Diversity Benchmarking Study Racial/ Ethnic Minority Specific Findings

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Load more

Diversity Benchmarking Study Racial/ Ethnic Minority Specific Findings Sponsored by: The Office for Diversity The Committee to Enhance Diversity in the Profession Deloitte © 2005 by the Association of the Bar of the City of New York For full report or further information, please contact Meredith Moore, Director of the Office for Diversity, at 212-382-6689 or [email protected]. The New York City Bar Association 42 West 44th Street, New York, NY 10036 www.nycbar.org Diversity Signatory Law Firm Benchmarking Report RACIAL/ETHNIC MINORITIES Overall, New York City signatory firms have a greater percentage of minorities than the legal profession nationally—15.2 percent of the nearly 17,000 attorneys at signatory firms are racial/ethnic minorities compared to 10.8 percent in the profession as a whole (ABA, Statistics about Minorities in the Profession from the Census, 2000). Much of this diversity is represented in the associate ranks, particularly in the most recent classes hired. Minorities represent over one-fifth of associates, but continue to comprise smaller percentages of special counsel and partnership positions (5.5% and 4.7% respectively). Representation by Level by Whites and Minorities in Signatory Law Firms, as of March 2004 94.5% 95.3% 84.8% 78.9% White Minorities 15.2% 21.1% 5.5% 4.7% All Associates=10,582 Special Partner=4,791 Attorneys=16,604 Counsel=1,231 Drilling down further, the largest percentage of racial/ethnic minorities is Asian/Pacific Islanders, particularly when examining the associate pool. The percentage of Asian/Pacific Islander associates is more than double the percentage of Black/African-Americans (12% compared to 5%). Associates (10,582) by Race/Ethnicity in Signatory Law Firms, as of March 2004 11.8% 5.1% 3.6% 0.3% 0.4% Am. Ind/Alsk. As. & Pac. Isl. Black Hispanic Multi-racial Comparing the remaining associates from the classes of 1996 and 2003 reveals a greater representation of many minority groups among incoming associates than is present in the senior associate, or pre-partner pool. © Association of the Bar of the City of New York 2 Diversity Signatory Law Firm Benchmarking Report Race/Ethnicity of Current Associates Remaining at Firm by Class Year, as of March 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 & Earlier Am. 0.7% 0.3% 0.1% 0.1% 0.3% 0.2% 0.3% 0.2% 0.3% Ind./Alsk. As. & Pac. Isl. 14.9% 13.5% 13.4% 13.6% 13.0% 11.3% 11.9% 11.8% 7.3% Black 6.8% 5.7% 6.3% 5.8% 3.5% 4.6% 3.9% 4.2% 3.1% Hispanic 3.9% 4.1% 3.7% 3.8% 3.6% 3.4% 2.4% 2.9% 2.9% Multi-Racial 0.6% 0.3% 0.2% 0.5% 0.6% 0.1% 0.3% 0.0% 0.3% This data does not distinguish between the loss of minority associates through attrition, the composition of lateral associate hires, an increased focus on diversity recruiting, or a more diverse law school graduate pool. The differential between Asian-Americans and other racial groups is much less at the partnership and special counsel levels than for associates. In part, this is due to the low percentages of minority partners and special counsel overall. Only 1.9 percent of partners are Asian-American compared to 1.4 percent Hispanic and 1.2 percent Black. Special Counsel & Partners by Race/Ethnicity in Signatory Law Firms, as of March 2004 2.8% 1.9% 1.6% 1.4% 1.1% 1.2% 0.0% 0.0%0.1% 0.0% Special Counsel=1,231 Partner=4,791 Am. Ind/Alsk. As. & Pac. Isl. Black Hispanic Multi-racial © Association of the Bar of the City of New York 3 Diversity Signatory Law Firm Benchmarking Report New Partner Promotions and Lateral Hires. Seven percent of new promotions to partner as of March 2004 were racial/ethnic minorities. Of the 20 minority new promotes to partner, 8 were Asian/Pacific Islander and 8 were Black/African Americans. New Promotes and Lateral Hires to Partner by Race/Ethnicity, as of March 2004 New Lateral Hires Promotions Am. Ind./Alsk. 0 0 As. & Pac. Isl. 8 4 Black 8 6 Hispanic 3 2 Multi-Racial 1 0 Total Minorities 20 12 Comparing the members of the class of 1996 remaining, who could be considered part of the pre-partner pool, with the new promotes, this data suggests that the available diversity is not being tapped. While 19 percent of the remaining class of 1996 are racial/ethnic minorities, they represent only 7 percent of new promotes to partner. Looked at another way, 20 of the 105 racial/ethnic minorities in the class of 1996 were made partner (19.0%), compared to 264 of the 445 whites in that class (59.3%)1. Signatory firms should explore whether this discrepancy signals bias in the partnership decision-making process, lack of honest feedback on partnership prospects, or clustering in practice areas with fewer avenues for partnership. In any of these cases, this necessitates intervention by firm leadership. 