Advertisement

May 17, 2013

Law Firm Rankings 2013: Vault Law 100

Lat week, Vault.com released its 15th annual Law 100: a ranking of the most prestigious law firms in the country in the eyes of the ultimate insiders—current law firm associates themselves. This year, almost 17,000 associates took Vault’s survey, and awarded Wachtell Lipton Rosen & Katz and Cravath, Swaine & Moore the number one and two spots, respectively, for the tenth year in a row.

The top ten law firms in the Vault Law 100 are:

1.       Wachtell Lipton Rosen & Katz

2.       Cravath, Swaine & Moore

3.       Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom

4.       Sullivan & Cromwell

5.       Davis Polk & Wardwell

6.       Weil, Gotshal & Manges

7.       Simpson Thacher & Bartlett

8.       Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton

9.       Kirkland & Ellis

10.   Latham & Watkins

This year saw more movement within the top ten than in years past. Skadden slipped past Sullivan & Cromwell to take the number three spot; Weil and Simpson swapped places in the #6 and #7 positions; and Latham bumped its way back into the top ten, sending Covington & Burling to #11.

Latham was a top ten mainstay until 2010, when associates responded to the firm’s 2009 layoffs by sending it from #7 to #17. This year, however, the firm rejoined the top ten for the first time since the layoffs. Survey respondents proclaimed that Latham is “back as top dog,” citing its “great culture” and “laid-back” vibe. Given that firm culture has become the top factor cited by survey respondents as influencing their decision to join a firm, Latham’s reputation for having a friendly, collaborative culture may have helped to propel it back into the Top 10 so quickly.

Hogan Lovells also saw a notable jump, from #51 in 2012 to #41 this year. Before its merger with London-based Lovells, Hogan & Hartson was ranked #28. Given the failed firm mergers that have made headlines recently, associates may have been cynical about any newly combined firm’s outlook. But the firm seems to be doing well in the eyes of associates, given its ten-spot jump this year.

Baker Hostetler also ascended the ranks significantly, going from #77 to #68, thanks in no small part to its front-page role in the Madoff bankruptcy. Survey respondents noted the firm’s “awesome work” as counsel for the Madoff trustee, partner Irving Picard.

One firm that is missing from the rankings this year is, of course, Dewey & LeBoeuf. The firm, which recently filed for bankruptcy, debuted in the Vault Law 100 at #48 in 2009 and by last year had moved up to the #37 spot.

Three firms that were unranked last year joined the Vault Law 100—Fenwick & West at #94, Wiley Rein at #97 and Kasowitz, Benson, Torres & Friedman at #98. Falling out of the top 100 were Troutman Sanders (ranked #93 in 2012), Littler Mendelson (previously ranked #97), Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton (previously ranked #98), Kelley Drye (previously ranked #99) and Foley Hoag (previously ranked #100).

Vault will be releasing the rest of its 2013 Rankings—Best in Practice, Best in Region, Best to Work For and Diversity Rankings—over the coming weeks.

© 2012 Vault.com Inc.

About the Author

Law Editor

Rachel Marx is the Law Editor for Vault.com. She covers career advice for lawyers and law students, as well as the latest legal news and trends. Rachel also edits the annual Vault Guide to the Top 100 Law Firms. Prior to joining Vault, Rachel was a litigation associate at a Vault Top 10 firm in New York. She has a law degree from Harvard Law School and a bachelor’s degree from Tufts University.

646-792-6268

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.