler, Chicago 4.235 17 (74%)
15 2 Susman Godfrey, Houston 4.233 13 (57%)
16 56 Arnold & Porter, Washington, D.C. 4.230 20 (17%)
17 14 McKee Nelson, Washington, D.C. 4.199 23 (59%)
18 - Linquist & Vennum, Minneapolis 4.183 16 (100%)
19 77 Ropes & Gray, Boston 4.175 90 (44%)
20 20 Harter Secrest, Rochester, New York 4.173 15 (68%)
21 17 Quarles & Brady, Milwaukee 4.161 27 (52%)
22 43 Weil, Gotshal, New York 4.137 106 (42%)
23 23 Fish & Richardson, National 4.104 72 (66%)
24 - Brown Rudnick, Boston 4.101 16 (67%)
25 13 Munger, Tolles, Los Angeles 4.088 23 (44%)
26 83 Haynes and Boone, Dallas 4.087 46 (64%)
27 - Baker & Daniels, Indianapolis 4.073 15 (41%)
28 48 Sullivan & Cromwell, New York 4.069 67 (38%)
29 71 Patton Boggs, Washington, D.C. 4.067 10 (13%)
30 86 Covington & Burling, Washington, D.C. 4.063 58 (46%)
30 40 Hughes Hubbard, New York 4.063 30 (59%)
32 18 Cooley Godward, Palo Alto 4.056 57 (42%)
33 44 Holland & Hart, Denver 4.049 12 (26%)
34 9 Pepper Hamilton, Philadelphia 4.048 39 (41%)
35 25 Allen & Overy, International 4.046 20 (51%)
36 127 Wachtell, New York 4.045 28 (57%)
37 54 Alston & Bird, Atlanta 4.041 47 (27%)
38 95 Hogan & Hartson, National 4.040 58 (35%)
39 65 Morgan, Lewis, National 4.039 144 (50%)
40 35 Bracewell & Giuliani, Houston 4.038 21 (38%)
41 116 Paul, Weiss, New York 4.021 43 (36%)
42 94 Irell & Manella, Los Angeles 4.015 17 (49%)
43 63 Sonnenschein, National 4.014 25 (26%)
44 88 Morrison & Foerster, San Francisco 4.008 91 (47%)
45 148 Howrey, National 3.993 25 (26%)
46 16 Stites & Harbison, Louisville 3.992 29 (71%)
47 112 Ballard Spahr, Philadelphia 3.988 32 (67%)
47 160 Proskauer Rose, New York 3.988 34 (31%)
47 156 Reed Smith, National 3.988 117 (53%)
50 4 Fox Rothschild, Philadelphia 3.986 22 (43%)
51 115 Strasburger & Price, Dallas 3.981 14 (64%)
52 141 Barnes & Thornburg, Indianapolis 3.979 12 (29%)
53 70 Kirkland & Ellis, National 3.970 134 (37%)
54 36 Fenwick & West, Mountain View, California 3.966 12 (23%)
55 - Frost Brown, Cincinnati 3.965 18 (44%)
56 61 DLA Piper US, National 3.962 160 (70%)
57 32 Cozen O’Connor, Philadelphia 3.960 16 (84%)
58 58 Mintz, Levin, Boston 3.956 16 (25%)
59 1 Dickstein Shapiro, Washington, D.C. 3.955 33 (57%)
60 78 Davis Polk, New York 3.949 85 (44%)
61 97 Lewis and Roca, Phoenix 3.942 17 (41%)
61 30 Young Conaway, Wilmington 3.942 17 (81%)
63 66 Goodwin Procter, Boston 3.938 101 (58%)
64 39 Manatt, Phelps, Los Angeles 3.936 25 (71%)
65 33 Orrick, National 3.930 80 (51%)
66 74 Kilpatrick Stockton, Atlanta 3.928 21 (57%)
67 66 Andrews Kurth, Houston 3.924 44 (94%)
68 105 Debevoise & Plimpton, New York 3.923 30 (19%)
69 124 Wilmer, National 3.918 93 (43%)
70 - Carter Ledyard, New York 3.915 11 (73%)
71 - Michael Best, Milwaukee 3.914 13 (46%)
72 104 Arent Fox, Washington, D.C. 3.913 33 (62%)
72 147 Duane Morris, National 3.913 52 (79%)
72 78 Heller Ehrman, San Francisco 3.913 55 (61%)
75 102 Willkie Farr, New York 3.903 48 (37%)
76 76 Bryan Cave, St. Louis 3.896 71 (55%)
77 78 Shook, Hardy, Kansas City, Missouri 3.893 20 (30%)
77 24 Stradley Ronon, Philadelphia 3.893 25 (89%)
79 107 Bingham McCutchen, National 3.890 61 (41%)
80 47 Snell & Wilmer, Phoenix 3.888 36 (48%)
81 29 Clifford Chance, International 3.880 26 (33%)
82 93 Robins, Kaplan, Minneapolis 3.878 21 (38%)
83 134 Perkins Coie, Seattle 3.863 38 (30%)
84 117 Holland & Knight, National 3.859 107 (73%)
85 - Morris, Nichols, Wilmington 3.858 10 (48%)
