Warning Signs Three Decades of Data Reveal How Big Law’S Greatest Failures Unfolded, and What We Can Learn from Them

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Load more

Illustration by Daniel Liévano WARNING SIGNS THREE DECADES OF DATA REVEAL HOW BIG LAW’S GREATEST FAILURES UNFOLDED, AND WHAT WE CAN LEARN FROM THEM. BY LIZZY MCLELLAN AND GINA PASSARELLA WHEN LECLAIRRYAN REACHED THE point of no return in August, finally to a collabo- acknowledging its plans to dissolve af- ration that was ter months spent bleeding partners, it billed as the firm’s sav- came into focus that the firm’s aggres- ior but ultimately became sive expansion had actually contributed yet another source of debt. And to its demise. those debts don’t include capital con- The firm had promised partners tributions as high as $100,000 per The de- more than they were worth and signed person, collected from as many as 50 tails of LeClair- expensive leases on understaffed offices. ex-partners who now seem unlikely to Ryan’s collapse are It missed budget in 2011 for the first ever be repaid. unique, but its trajectory is far time, but not the last. When new lead- Even as the firm’s debt grew, some from it. As recently as Sedgwick in ership took over in 2016, there was talk lawyers were given bonuses to stay, 2017 and as far back as Finley Kumble of “righting the ship,” a former share- sources have said. A select few part- more than three decades ago, over- holder recalls. Any attempts to do so ners with guaranteed contracts kept ambitious law firms have ended up in were too late. enjoying a high level of compensation trouble. Nearly all were growing head By the time it closed, LeClairRy- while others took pay cuts. Even in its count and revenue in the years leading an had borrowed $15 million from a final year, the firm boasted of its plans up to their demise. But an analysis of 10 lender, nearly half of which remained to change the industry with its new, up- years of data leading up to a dozen dif- as debt in bankruptcy. It owed more dated model, dubbed “Law Firm 2.0” ferent firm collapses shows that in most than $8 million to UnitedLex, related by leadership. cases, profits per lawyer failed to keep The American Lawyer | November 2019 23 pace with the costs of expansion, leaving Failed firms all had firms overburdened by the mounting debt that helped fuel their growth. something in common, As recently as 20 years ago, the Janis Meyer says: “They had major law firm dissolutions could be counted on one hand. But in the wake of expectations that couldn’t the dot-com bubble burst, and then the be fulfilled.” Great Recession, they began to pile up. Even economic recovery couldn’t stem the tide. Growing financial and client one or more of three issues: expanding pressures forced firms to rethink their too quickly, failing to manage costs and strategic vision, and many chose growth. generally poor leadership. Some followed the wrong path. “When the money got tight, those Each failure was another chapter people who had huge practices and por- in an unfolding story, whether it was a table business left. But had there been firm dissolution or a firm welcoming stronger leadership, that might not have absorption by a larger entity as finan- happened,” says Les Corwin, a partner at cial pressures grew. Some firms grew Eisner whose practice includes law firm head count by hundreds of lawyers in bankruptcies and dissolutions. Corwin just a few years before they met their places much of the blame of law firm end. Others invested in specific prac- failures on a lack of leadership. tices, looking to become the go-to firm External factors, including a reces- for an industry or legal service niche. Janis Meyer, the former general sion, can accelerate a firm’s demise, but And a few ended up under investiga- counsel of Dewey & LeBoeuf, which typically are not at the root of its prob- tion—or worse—for questionable busi- filed for bankruptcy in 2012, describes lems. Collapsed firms “had not grown ness practices. the common thread between failed in the right ways,” says Mary K Young, But they all had something in com- firms simply: “They had expectations a consultant at Zeughauser Group who mon: a strategy developed in the best that couldn’t be fulfilled.” previously worked in the marketing de- of times that didn’t consider what the A number of consultants say law partment of Howrey, which dissolved worst of times might hold. firm failures can often be traced back to in 2011. PRELUDE TO COLLAPSE In the decade before firms closed their doors, costs often rose at an unsustainable rate, making profits harder to maintain. $1,200,000 Revenue Per Lawyer $800,000 Cost Per Lawyer $700,000 $1,000,000 $600,000 $800,000 $500,000 $400,000 $600,000 $300,000 $400,000 $200,000 $200,000 $100,000 -10 -9 -8 -7 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 -10 -9 -8 -7 -6 Years Before Collapse Years Before Collapse Data from ALM Intelligence 24 November 2019 | americanlawyer.com Before 2008, Young says, “you could that gross revenue is not a clear indica- years out from collapse—an average bury a lot of issues.” But since the tor that a firm is approaching failure. 