Talk:White-shoe firm/Archives/2011

Merriam-Webster Definition of White-Shoe
Here's the definition from m-w.com: "of, associated with, or characteristic of the privileged moneyed upper class." They use as a synonym "upper-crust." The term dates to 1957 according to Merriam-Webster. Also note the correct spelling includes a hyphen between white and shoe, i.e., "white-shoe" is correct spelling. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.108.211.131 (talk) 03:14, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

added paul weiss...founded in the late 19th century...top grads...among the top law firms in the country (#1 litigation firm)

paul weiss
While an excellent firm, the criteria for a "white shoe" firm is not simply 'founded in the 19th C.' or that it attracts top graduates from the top law schools. By this logic, a firm such as Wachtell or Skadden would qualify. Put simply, "white shoe" is, for better or worse, an historical artifact. When the term "white shoe" carried any currency (i.e, 1890-1945) the criteria included institutional or familial pedigree. The entire impetus behind the quality and reputation of firms such as Wachtell or Skadden is that they recruited and developed non-WASPs. They realized, before many firms, that the success of a firm was defined more by its profit per partner and business/legal acumen than with the criteria of old. Those posting on this site should be less obsessed with prestige and more sensitive to an honest historical perspective. 'White Shoe" does not necessarily equal 'superior' or 'prestigious.' I am sure that the founding partners of many of the legal/financial institutions erroneously added to this topic would be horrified to be lumped together with those who held them back for so long.

Ditto for Weil —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.211.81.236 (talk) 09:54, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

who determines?
Is there an external source we can all agree upon? Chivista 16:31, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

JP Morgan?
I don't dispute their in-house legal team is excellent, but they are a bank, not a law firm!? Or am I complete missing something? Legis 07:49, 12 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Sorry; I had thought White Shoe only related to law firms. I now see that they have also listed the banks as well.  My bad. Legis 07:59, 12 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Is it the old JP Morgan because it then became Morgan Stanley b/c the commercial bank JP Morgan was a plain old bank bank, not until the Gramm-Leach-Bliley repeal of Glass-Steagall was reconsolidation allowed :( Chivista 13:09, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Bear Stearns
From the New York Times "Bear Stearns was never considered a white-shoe Wall Street firm and often operated on the edge of the industry." http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/16/business/16cnd-bear.html?_r=1&ref=business&oref=slogin I have thus removed it from the list. Billhpike (talk) 00:23, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Defunct White Shoe firms
A number of defunct firms were white shoe and have either gone bust or merged. Should I include them? I'm thinking of Donovan, Leisure, Newton & Irvine and Lord, Day & Lord?? --Mediterraneo (talk) 00:09, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Covington & Burling
I know someone added Cov and even had a cite for it, but officially speaking, isn't the term white shoe limited to New York based law firms founded on Wall Street with a strong connection to a major banking family/banking empire? Covington does not fit that definition and is a Washington D.C. firm with a small corporate practice better known for its products liability, regulatory, litigation and lobbying work. Or am I wrong? --Mediterraneo (talk) 04:02, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Jones Day
No way that Jones Day is a white shoe firm in any meaningful sense. It is based in Ohio. --Mediterraneo (talk) 01:41, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Charmed Circle
As I understood it, the "White Shoe" term was synonymous with the Charmed Circle of Wall Street old genteel firms. This group was generally considered as including the following 7 firms:

Cadwalader Wickersham & Taft; Cravath Swaine & Moore; Davis Polk & Wardwell; Millbank Tweed Hadley & McCloy; Shearman & Sterling; Simpson Thacher & Bartlett; and Sullivan & Cromwell.

White & Case was often included in the group in the same way that Herbert Smith is often regarded as a member of the Magic Circle. However White & Case is considerably younger in its origins then the other Charmed Circle firms. Perhaps it might be worth including a paragraph noting the historical Charmed Circle firms?

Perhaps Choate Hall & Stewart should be added to this list?

I would also suggest adding Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale & Dorr to the list of new firms.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Wholenewlevelofcool (talk • contribs) 14:48, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

What about top insurers?
Like AIG?