86 - Gibbons, Newark 3.856 18 (60%)
86 90 Pillsbury Winthrop, National 3.856 38 (34%)
88 49 Linklaters, International 3.853 21 (40%)
89 53 Davis Wright, Seattle 3.851 13 (20%)
90 62 Baker & McKenzie, International 3.848 61 (54%)
91 106 Jones Day, National 3.847 48 (16%)
91 137 Steptoe & Johnson, Washington, D.C. 3.847 13 (30%)
93 57 Crowell & Moring, Washington, D.C. 3.841 18 (29%)
93 102 Kramer Levin, New York 3.841 42 (66%)
95 51 O’Melveny & Myers, Los Angeles 3.838 86 (36%)
96 119 Dorsey & Whitney, Minneapolis 3.834 36 (31%)
96 - Thompson & Knight, Dallas 3.834 16 (31%)
98 - Dow, Lohnes, Washington, D.C. 3.827 12 (60%)
99 68 Vinson & Elkins, Houston 3.813 44 (35%)
100 42 Foley Hoag, Boston 3.809 14 (30%)
101 59 Jenner & Block, Chicago 3.808 19 (19%)
102 - Williams Mullen, Richmond 3.807 29 (63%)
103 55 Paul, Hastings, National 3.806 100 (62%)
104 25 Nossaman, Los Angeles 3.794 12 (100%)
105 101 Drinker Biddle, Philadelphia 3.787 35 (34%)
106 154 Schiff Hardin, Chicago 3.786 26 (59%)
107 143 Winston & Strawn, Chicago 3.785 31 (22%)
108 84 Akin Gump, National 3.779 104 (54%)
109 135 Shearman & Sterling, International 3.772 48 (29%)
110 97 McDermott Will, National 3.761 92 (50%)
111 50 Sutherland Asbill, Atlanta 3.760 34 (39%)
112 96 Sidley Austin, National 3.751 148 (44%)
113 123 Cahill Gordon, New York 3.738 30 (43%)
113 18 Carlton Fields, Tampa 3.738 27 (71%)
113 100 Seyfarth Shaw, National 3.738 53 (49%)
116 - Wiley Rein, Washington, D.C. 3.737 13 (30%)
117 158 King & Spalding, Atlanta 3.727 105 (64%)
117 109 Troutman Sanders, Atlanta 3.727 65 (65%)
119 155 Wilson Sonsini, Palo Alto 3.715 82 (59%)
120 122 Foley & Lardner, Milwaukee 3.713 36 (21%)
121 60 Saul Ewing, Philadelphia 3.707 22 (92%)
122 162 Cravath, New York 3.703 32 (29%)
122 151 Milbank, Tweed, New York 3.703 41 (34%)
124 69 Hunton & Williams, Richmond 3.698 76 (49%)
125 46 Sheppard, Mullin, Los Angeles 3.694 22 (30%)
126 99 Simpson Thacher, New York 3.676 63 (29%)
127 137 Nelson Mullins, Columbia, South Carolina 3.673 52 (95%)
128 145 Mayer Brown, National 3.668 86 (40%)
129 152 Kelley Drye, New York 3.666 18 (40%)
129 131 Skadden, National 3.666 96 (19%)
131 - Dewey & LeBoeuf, New York 3.662 79 (43%)
131 149 Schulte Roth, New York 3.662 47 (43%)
133 109 Chadbourne & Parke, New York 3.658 24 (60%)
134 113 Buchanan Ingersoll, Pittsburgh 3.645 23 (47%)
135 81 Katten Muchin, Chicago 3.642 94 (84%)
136 64 Blank Rome, Philadelphia 3.639 32 (45%)
137 140 White & Case, International 3.628 206 (40%)
138 - Porter Wright, Columbus 3.625 10 (45%)
139 92 Greenberg Traurig, National 3.621 164 (76%)
140 114 Venable, Washington, D.C. 3.618 10 (18%)
141 150 Montgomery, McCracken, Philadelphia 3.617 12 (75%)
142 88 Baker Botts, Houston 3.594 67 (37%)
143 126 Nixon Peabody, National 3.590 19 (21%)
144 - Akerman Senterfitt, Miami 3.576 21 (32%)
145 121 Fulbright & Jaworski, Houston 3.552 97 (63%)
146 111 Baker & Hostetler, National 3.531 52 (65%)
147 133 K&L Gates, National 3.509 137 (64%)
148 130 Fried, Frank, New York 3.503 51 (34%)
149 143 Wolf, Block, Philadelphia 3.497 35 (95%)
150 161 Kaye Scholer, New York 3.492 29 (35%)
151 84 Luce, Forward, San Diego 3.463 24 (73%)
152 - Day Pitney, Hartford 3.419 26 (65%)
153 127 Stroock & Stroock, New York 3.407 11 (16%)
154 135 Dechert, National 3.403 79 (38%)
155 - Loeb & Loeb, Los Angeles 3.370 15 (42%)
156 87 Vorys, Sater, Columbus 3.299 23 (70%)
157 153 Cadwalader, New York 3.223 90 (66%)