1 For additional data on class years, please refer to the prior Associate section on page 8. Additional new promotion to partner data can be found in the Partnership section on page 10. © Association of the Bar of the City of New York 4 Diversity Signatory Law Firm Benchmarking Report METHODOLOGY This data is based on the responses of 82 law firm signatories to the New York City Bar’s Statement of Diversity Principles, as of November 2004. This represents a 95 percent response rate. Each individual firm’s response to the web-based survey is treated as anonymous and confidential. This data is a snapshot of participating firms between January – March 2004 to serve as a baseline for measuring progress. This data represents only the New York City area offices of the signatory firms. For comparison purposes, we utilized the demographic categories and terminology employed by the National Association of Law Placement (NALP). We collected data on Women, Men, American Indian, Asian- American/Pacific-Islanders, Black, Hispanic, Multi-racial, Openly Gay, and Disabilities. These categories are not mutually exclusive, e.g., the women category includes both white women and women of color. In future studies, we will explore collecting data by race and gender enabling us to compare white men, white women, men of color, and women of color. We gathered data on the current associate pool by class year, total associate composition, special counsel/senior attorney positions, partners, new partner promotes and lateral hires, and those on formal full-time and part-time flexible work arrangements by level. Contributors to the Office for Diversity The Association wishes to acknowledge with gratitude the contributions of the following law firms, corporations and organizations whose generosity helped fund our Office for Diversity, which supports the participating firms and corporations in their efforts to promote diversity. Credit Suisse First Boston Debevoise & Plimpton LLP Deloitte Dewey Ballantine LLP Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP LexisNexis Milbank Tweed Hadley & McCloy LLP Minority Corporate Counsel Association Morgan Stanley Viacom Inc. Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP © Association of the Bar of the City of New York 5 Diversity Signatory Law Firm Benchmarking Report Signatories to the Statement of Diversity Principles Allen & Overy Fragomen, Del Rey, Bernsen Morrison & Foerster LLP Altria Group Inc. & Loewy P.C. Moses & Singer LLP American Express Company Freshfields Bruckhaus New York Life Anderson Kill & Olick, P.C. Deringer LLP Insurance Co. Arent Fox PLLC Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Nixon Peabody LLP Norris Jacobson LLP Arnold & Porter McLaughlin & Marcus PA Fulbright & Jaworski LLP Baker & Hostetler LLP General Electric Company O’Melveny & Myers LLP Bingham McCutchen LLP Gibbons, Del Deo, Dolan, Orrick, Herrington Brown Raysman Millstein Griffinger & Vecchione & Sutcliffe LLP Felder & Steiner LLP Gibson Dunn & Crutcher LLP Patterson, Belknap, Bryan Cave LLP Hawkins Delafield & Wood Webb & Tyler LLP Cadwalader, Wickersham & LLP Paul, Hastings, Janofsky Taft LLP Heidell, Pittoni, Murphy & & Walker LLP Cahill Gordon Bach LLP Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, & Reindel LLP Heller Ehrman White & Wharton & Garrison LLP Carter Ledyard McAuliffe LLP PepsiCo. Inc. & Milburn LLP Hogan & Hartson LLP Pillsbury Winthrop LLP Holland & Knight LLP Chadbourne & Parke LLP Pitney Hardin LLP Honeywell International Cleary, Gottlieb, PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP Hughes Hubbard & Reed LLP Steen & Hamilton Hunton & Williams Proskauer Rose LLP Clifford Chance U.S. LLP Jenkens & Gilchrist Parker Salans Conway Farrell Chapin LLP Schoeman Updike & Curtin & Kelly J.P. Morgan Chase Kaufman LLP Coudert Brothers LLP Kaye Scholer LLP Schulte Roth & Zabel LLC Covington & Burling Kelley Drye & Warren LLP Shearman & Sterling LLP Cravath, Swaine King & Spalding LLP Sidley Austin Brown & Moore LLP Kirkland & Ellis LLP & Wood LLP Credit Suisse First Boston Kirkpatrick & Lockhart LLP Simpson Thacher Davis & Gilbert LLP KMZ Rosenman & Bartlett LLP Davis Polk & Wardwell Kramer Levin Naftalis & Skadden, Arps, Slate, Frankel LLP Davis Wright Meagher & Flom LLP Latham & Watkins LLP & Tremaine LLP LeBoeuf, Lamb, Greene & Sonnenschein Nath & Debevoise & Plimpton LLP MacRae LLP Rosenthal LLP Dechert LLP Loeb & Loeb LLP Stroock & Stroock Deloitte Mayer, Brown, Rowe & Maw & Lavan LLP Dewey Ballantine LLP LLP Sullivan & Cromwell LLP Dickstein Shapiro Morin & Menaker & Herrmann LLP Thacher Proffitt & Wood LLP Oshinsky LLP Merck & Co., Inc. Thelen Reid & Priest LLP DLA Piper Rudnick Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc. Viacom Inc. Gray Cary US LLP Metropolitan Life Insurance Wachtell, Lipton, Dorsey & Whitney LLP Company Rosen & Katz Edwards & Angell LLP Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & Wasserman Grubin McCloy LLP Epstein Becker & Rogers LLP Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Green, P.C. Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP & Lerach LLP Estee Lauder Companies White & Case LLP Morgan, Lewis Fitzpatrick, Cella, Willkie Farr & Gallagher & Bockius LLP Harper & Scinto Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale Morgan Stanley and Dorr LLP © Association of the Bar of the City of New York 6 Diversity Signatory Law Firm Benchmarking Report © Association of the Bar of the City of New York 7 .
Recommended publications
  • Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg and New York City Law Department Launch Innovative Corporate / Public Service Pro Bono Initiative

    Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg and New York City Law Department Launch Innovative Corporate / Public Service Pro Bono Initiative

    NEW YORK CITY LAW DEPARTMENT OFFICE OF THE CORPORATION COUNSEL Press Release Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel Web: nyc.gov/html/law/home.html For Immediate Release MAYOR MICHAEL R. BLOOMBERG AND NEW YORK CITY LAW DEPARTMENT LAUNCH INNOVATIVE CORPORATE / PUBLIC SERVICE PRO BONO INITIATIVE MAYOR ACKNOWLEDGES PARTICIPATING FIRMS AND FIRMS THAT AIDED CORPORATION COUNSEL’S OFFICE AFTER SEPT. 11 WITH CITY HALL ENGAGEMENT Contact: Kate O’Brien Ahlers, Communications Director, (212) 788-0400, [email protected] New York, May 17, 2002 -- The New York City Law Department has joined with more than 30 leading law firms to form a unique public service initiative, the “Corporation Counsel Public Service Program,” that embraces Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg’s corporate/public service ideal while tackling the need for innovative solutions to the City’s budget crisis. The Mayor acknowledged firms participating in this program -- along with firms that aided the Corporation Counsel’s office after Sept. 11 -- with a City Hall engagement this morning. At the event, Chadbourne & Parke was honored for providing housing to over 100 City lawyers and staff for almost eight months, with Mayor Bloomberg proclaiming it “Chadbourne and Parke Day.” The Mayor also acknowledged several other law firms for the assistance they provided to the Corporation Counsel’s office after Sept. 11. Mayor Bloomberg’s engagement highlighted the two distinct elements of recent legal public service assistance offered to the New York City Law Department. The first initiative, the Corporation Counsel Public Service Program, is enabling New York City to better manage its mounting legal caseload while offering attorneys at major law firms a unique chance to participate in public service opportunities and bolster their legal and trial experience.
  • Beazley Brief Update Risk Management Insights for Law Firms from Beazley

