Don't believe everything you hear: bigger isn't always better. There are many benefits to practicing at a mid-sized firm, as the folks at Seward & Kissel know very well.
Chambers Associate: What appealed to you most about joining a mid-sized firm?
Noelle Indelicato: Having previously worked at a large company, I intentionally sought out a mid-sized law firm to avoid becoming a “face in the crowd” and to know that I would receive substantive work early in my career. For me, it’s the most effective way to learn. I knew I made the right decision as early as my time as a summer associate, when both partners and associates were clearly making an effort to build connections with me.
Kristen Curatolo: I made the move to a mid-sized firm because I wanted to practice law in an environment where mentorship, meaningful client contact, and entrepreneurial growth are not just encouraged—they're expected. Joining Seward & Kissel was an exciting opportunity to be part of a firm that combines deep expertise with a collaborative, agile culture. What drew me most was the ability to work closely with exceptional colleagues across disciplines while maintaining a strong focus on client service and innovation—hallmarks of a mid-size firm.
Kevin Neubauer: I came to Seward & Kissel as a summer associate and have spent most of my legal career at the firm—I served as in-house counsel in the legal department of a large private equity firm for two years before returning to Seward & Kissel. I wanted a firm where I would be exposed to substantive areas of practices from the beginning of my career, where projects would be staffed leanly and I could take on a higher level of responsibility earlier in my career than I could at a large firm, all while working with market-leading clients. I found that at Seward & Kissel. The Firm cares about the development of our associates, both professionally and personally and put a lot of time and resources into their development. Most of our partners have spent their entire legal careers at the firm (i.e., straight from law school and in most cases, having been part of our summer associate program). Our size allows our attorneys to get to know each other extremely well and the ties among Seward & Kissel lawyers, both past and present, remain long and deep.
CA: How might Seward & Kissel’s strategy differ to a larger firm’s? What kind of clients does the firm target?
Craig Sklar: As a mid-size firm, we focus our efforts on what we do well, and unlike some other firms, we do not try to be something to everyone. The clients we target are the ones that need sophisticated legal advice and representation in our core competencies. While much of our activity is in the middle-market, our clients range from privately held start-up and emerging companies to large investment funds, banks, financial institutions and public companies.
Rhona Kisch: Many partners at Seward & Kissel, including myself, like working with clients that value sustained attention from partners overseeing their matters. This model allows us to create deep, advisory relationships with our clients. Understanding our clients and easy access to partner involvement, regardless of industry and size, allows us to efficiently offer strategic guidance on deal and JV structures as well as investment and financing options.
CA: How does a mid-sized firm manage to stand tall in New York and DC, home to the world’s biggest firms?
CS: We focus on what we do best. The firm has established a reputation for excellence in specific industries and practice areas where we are recognized nationally and internationally. Our clients seek our counsel in these areas and our focus enables us to work on complex and sophisticated matters compared to larger firms that oftentimes do not have the same expertise that we possess. Our size also allows us to be nimble and avoid being bogged down in large firm bureaucracy.
Anthony Tu-Sekine: Lawyers who do superb legal work for their clients will always stand out. People come to us for our expertise and our response times. While we are a full-service firm, we are not all things to all people; clients come to us because of our expertise in financial services, funds, shipping, financial regulatory work, and blockchain, to name a few.
CA: What type of work might you get exposure to at a mid-sized firm? How does the level of responsibility differ to bigger firms?
Robert Gayda: The work at a mid-size firm at the junior level is typically broader in scope than at bigger firms. Large deals at big firms will generally be staffed with many associates, and each associate will likely work on discrete issues. At a mid-size firm, a deal would typically be staffed with only one or two associates—so those associates are more likely to see the full spectrum of issues on a given deal. This broader exposure heightens the level of responsibility.
RK: There are fewer bodies at a mid-sized firm. Subsequently, we invest more in training our talent. Associates get called on to contribute earlier and at a higher level than they would in larger groups.