partners are jumping ship - get out while you can

Dechert is only 3 away from CWT. That is generous if anything. IMO they treat their associates like crap across the board. Suck it, Bart.

does anyone know if the people who were cut at CWT are still on the website, or if they have been removed?

they are still on the website. most associates don't have a bio up normally, so that doesn't mean anythign either. the people they let go shuold be ending at the end of next week, expect their names to disappear from the site then.

they are still on the website. most associates don't have a bio up normally, so that doesn't mean anythign either. the people they let go shuold be ending at the end of next week, expect their names to disappear from the site then.

How the hell did DLA's sleuth laying off self end up at No. 56? At this point, based on the size of the firm, they've had to have laid off at least twice the people Cadwalader did.

every day I despise cwt more. what a terrible place...

btw, what is the top firm in the country?

Fried Frank is 148. Anyone have any insight. They are on my list for interview??

Anyone know why Vorys is ranked 2nd from the bottom?

lindquist and vennum is top 20.

10 - me too. gonna play a new version of the supertroopers game: how many times can you say "fire" during the interview? really fired up, got the fire inside, fire away...

29: They had a low response rate (34%) so only unhappy responded. Happy associates are working, not taking polls.

32 -- I love that! Wonderful!

The raw scores are very compressed -- the range is only 1.384, or 0.0088 per spot. If you plot the scores, you shall see that they are almost linear for about 120 of the 157 spots, with a slope of 0.0045. Almost meaningless.

I once saw a Fried Frank stuck way up a Cravath and it looked painful and very unsatisfying.

I once saw a Fried Frank stuck way up a Cravath and it looked painful and very unsatisfying.

Why is everyone so down Cadwalader? They are a NYC juggernaut and one of the oldest law firms in the world. I can't wait to interview there.

The raw scores are very compressed -- the range is only 1.384, or 0.0088 per spot. If you plot the scores, you shall see that they are almost linear for about 120 of the 157 spots, with a slope of 0.0045. For anything more than difference of about 100 spots, this is almost meaningless.

That said, I totally weighed the 2007 survey as 1/9th of my rankings for OCI.

How does Susman rank so high?
I know you get almost 100% matched salary as bonuses, but you bill 2800+ every year.