    Beazley Brief Update Risk Management Insights for Law Firms from Beazley

    Beazley Brief Update Risk management insights for law firms from Beazley Finishing Some “Unfinished Business”— California And In the February 2012 and July 2012 issues of the Beazley Brief, we reported on how the “unfinished business” doctrine New York Courts Reject - based on the California Court of Appeals decision in Jewel v. Boxer (156 Cal. App. 3d 171 (1984) - had spawned a rash of “Unfinished Business” Claims suits by dissolving law firms against departing partners and their new firms for taking the old firm’s “unfinished business,” Involving Dissolved Law Firms or pending client matters, with them to their new firms. By Kevin S. Rosen, Christopher Chorba, and Peter Bach-y-Rita Fortunately, the tide has begun to turn against this troubling - Gibson Dunn & Crutcher LLP trend. Recent decisions by courts in California and New York have determined that dissolved law firms do not have a One of the most troubling trends in recent years has been the property interest in pending hourly unfinished business rise in trustee litigation following the dissolution of several matters. This Beazley Brief Update addresses these major international law firms. Bankruptcy trustees have significant rulings. brought claims to recover profits on “unfinished business” on behalf of defunct firms, asserting an entitlement to fees We are again pleased that Gibson Dunn & Crutcher partners earned on matters handled by new firms that hired partners of Kevin S. Rosen and Christopher Chorba and associate Peter the dissolved firm. In these cases, trustees and debtors of the Bach-y-Rita have graciously agreed to prepare this update. dissolved firms have sued both the former partners and their Kevin is in the firm’s Los Angeles office and chair of the firm’s new firms, relying on the California Court of Appeal decision Law Firm Defense Practice Group.
  • Legal Malpractice

    Legal Malpractice

    Legal Malpractice Professional Liability Claims, Litigation Strategies, and Attorney Disciplinary Procedures Friday, March 24, 2017 Friday, March 10, 2017 New York City | Live & Webcast Westchester | Live Program Friday, March 24, 2017 Friday, March 17, 2017 Albany | Live Program Rochester | Live Program Friday, March 31, 2017 Long Island | Live Program 4.0 MCLE Credits 3.0 Ethics | 1.0 Law Practice Management Interactive Video Conference Formats are approved for MCLE Credit for all attorneys, including newly admitted. www.nysba.org/LegalMalpractice2017Materials Sponsored by the Law Practice Management Committee, the Torts, Insurance & Compensation Law Section and the Trial Lawyers Section of the New York State Bar Association. This program is offered for educational purposes. The views and opinions of the faculty expressed during this program are those of the presenters and authors of the materials. Further, the statements made by the faculty during this program do not constitute legal advice. Copyright © 2017 All Rights Reserved New York State Bar Association Program Description Lawsuits against lawyers arising from errors and/or omissions in the performance of legal services are on the rise. It is now an integral part of a law firm’s business practice to evaluate its legal risk and malpractice insurance needs. This program is designed to educate attorneys on how to prosecute and/or defend a legal malpractice action. In addition, this program will educate attorneys about their legal malpractice exposures, what they should do in the event that a lawsuit is filed against them, and what they should do when situations arise that indicate that a legal malpractice claim is likely.
  • When Law Firms Go Bankrupt — What Secured Lenders Can Learn from the Dewey Bankruptcy

    When Law Firms Go Bankrupt — What Secured Lenders Can Learn from the Dewey Bankruptcy