Huffandpuff (talk) 11:52, 28 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Is that a joke? Hahahahaha. --Mediterraneo (talk) 16:59, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

No. It was once a standard destination for those from elite backgrounds and historically excluded Jews. So why shouldn't it be classified somewhere? Huffandpuff (talk) 19:26, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Merriam-Webster Definition of White-Shoe
Here's the definition from m-w.com: "of, associated with, or characteristic of the privileged moneyed upper class." They use as a synonym "upper-crust." The term dates to 1957 according to Merriam-Webster. Also note the correct spelling includes a hyphen between white and shoe, i.e., "white-shoe" is correct spelling. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.108.211.131 (talk) 03:14, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

added paul weiss...founded in the late 19th century...top grads...among the top law firms in the country (#1 litigation firm)

paul weiss
While an excellent firm, the criteria for a "white shoe" firm is not simply 'founded in the 19th C.' or that it attracts top graduates from the top law schools. By this logic, a firm such as Wachtell or Skadden would qualify. Put simply, "white shoe" is, for better or worse, an historical artifact. When the term "white shoe" carried any currency (i.e, 1890-1945) the criteria included institutional or familial pedigree. The entire impetus behind the quality and reputation of firms such as Wachtell or Skadden is that they recruited and developed non-WASPs. They realized, before many firms, that the success of a firm was defined more by its profit per partner and business/legal acumen than with the criteria of old. Those posting on this site should be less obsessed with prestige and more sensitive to an honest historical perspective. 'White Shoe" does not necessarily equal 'superior' or 'prestigious.' I am sure that the founding partners of many of the legal/financial institutions erroneously added to this topic would be horrified to be lumped together with those who held them back for so long.

Ditto for Weil —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.211.81.236 (talk) 09:54, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

who determines?
Is there an external source we can all agree upon? Chivista 16:31, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

JP Morgan?
I don't dispute their in-house legal team is excellent, but they are a bank, not a law firm!? Or am I complete missing something? Legis 07:49, 12 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Sorry; I had thought White Shoe only related to law firms. I now see that they have also listed the banks as well.  My bad. Legis 07:59, 12 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Is it the old JP Morgan because it then became Morgan Stanley b/c the commercial bank JP Morgan was a plain old bank bank, not until the Gramm-Leach-Bliley repeal of Glass-Steagall was reconsolidation allowed :( Chivista 13:09, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Bear Stearns
From the New York Times "Bear Stearns was never considered a white-shoe Wall Street firm and often operated on the edge of the industry." http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/16/business/16cnd-bear.html?_r=1&ref=business&oref=slogin I have thus removed it from the list. Billhpike (talk) 00:23, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Defunct White Shoe firms
A number of defunct firms were white shoe and have either gone bust or merged. Should I include them? I'm thinking of Donovan, Leisure, Newton & Irvine and Lord, Day & Lord?? --Mediterraneo (talk) 00:09, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Covington & Burling
I know someone added Cov and even had a cite for it, but officially speaking, isn't the term white shoe limited to New York based law firms founded on Wall Street with a strong connection to a major banking family/banking empire? Covington does not fit that definition and is a Washington D.C. firm with a small corporate practice better known for its products liability, regulatory, litigation and lobbying work. Or am I wrong? --Mediterraneo (talk) 04:02, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Jones Day
No way that Jones Day is a white shoe firm in any meaningful sense. It is based in Ohio. --Mediterraneo (talk) 01:41, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Charmed Circle
As I understood it, the "White Shoe" term was synonymous with the Charmed Circle of Wall Street old genteel firms. This group was generally considered as including the following 7 firms:

Cadwalader Wickersham & Taft; Cravath Swaine & Moore; Davis Polk & Wardwell; Millbank Tweed Hadley & McCloy; Shearman & Sterling; Simpson Thacher & Bartlett; and Sullivan & Cromwell.

White & Case was often included in the group in the same way that Herbert Smith is often regarded as a member of the Magic Circle. However White & Case is considerably younger in its origins then the other Charmed Circle firms. Perhaps it might be worth including a paragraph noting the historical Charmed Circle firms?

Perhaps Choate Hall & Stewart should be added to this list?

I would also suggest adding Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale & Dorr to the list of new firms.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Wholenewlevelofcool (talk • contribs) 14:48, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

What about top insurers?
Like AIG?

Huffandpuff (talk) 11:52, 28 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Is that a joke? Hahahahaha. --Mediterraneo (talk) 16:59, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

No. It was once a standard destination for those from elite backgrounds and historically excluded Jews. So why shouldn't it be classified somewhere? Huffandpuff (talk) 19:26, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

What about Brown Brothers Harriman & Co.?
Brown Brothers for many decades has been a pillar of the WASPish investment houses on Wall Street. In fact, once it was only second to JP Morgan & Co. in terms of its prestige. So I will add it to the list unless it is argued otherwise. -- An d Re w 14:49, 1 November 2011 (UTC)