Why didn't they announce these layoffs October 1st and say they would be effective December 31. That is three months notice. Meanwhile these people can bill 50 hrs a month and the firm can make a few dollars off them. The firm is still paying the same amount and they could still make a few bucks off them. Was the 5 months meant to achieve good will for the firm? Other than that Mrs. Lincoln how was the play?

42

They were not smart enough to figure that out which is why they're in this position in the first place. They have no logic and just ruined their reputation

7:04 - Hope you like bed bugs:

http://www.abovethelaw.com/2007/06/breaking_cadwalader_bed_bugs.php

The word is they have no replacement business and the lateral partners they've brought in over the last couple of years to "diversify" are not producing commenserate with their huge guarantees. Everything is out of whack and everybody is pointing fingers at everybody else. Expect a large rainmaker outflow by the end of the year followed by more firings. Dissolution 2Q 09.

32 -- I would go for something more challenging like "lay off." "I'm just staying focused on school and not laying off at all." "Some people have been looking in a bunch of different cities but I think they should lay off." Etc., etc.

Here are some other suggestions at increasing levels of difficulty (and decreasing levels of subtlety): axe, downsize, furlough, unemployment, TTT.

How cool would it be if 5 or 6 OCI candidates in a row played this game with CWT?

The solution to CWT's Amlaw woes is to PROMOTE PATTY ELLIS!!! Oh, wait, I think they tried that one the last three times CWT finished last....

I wonder if all those Weil bankruptcy partners regret leaving a thriving firm for a sinking ship.

All I know is that this list makes me thrilled that I turned down my interview at Dechert two years ago. That guy seemed like a total egomaniac, and judging from his website, the firm was all about him and not his clients or his lawyers.

As much bashing as CWT gets, I believe they did the layoffs now rather than in October for a variety of purposes. Some are not so nice, others are in fact generous of them (this is NOT in order of importance; in fact summers were probably not even a tertiary concern for them):

1. To send a message to the summers to find jobs elsewhere if possible;

2. To give the laid off employees extra time to find a job, while still honoring their promise to pay those associates through the end of the year;

3. To justify concurrent staff layoffs. This is what most posters are unaware of. Staff doesn't get nearly as generous a severance package; if they kept attorneys through the end of the year they would have kept, secretaries, paralegals, computer support, library people etc through the end of the year as well; laying off attorneys now lets them shed staff too;

4. to consolidate floor space, or to make room for new people in practice areas they hope to grow. About two years ago CWT had rented out more floor space in NY. These layoffs would allow them to give up some space or use it for areas (e.g., private equity) they hope to grow (though who knows who would join the firm at this point)? I don't know the lease terms so I'm unsure how feasible this is; this could also apply to Charlotte but I don't know how that office is physically set up;

5. to do a favor to the incoming class of 2008 and possibly save themselves yet more bad PR down the road. The capital markets layoffs will force the senior associates who did not get fired (nearly all juniors and midlevels did) to utilize the juniors coming in (banks will balk at charging senior associate rates to edit a bunch of simple pledge docs). One of the "untold" stories is how for the past year seniors and midlevels have been hordeing work to boost their billables. This trickle-down practice meant that the class of 2007 had largely nothing to do. Forget 50 hours a billables a month--it was more like 10.

50 = dumbass

"hording" of work is what everyone senior does, including partners, when work is slow

last hired first fired - sucks to be a junior associate under the waning bush regime's final assault on America (to enrich the people who put the cokemonkey retard in office) but it is what it is....

best of luck to all - we will need as bush continues to rape our economy

CWT HR here - The Release and Severance Agreement (the "Agreement") that you former employees signed had an anti-disparagement clause. Read it carefully, it covers disparagement by third parties. We construe the disparaging comments on this board as a Global Event of Default and we will now only be paying $100 of the severance in consideration of your release of any existing or future Claims (as defined in the Agreement). The severance through the end of the year will NOT be paid. You have all defaulted. The unemployment office in your local municipality can assist you with unemployment benefits and job retraining.

Thank you for your assistance. The valuable skillset you learned by running the same deal with the same 120 page contract over and over again will make you very valuable in your future endeavors.