    PLACE PDF @ 88% REPRINTED FROM THE NOV/DEC 2012 ISSUE, VOL. 10, NO. 8 BANKRUPTCY UPDATE When Law Firms Go Bankrupt — What Secured Lenders Can Learn From the Dewey Bankruptcy BY JEFFREY A. WURST, ESQ When law firm Dewey & LeBoeuf filed for Chapter 11 protection, it was obligated to its secured creditors, among many others, led by JP Morgan on a $75 million line of credit facility. Jeffrey Wurst explains what led to Dewey’s collapse and offers advice regarding key indicators of a potential creditor’s fiscal irresponsibility. ictims of bankruptcy come in many forms. Dewey filed for bankruptcy in the U.S. Bankruptcy They include the debtors themselves, as well Court for the Southern District of New York. Many theo- V as their secured and unsecured creditors. When ries abound as to the causes of Dewey’s collapse, but, law firms fall into bankruptcy, the secured lenders are essentially, the crux appears to be that Dewey guaran- often among the hardest hit. Typically, these secured teed an unsustainable amount of compensation to both lenders take security interests in all assets of the law newly acquired and longstanding partners. Hoping to firm when funding operations. The assets with the generate enormous fees off these highly compensated most value tend to be the cash and cash equivalents partners, Dewey subsequently took on debt to fund the and the accounts receivable. The problem with many failing business. However, the economic impact of the recent law firm bankruptcies is that cash on hand is recession forced Dewey to consolidate its debt. Further JEFFREY A.
  • Law School Record, Vol. 48, No. 1 (Fall 2001) Law School Record Editors

    Law School Record, Vol. 48, No. 1 (Fall 2001) Law School Record Editors

    University of Chicago Law School Chicago Unbound The nivU ersity of Chicago Law School Record Law School Publications Fall 9-1-2001 Law School Record, vol. 48, no. 1 (Fall 2001) Law School Record Editors Follow this and additional works at: http://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/lawschoolrecord Recommended Citation Law School Record Editors, "Law School Record, vol. 48, no. 1 (Fall 2001)" (2001). The University of Chicago Law School Record. Book 85. http://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/lawschoolrecord/85 This Book is brought to you for free and open access by the Law School Publications at Chicago Unbound. It has been accepted for inclusion in The University of Chicago Law School Record by an authorized administrator of Chicago Unbound. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE U N V E R S T Y 0 F R E c o R D Fall 2001 The University of Chicago Law School Saul Levmore Dean and William B. Graham Professor of Law Jonathan S. Stern Associate Dean for External Affairs Editors Deborah Franczek, '71 2 Kyle Holtan Kathy Schichtel Senior Writer Gerald de Jaager Contributing Writers and Editors Richard Badger, '68; Douglas Baird; Ellen Cosgrove, '91; Nichole Crist; Roberta Dempsey; Diane Downs; Richard Epstein; Marsha Ferziger, '95; Kay Kersch Kirkpatrick; Abner Mikva, '51; Martha Nussbaum; Peter Schuler Class Correspondents Affable Alumni 38 6 Design and Production VisuaLingo Fran Gregory Chief Photographer Michelle Litvin Supporting Photographers Cheri Eisenberg Bruce Powell Publisher The University of Chicago Law School Office of External Affairs ibc 1111 East 60th Street Chicago, Illinois 60637 Telephone: 773-702-9486 Facsimile: 773-702-0356 Email: [email protected] Web site: www.law.uchicago.edu The University of Chicago Law School Record (lSSN 0529-097X) is published for alumni, faculty, and friends of the Law School.
  • The New Yorker

