Shearman v. Milbank in NYC Forum
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
-
- Posts: 428561
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Shearman v. Milbank in NYC
Trying to decide between these two in NY. Not sure if I want to do litigation or transactional work.
-
- Posts: 428561
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Shearman v. Milbank in NYC
Sorry not adding value but curious when was your shearman cb and offer?
-
- Posts: 428561
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Shearman v. Milbank in NYC
I'm surprised that Milbank is take such a strong lead (as of now) in this poll. In terms of practice area strengths, if you want to do corporate, Shearman is ranked higher in Chambers in Corporate/M&A and Capital Markets. Am I missing something?
-
- Posts: 428561
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Shearman v. Milbank in NYC
Milbank has stronger litigation practices, though. If you are at all interested in restructuring then it is also by far the better option. I have also heard it is a slightly more humane place to work.Anonymous User wrote:I'm surprised that Milbank is take such a strong lead (as of now) in this poll. In terms of practice area strengths, if you want to do corporate, Shearman is ranked higher in Chambers in Corporate/M&A and Capital Markets. Am I missing something?
-
- Posts: 428561
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Shearman v. Milbank in NYC
can confirm that shearman litigation is not humane.Anonymous User wrote:Milbank has stronger litigation practices, though. If you are at all interested in restructuring then it is also by far the better option. I have also heard it is a slightly more humane place to work.Anonymous User wrote:I'm surprised that Milbank is take such a strong lead (as of now) in this poll. In terms of practice area strengths, if you want to do corporate, Shearman is ranked higher in Chambers in Corporate/M&A and Capital Markets. Am I missing something?
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 428561
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Shearman v. Milbank in NYC
Even by biglaw standards? I had heard Shearman was relatively okay compared to other firms.Anonymous User wrote:can confirm that shearman litigation is not humane.Anonymous User wrote:Milbank has stronger litigation practices, though. If you are at all interested in restructuring then it is also by far the better option. I have also heard it is a slightly more humane place to work.Anonymous User wrote:I'm surprised that Milbank is take such a strong lead (as of now) in this poll. In terms of practice area strengths, if you want to do corporate, Shearman is ranked higher in Chambers in Corporate/M&A and Capital Markets. Am I missing something?
-
- Posts: 428561
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Shearman v. Milbank in NYC
I can confirm that Shearman on the whole is a humane place to work, at least compared to some other firms I did callbacks with years ago. Hours are terrible in M&A, but better in capital markets and a lot better in some other transactional practice areas.Anonymous User wrote:Even by biglaw standards? I had heard Shearman was relatively okay compared to other firms.Anonymous User wrote:can confirm that shearman litigation is not humane.Anonymous User wrote:Milbank has stronger litigation practices, though. If you are at all interested in restructuring then it is also by far the better option. I have also heard it is a slightly more humane place to work.Anonymous User wrote:I'm surprised that Milbank is take such a strong lead (as of now) in this poll. In terms of practice area strengths, if you want to do corporate, Shearman is ranked higher in Chambers in Corporate/M&A and Capital Markets. Am I missing something?
But I must tell you work/life balance shouldn't be an important factor in making your decision. It depends more on your practice area than your firm. I work at Shearman and I notice not only hours, but also work culture differences across practice groups. You will have absolutely zero life in some months if you do M&A for sure regardless of where you go as long as you go to one with a strong M&A practice. At a top restructuring firm like Milbank I suppose the restructuring group would be a lot busier.
I am not sure whether Milbank does this as well, but at Shearman, associates in the corporate pool (first and second years are in this corporate pool for two years) could try out litigation full-time for some months if they want to.
Last edited by Anonymous User on Tue Aug 21, 2018 1:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 428561
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Shearman v. Milbank in NYC
Deleted