Cheers,

CWT HR

I wonder if those IP attorneys regret leaving thriving firms for a sinking ship.

Wait til the client and shareholder malpractice and fraud suits start in earnest. There won't be a single partner left willingly holding that bag of shit. But they're already on the hook. Not only will CWT dissolve, the current and past partners will be ruined financially. And CWT isn't the only firm this will happen to. Attorneys should look carefully at what their firms have been involved with and get out while they can if they've been dealing with the areas that have blown up. Law firms are one kind of business the Bush administration will not bail out. As a matter of fact, Bush's DOJ will scapegoat the lawyers.

54, How will this bankrupt any partner other than the ones who committed or knew about the malpractice? Sure, they will chase down these firms to the extent of their insurance and valuable assets (of which a service company has very few), and they might even chase down partners that committed the malpractice if they have enough assets to warrant it (or if they need them to turn on the firm or other defendants), but most of the partners at the firm would be largely protected by limited liability, no? Granted, if the firm goes down, PPP will be in the crapper, but it is not like a IP partner at CWT is worried about losing his house, is he?

55,

I certainly hope not!

Sincerely,

CWT IP partner.

P.S. 48 -- I have no regrets.

51 = f%&ktard

bush has nothing to do with the raping of the economy. the dems have been in control the past two years and the only meaningful legislation they passed was the housing socialization bill.

54 wins the award for dumbest post EVER on this site. How do you live with yourself?

Please never work on one of my deals. THAT would be malpractice.

52,

I thought Cadwalader's whole schtick was charging premium rates for the really complicated and exotic securitizations - while the Thatcher Profits of the world cranked out the cookie cutter deals.

I could be wrong though - I'm certainly not a CMBS or securitization guy.

57 = retard who blames clinton for every ill years after he left, but whose intellectual hero(and equal) bush has nothing to do with big oil raping america

takes all kinds

Fried Frank is terrible.

54 has a point. Although seemingly shielded from all but their own negligent acts, non-securitization partners at CWT have reaped huge rewards from CMBS while turning a blind eye to what their partners were doing. If fraud and/or gross negligence can be established by, e.g., Andrew Cuomo, why would he stop at the involved partners? And even if liability of non-involved partners cannot be established, the firm would still have to pony up a big settlement. None of it is good for CWT partners.

56, Are you a bankruptcy AND IP lawyer? Quite an impressive resume! Or did you just fail to keep your lies straight?

Either way, you are apparently a CWT partner. You're entitled to spin as you wish, but you should be more careful. Hope you check your legal work as closely as you did your posting here.

Did you know the severity of the coming securitization meltdown when you lateraled into CWT, or were you sand-bagged?

is there a chart or list showing firms opting out of lockstep?

recently left Fried Frank for another firm - great great decision. Partners at the Frank are miserable people and morale is very low. for those interviewing, avoid the Frank if possible. still not a bad legal education, but the people, oh the people. such a bunch of trolls.

A few thoughts.

1. Fried Frank is hilarious. But I prefer grilled.
2. Does anybody think an anti-disparagement clause could be enforced for speech that would not be defamatory anyway? Just an extra damage if you say "CWT has herpes AND bedbugs"?
3. If the rankings are so compressed as to be meaningless, as some repeat poster above suggests, why are they so stable, at least in the case of CWT which sits at the bottom every damn year?

How'd this work out for you, Link?

"His views on the subject mark another departure from New York's traditional elite. Whereas those firms lavish attention on Ivy League law graduates with prestigious judicial clerkships, Link wants lawyers who want to be in the business and want to work hard in it. He said his ideal candidate would probably be someone slightly older with previous work experience, maybe on Wall Street.

He has no use for Yale Law School.

"I don't think we even recruit there anymore," he said of the law school often regarded as the nation's most intellectual. "They don't seem to produce the kind of lawyer we want."

Perhaps more than most firms, Cadwalader has made an effort to find the cream of students at nonelite schools. The University of Tennessee, Link's alma mater, is a favored destination.

68 - What, exactly, would the quality of students, real or perceived, have to do with securitization monkey work thought up by bankers? You could probably get a vocational class as effective at it as any group of "top legal talent."

Attacking the quality of CWT associates, large numbers of whom have been terminated through no fault of their own, is pathetic.