    The New Yorker

    A NNALS OF LAW THE COLLAPSE How a top legalfirm destroyed itse(f BY JAMES B. STEWART n an April morning in Manhattan A group of Dewey & LeBoeuf LLP part­ in his briefcase, and walked to the eleva­ last year, Steven Davis, the former ners has asked the New York district attor­ tor. He never returned. O ney to bring c(iminal charges against the chairman ofthe law firm ofD ewey & Le­ chairman of the totrering firm, which could A month later, on May 28, 2012, Boeuf, reached for his ringing cell phone. dose its doors as early as next week, a source Dewey & LeBoeuf.filed for bankruptcy. He was sitting in the back seat of a taxi, familiar with the matter said Thursday. The Times called it the largest law-firm The source told Law360 that an un­ on the way downtown to renew his pass­ disclosed number of partners from Dewey collapse in United States history. The port. Dewey & LeBoeuf, which was often asked the New York County district attorney firm embodied a business strategy that referred to in the press as a global "super to charge the chairman, Steven H. Davis, has begun to supplant the traditional part­ with embezzlement, wire fraud, mail fraud finn," was largely his creation. In 2007, he and other criminal activity. nership values of loyalty and collegiality had engineered the merger ofa profitable with an insistence upon expansion: by but staid midsized specialty firm- Le­ Davis immediately returned to his merging with another firm (and a Boeuf, Lamb, Greene &MacRae-with office, on the forty-third floor of a sky­ different culture) or by offering unwieldy a less profitable but much better- known scraper on Sixth Avenue near Fifty-sec­ financial packages to lure partners from firm, Dewey Ballantine.
  • Coudert Brothers

    Coudert Brothers

    north america Coudert Brothers LOS ANGELES, NEW YORK, PALO ALTO, SAN FRANCISCO, WASHINGTON llp europe ATTORNEYS AT LAW ANTWERP, BERLIN, BRUSSELS, FRANKFURT, GHENT, LONDON, MILAN, MOSCOW, MUNICH, PARIS, 1114 AVENUE OF THE AMERICAS ROME, STOCKHOLM, NEW YORK, NY 10036-7703 ST. PETERSBURG TEL: (212) 626-4400 asia/pacific FAX: (212) 626-4120 ALMATY, BANGKOK, BEIJING, HONG KONG, JAKARTA, SINGAPORE, WWW.COUDERT.COM SYDNEY, TOKYO [email protected] associated offices BUDAPEST, MEXICO CITY, PRAGUE, SHANGHAI September 15, 2004 Jonathan A. Katz, Secretary Securities and Exchange Commission 450 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20549-0609 [email protected] Re: Registration Under the Advisers Act of Certain Hedge Fund Advisers -- Proposed Rule S7-30-04 Dear Mr. Katz: We represent a wide range of managers and sponsors of investment funds, including both investment companies registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended, and private investment funds operating under the exemption under either Section 3(c)(1) or Section 3(c)(7) of the Investment Company Act, and including substantial numbers of investment advisers based both within and outside the United States. We also represent a number of insurance companies, pension funds and other sophisticated investors, both U.S. and non-U.S., that invest in private investment funds. As a general preliminary comment, we are very concerned that the additional administrative and compliance burdens and costs imposed upon private fund managers required to register under the proposed new rule will,
  • CLIENTS: PARTIAL LIST 115-87 Owners Corporation '21' Club Inc

    CLIENTS: PARTIAL LIST 115-87 Owners Corporation '21' Club Inc

    CLIENTS: PARTIAL LIST 115-87 Owners Corporation '21' Club Inc. Aby Kalimian Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP Alan Fox, Esq. Alfa Development Management, LLC Alice Alexiou Alliance for Downtown New York Alston & Bird, LLP Alterman & Boop, LLP American Broadcasting Companies, Inc. American Telephone & Telegraph Co. Amerimar Enterprises, Inc. Arent Fox Kintner Plotkin & Kahn, PLLC Arlen Realty & Development Corporation Arnold S. Penner Asher Dann Association of the Bar of New York Atco Properties & Management, Inc. Atlan Management Corporation Bachner, Tally, Polevoy & Misher Backenroth, Frankel & Krinsky, LLP Balber Pickard Battisoni Baldwin & Haspel, LLC Bally Total Fitness Banif Mortgage Barnard Charles Real Estate Bernard Spitzer, P.E. Bass Real Estate Battery Park City Authority Battle Fowler Beatie and Osborn LLP Becker Ross Stone DeStefano & Klein Ben Heller Blank Rome LLP BLDG Management Company, Inc. Blesso Properties Bonjour Capital Boston Properties Boulanger, Hicks & Churchill Boys Town Jerusalem Fndtn America, Inc. Brack Capital Real Estate-USA Brandt, Steinberg & Lewis LLP Bridge Business & Property Brokers, Inc. Brill & Meisel Brown & Wood Brown, Raysman & Millstein Bryan Cave, LLP Buckingham Hotel CLIENTS: PARTIAL LIST (CONTINUED) Buckingham Real Estate C. Lawrence Paine, LLC C.H. Martin Calvary Baptist Church Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Carol Management Company Carter, Ledyard & Milburn LLP CBS, Inc. Center for Jewish History Chatwal Hotels & Restaurants, Inc. Children’s Aid Society Children's Oncology Society of New York CIGNA Real Estate Investors Citi Urban Management Corporation City Center Real Estate, Inc. City of New Rochelle Clarendon Management Corporation Club Quarters Coach, Inc. Coalition for the Homeless Cohen Brothers Realty Corporation Cohen Hennessey Bienstock & Rabin P.C. Cohen Tauber Spievack & Wagner, P.C.
  • The Jewish Law Firm: Past and Present