CS: When associates work in a mid-sized firm such as Seward & Kissel, with fewer attorneys per practice group, matters are staffed more leanly. This gives associates the opportunity to take on more meaningful work early in their careers. For instance, associates in a corporate group do not just get stuck doing research memos or conducting due diligence. Instead, they get to participate in conferences, negotiations, drafting sessions, closings, etc., from the start and interact with clients and adversaries.
In other departments, such as litigation, they may work on drafting briefs, attending depositions and trials, etc. Feedback is given in real-time which allows the associates to hone their skills quickly and progress faster. Unlike other firms, we do not have artificial constraints that a junior associate must report to a mid-level associate who reports to a senior associate, etc. Oftentimes junior and mid-level associates are working directly with partners and may even take the lead on certain matters.
CA: What do the typical working hours look like?
NI: There are no “typical” hours, because clients and deal timing largely dictate our deadlines. That said, partners do care about associates’ well-being and take it into consideration when assigning projects. There’s a sincere belief here that a healthy balance between personal and professional lives allow individuals to perform their best, making us stronger as a firm in every sense.
KC: The typical working hours are difficult to predict. They are driven by the needs of our clients and vary depending on the timelines for various projects. However, we want all of our associates to have a good work-life balance and adjust staffing on projects to achieve that.
CA: How do macroeconomic events affect mid-sized firms differently to large firms? What does the firm to do navigate and adapt to the changing political and economic landscapes?
CS: By having offices in New York and D.C. and focusing on U.S. legal matters, we are not as exposed to adverse global events that might negatively impact larger firms with offices around the globe. That said, we are still able to work on sophisticated cross-border matters through our strong network of local counsel all over the world. In addition, we have several diverse practice areas—some that correlate with larger economic cycles and others that don’t. With a number of these areas, such as investment management and maritime, we provide “cradle to grave” services. There is always work for us to do for our clients (e.g., general corporate work, capital markets, financing, M&A, litigation, bankruptcy and restructuring, etc.) depending on what part of the economic cycle they are in at the time.
David Baron: Macroeconomic events—whether it’s inflation, regulatory shifts, or labor market disruptions—often require agility in response. Mid-sized firms can pivot quickly, tailor our services to client needs, and make strategic decisions without layers of bureaucracy. That agility translates into real opportunities to showcase our commercial wherewithal and our ability to manage crises, deepening our status as a trusted advisor and providing our associates with real-time, hands-on, and challenging experiences.
CA: How much of the firm’s work is international in scope? When you do have cross-border work, how do you coordinate with work in overseas jurisdictions?
KN: A significant portion of our work in the Investment Management Group is international in scope, particularly as we advise private equity, credit, venture, and hedge fund sponsors on structuring vehicles that accommodate both U.S. and non-U.S. investors. This often involves offshore jurisdictions and requires careful coordination with local legal and regulatory frameworks. To manage this effectively, we maintain strong, reciprocal relationships with leading foreign law firms. These collaborations allow us to deliver seamless, cross-border service while ensuring that our clients receive jurisdiction-specific guidance from top-tier advisors.
ATS: About 50% of my work is international in scope. Often, the hardest part to coordinate is time zones. My European clients are four to six hours ahead, and my Asian clients are 12 to 13 hours ahead, so it can be a real challenge managing schedules. On the legal side, we maintain close relations with law firms in major jurisdictions that we know to be experts in their respective practices.
CA: How did the Covid-19 pandemic affect the type of work your practice does?
DB: The COVID-19 pandemic significantly reshaped the landscape of employment law. At the height of the crisis, much of my work focused on helping employers navigate emergency legislation—like the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (FFCRA), CARES Act provisions, and evolving OSHA and CDC guidance. I advised on furloughs, layoffs, remote work policies, and return-to-work protocols. As the pandemic progressed, the focus shifted to vaccine mandates, accommodations under the ADA, and hybrid workplace compliance. Even now, we're seeing long-term impacts in areas like wage and hour compliance for remote workers, mental health accommodations, and increased scrutiny around workplace safety and flexibility. The pandemic didn’t just change the volume of work—it fundamentally changed the nature of the questions clients are asking.