LOL @ Vorys getting coverage on ATL, if inadvertently.

But to answer 30: why is Vorys ranked so low? As someone who's spent some time there, I feel like I can answer that.

It has an old school, stodgy, uptight, country club culture. There is a division in the firm. The old country-club type partners, and a smaller centralized group of young fratty associates. If you're not interested in dealing with either, you're not going to have fun at work. And I'd imagine most people aren't in either milieu.

It's very hierarchical. While you don't have problems with screamers (mostly), you never really feel comfortable either. There are of course numerous exceptions that are great to work with.

Oh, and no bonuses! At all! And the way decisions are made is completely opaque.

While it's probably not the most offensive place to work - or even the second most - I'm not shocked to see that the stodgy, uptight environment isn't conducive to midlevel satisfaction.

53: Morgan & Finnegan is "thriving"??? Get a clue.

Cadwalader is an LLP. New York's hasn't adopted all of the liability protections offered by RUPA. If the firm does go down, a lot of partners will be in for a surprise when they find out that LLP doesn't mean what they think it means.

I remember, BEFORE coming to CWT, hearing all the horror stories about how they treated you. When I came on board, I was isolated, but I saw the cruel and unusual ways they could work a person, lawyer and staff. Today, I'm one of the lay offs. Although I liked the paycheck and the benefits, I consider myself lucky and plan on making the most of this. Life is too short to lose my humanity over money. I'm ready to move on.

I remember, BEFORE coming to CWT, hearing all the horror stories about how they treated you. When I came on board, I was isolated, but I saw the cruel and unusual ways they could work a person, lawyer and staff. Today, I'm one of the lay offs. Although I liked the paycheck and the benefits, I consider myself lucky and plan on making the most of this. Life is too short to lose my humanity over money. I'm ready to move on.

Why no 411 on Quinn Emanuel?

Appreciate the feedback, 70. Thanks.

-30

Long Live Neil Weidner!!

Could this Cadawhatever law firm do everyone a favor and just fold? The world would be a better place without this joke of a law firm. Hopefully, they will cease to exist in several months.

why is everyone so down on loeb & loeb? i thought it was a good firm?

56 - whether you're lying or not - you shouldn't say that - there are only 4 IP partners at CWT, so you're not really protecting your anonymity.

Any thoughts on Katten? Why are they ranked so low? The people seemed happy to me.

Yeah, anyone know why loeb and loeb is ranked so low? Do they not pay market salaries or bonuses? Or are entertainment clients and attorneys just the horrible people you'd assume they'd be?

Apparently not everyone is a winner at Nixon Peabody.

143 126 Nixon Peabody, National 3.590 19 (21%)

what about thacher proffitt?

I'm surprised CWT scored as highly as they did...

56 is joking you idiots

I also find it interesting that Thacher Proffitt was not listed. I suspect their ranking would have rivaled that of CWT.

I also find it interesting that Thacher Proffitt was not listed. I suspect their ranking would have rivaled that of CWT.

I also find it interesting that Thacher Proffitt was not listed. I suspect their ranking would have rivaled that of CWT.

Is the second number the ranking from the year before? If so, it looks like most firms went up or down 30 or more rankings from last year and that few firms haven't had large increases or decreases in associate satisfaction. I am a midlevel and my firm was one of those that had a large decrease, but I'm not sure I could guess at what the cause is.

39 - what was your full ranking equation

86,

thank you! jeez, some readers are dense as bricks!

sincerely, 56

I second the other former Fried Frank associate's thoughts. Recently lateralled from there. TheIr partners are pretty awful. Associates get abused and then become mid-levels and start abusing juniors. Much happier at my new firm.

@77 and 80 - Loeb & Loeb consistently pays below market salary and bonus, with no lockstep (instead using some subjective standard that no one understands) and, with decision-making authority given to only a few partners, the firm is run with a tight and arbitrary fist. In addition, the firm has a policy of conducting no-notice layoffs with as little as one month's severance. If you're considering joining Loeb and have an opportunity to go to any other firm - definitely go to that other firm. Loeb tries to sell itself as a lifestyle firm but is really just another TTT sweatshop.