    The Jewish Law Firm: Past and Present

    University of Denver Digital Commons @ DU Sturm College of Law: Faculty Scholarship University of Denver Sturm College of Law 2014 The Jewish Law Firm: Past and Present Eli Wald Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.du.edu/law_facpub Part of the Organizations Law Commons Recommended Citation HLS Center on the Legal Profession Research Paper No. 2015-9 This Paper is brought to you for free and open access by the University of Denver Sturm College of Law at Digital Commons @ DU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Sturm College of Law: Faculty Scholarship by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ DU. For more information, please contact [email protected],dig- [email protected]. The Jewish Law Firm: Past and Present Publication Statement Copyright held by the author. User is responsible for all copyright compliance. This paper is available at Digital Commons @ DU: https://digitalcommons.du.edu/law_facpub/28 THE JEWISH LAW FIRM: PAST AND PRESENT Eli Wald1 I. Introduction The rise and growth of large Jewish law firms in New York City during the second half of the twentieth century is nothing short of an astounding success story. 2 As late as 1950, there was not a single large Jewish law firm in town. By the mid-1960s, six of the largest twenty law firms were Jewish, and by 1980, four of the largest ten law firms were Jewish firms.3 Moreover, the accomplishment of these Jewish firms is especially striking because, while the traditional large White Anglo-Saxon Protestant (“WASP”) law firms also grew at a fast rate during this period, the Jewish firms grew twice as fast, and they did so in spite of explicit discrimination.
  • Tier 1 Law Firms Tier 2 Law Firms

    Tier 1 Law Firms Tier 2 Law Firms

    U.S. News & World Report – Best Lawyers in America 2011-12 listed more than 160 law firms in its ranking of Intellectual Property Litigation Firms. Edwards Wildman Palmer LLP is proud to have been ranked a Tier 1 Firm. The following lists all firms named, and the Tier under which each is listed. TIER 1 LAW FIRMS Covington & Burling LLP Winston & Strawn LLP Fenwick & West LLP Alston + Bird LLP Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP Chaz De La Garza & Assoc., LLC Fish & Richardson P.C. Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLP Foley & Lardner LLP Debevoise & Plimpton LLP K&L Gates LLP DLA Piper LLP Kenyon & Kenyon LLP Edwards Wildman Palmer LLP McDermott Will & Emery LLP Greenberg Traurig LLP Morrison & Foerster LLP Holland & Knight, LLP Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP Howrey LLP Perkins Coie LLP Jones Day Sidley Austin LLP Kirkland & Ellis LLP Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP Squire, Sanders & Dempsey, L.L.P. Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP Sullivan & Cromwell LLP Susman Godfrey LLP WilmerHale Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP TIER 2 LAW FIRMS Akerman Senterfitt LLP Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP Bingham McCutchen LLP Panitch Schwarze Belisario & Nadel LLP Cowan Liebowitz & Latman, P.C. Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP Proskauer Rose LLP Davis Wright Tremaine LLP Ropes & Gray LLP Dechert LLP Vinson & Elkins LLP Faegre & Benson LLP Woodcock Washburn LLP Fitzpatrick, Cella, Harper & Scinto Abelman Frayne & Schwab Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP Goodwin Procter LLP Allen, Dyer, Doppelt, Milbrath & Gilchrist, P.A. Holland & Hart LLP Arnold & Porter LLP Kaye Scholer LLP Baker & McKenzie LLP Keker & Van Nest LLP Baker Botts L.L.P.
  • Law Firms and Associate Careers: Tournament Theory Versus the Production-Imperative Model