RG: Restructuring, and specifically bankruptcy, has been slow since around mid-2021. After the market stabilized—thanks mainly to government aid provided in response to the impact of COVID-19—an abundance of liquidity from the government or the private market has kept many companies afloat. Many of which would have filed for bankruptcy or required a significant restructuring. The gradual reopening and return to normalcy—or at least the “new normal”—has also helped to alleviate pressures on businesses. However, there are some issues on the horizon that may make it more difficult for struggling companies to find a lifeline therefore causing an uptick in restructuring activity. It is possible that the lull we have seen in restructuring as a result of the government’s response to COVID-19 may come to an end.
CA: What approach does the firm take to training its junior associates/mid-level associates?
NI: Seward & Kissel uses a combination of formal and informal training. Last year, the firm had more than 60 internal courses on substantive topics. However, most training takes place “on-the-job.” Associates get a level of responsibility early on, which requires them to learn.
ATS: The firm’s culture is for associates to learn as they work alongside the partners and take on responsibility early and often. Because our work is specialized and sophisticated, it takes training and supervision to get our associates up to speed. We take training very seriously, because without it our associates cannot progress and the firm’s success depends on that.
CS: One of the most important responsibilities of our partners and senior attorneys is to work with our associates and enable them to develop the skills necessary to successfully engage in the day-to-day practice of law and to hone their development in their areas of expertise. These goals are attained through selection of assignments; working on entire matters from beginning to end; participating in negotiations and meetings with clients and adversaries—rather than just working on distinct parts of transactions or litigations; project-by-project review; and constructive feedback. Formal performance reviews are also conducted with all associates. In addition, lawyers in each practice group routinely discuss current developments and matters in progress. On-the-job training is supplemented with internal seminars and training programs, as well as encouraging attendance at programs outside of the firm. In addition, we routinely send our associates to industry conferences and events.
CA: What does the career progression look like at Seward & Kissel? Where could a junior associate be in five years’ time?
KN: We don’t put any artificial constraints on how quickly an associate can progress. With our lean staffing, partners and senior associates are eager for more junior associates to accept significant responsibility for managing a client relationship. At the same time, we make sure that junior associates who need more training receive it so they are set up for success. Practically speaking, a quickly progressing fifth-year associate is likely to first-chair trials or lead transactions and have regular client contact on their matters and responsibility for managing the client relationship, as well as supervising junior associates.
RG: Seward & Kissel is unique in that many of our partners have spent their entire legal career here, which speaks volumes about the firm’s legal practice and culture. After five years, a junior associate should expect to be taking the lead on complex transactions, supervising junior associates, and reporting directly to the partner in charge while being client facing on the majority of the client interactions.
CA: How should an applicant approach an interview for a firm like Seward & Kissel? What are you looking for from potential associates?
KN: When we interview candidates, we’re asking ourselves whether this person could be a member of the next generation of lawyers to lead the firm. At a minimum that requires an excellent academic record. However, we also look at a candidate’s resume as a whole in an effort to determine whether this person might have the maturity and ability to handle the responsibility that the firm delegates to its junior attorneys. Additionally, we like to see candidates who have researched the firm and have genuine reasons for wanting to work at Seward & Kissel.
RG: When interviewing an associate, I am looking for someone that is excited about what they do and is willing to take responsibility and ownership of a situation. As I am sure many have mentioned, mid-sized firms like Seward & Kissel present associates with the opportunity to do substantive work at an early stage in their careers. Junior associates most certainly will have the opportunity to roll up their sleeves and get involved. When given that chance, I want to see an associate take advantage of that and attack the situation with enthusiasm. Moreover, I want somebody that takes ownership—they want to solve larger case problems and not simply do the work allotted to them to get it off their desk.