    Law Firms and Associate Careers: Tournament Theory Versus the Production-Imperative Model

    Law Firms and Associate Careers: Tournament Theory Versus the Production-Imperative Model Kevin A. Kordana Pray look better, Sir, quoth Sancho; those things yonder are no Giants, but Wind-mills .... The career of an associate in a large law firm has been portrayed in stark Darwinian terms: Only the fittest survive the "tournament" that is established by the firm's partners. Such is the tale told by Marc Galanter and Thomas Palay in Tournament of Lawyers: The Transformation of the Big Law Firm. This "tournament theory" explanation for the structure of large law firms has been widely adopted, and has received surprisingly little criticism.' 1. MIGUEL DE CERVANTES, DON QUIXOTE DE LA MANCHA 44 (Peter Motteux trans.. revised by John Ozell, 1950) (1605). The Spanish text reads: Mire vuestra merced--respondi6 Sancho-quc aquellos que allf se parecen no son gigantes, sino molinos de viento.. .- I MIGUEL DE CERVANTES. DON QUUOTE DE LA MANCHA 198-99 (Angel Basanta ed., 1985) (1605). 2. MARC GALANTER & THOMAS PALAY, TOURNAMENT OF LAWYERS: THE TRANSFORMAliON OF "IE BIG LAW FIRM (1991) [hereinafter GALANTER & PALAY, TOURNAMIENT]; see also Marc Galanter & Thomas M. Palay, Why the Big Get Bigger: The Promotion-to-PartnerTournament and the Growth of Large Law Firms, 76 VA. L. REV. 747 (1990) [hereinafter Galanter & Palay. Big Get Bigger). Compare GAI.ANTER' & PALAY, TOURNAMENT, supra, at 100 ("IThe firm holds a tournament in which all the associates in a particular 'entering class' compete and the firm awards the prize of partnership to the top ct percent of the contestants.") with CHARLES DARWIN, ON THE ORIGIN OF SPECIES 170 (facsimile of Istd.
  • Corporate Counsel Institute

    Corporate Counsel Institute

    GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY LAW CENTER CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION in cooperation with THE AMERICAN CORPORATE COUNSEL ASSOCIATION and THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CORPORATE SECRETARIES present the 7th Annual Corporate Counsel Institute March 13-14, 2003 • Washington, DC Georgetown, ACCA and ASCS offer you a 11.0 CLE credits, of which 2 will apply to legal ethics corporate counsel program with an unparalleled At the Seventh Annual Corporate Counsel Institute, you will: faculty. This Institute has become the premier event for corporate counsel because it offers you ● Receive an up-to-the-minute ● Receive a CEO perspective on practical, real-world review of the administration’s working with the law department solutions to your antitrust priorities from the from Knoll, Inc.’s Burt Staniar toughest problems. Chairman of the Federal Trade ● Explore the toughest problems Given the events of Commission and a former Assistant facing general counsel - and the this past year, Attorney General for the Antitrust ways to solve them - during the you cannot Division of the Department of Justice popular General Counsel afford to ● Review SEC priorities with Roundtable moderated by Tyco miss this Commissioner Harvey Goldschmid General Counsel Bill Lytton timely and analyze the new corporate ● Obtain a new perspective on the event! compliance regulations and the work of the Supreme Court from Commission’s enforcement priorities CBS News’ Bob Schieffer, our with the heads of the Divisions of luncheon speaker Enforcement and Corporation Finance ● Assess some of the pressing