12% jump after several years of growth Great Recession, firms have nowhere The data, available through ALM Intel- at a more modest 4% average clip. Head left to hide them. ligence, shows some unsurprising com- count growth fell to 3%, on average, in mon threads, including a drop-off in the year after that sudden increase, then GROWING REVENUE, GROWING DEBT head count and profitability in the year declined 3.5% and, ultimately, 8.2% in Bill Brandt has worked on a number of or two before a firm’s closure. Naturally, the year before firms closed their doors. law firm dissolutions, including How- mass departures are often the first pub- Revenue per lawyer at the average failed rey, Heller Ehrman (2008), Coudert lic sign that a firm is in grave danger. firm fell 2%, then 3%, in the last two Brothers (2005) and Dewey. He says What may be more surprising is that years of full operation. law firms run into trouble when they many of the dozen firms were growing Several of the 12 law firms saw no lose focus on the fundamentals—the in head count and revenue right up un- meaningful growth in profits per law- blocking and tackling, as a football til lawyers began heading for the exits. yer in the decade before their demise— coach might say. Several even saw revenue per lawyer as revenue per lawyer grew, costs per “You need to keep getting clients, climb in those years. On the surface, lawyer grew right along with it. This working for those clients, getting paid these firms appeared to be growing and was the case at Coudert Brothers, Wolf by those clients,” Brandt says. thriving, surpassing peers on the Am Block, Sedgwick and LeClairRyan, ac- Instead, firms that ultimately fail Law 200 rankings. cording to ALM Intelligence data. rush to grow rather than using an ap- But across these 12 firms, cost per In many cases, trouble was also propriate level of caution. They open lawyer kept going up, at an average brewing beyond the publicly reported accounts for clients that will never pay, rate higher than the annual growth in financial numbers. Brandt says. They fail to collect, and profits per lawyer. By the two years LeClairRyan, for instance, reported their realization rates plummet. Then, preceding collapse, the average failed gross revenue growth for 2013 and he says, they borrow from the bank to firm saw profits per lawyer decrease 2014. But according to court records, it make partner distributions, building up 5.9%, then 25.8%. All the while, costs missed budget each of those years. debt based on receivables that aren’t were still rising—1.3% and 7.1%, re- At nearly all of the failed firms, ma- likely to arrive. spectively, in the two years before col- jor debt was building. An examination of financial data for lapse, on average. Brobeck Phleger & Harrison had 12 now-shuttered law firms in the de- The biggest leap in head count for $90 million in debt when it closed in cade leading up to their collapse shows the failed firms tended to occur three 2003, The American Lawyer affiliate Bingham Brobeck Coudert Dewey Heller Ehrman Howrey Jenkens & Gilchrist LeClairRyan Sedgwick Thacher Thelen Wolf Block 1,500 Head Count 1,200 900 600 300 0 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 -10 -9 -8 -7 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 Years Before Collapse Years Before Collapse The American Lawyer | November 2019 25 “It doesn’t take a whole lot Sources describe LeClair- Ryan’s compensation system of debt to cause turbulence as opaque and overly compli- in a firm if the cultural cated, not to mention the cuts that came in the firm’s later cohesiveness isn’t there.” years. Many lawyers at the —Jay Benegal firm were aware of the guar- anteed contracts some col- leagues were granted, but their The Recorder reported at the time, in- exact terms were a closely held cluding $40 million it borrowed from secret, sources say. Citibank about a year before it dissolved. When problems become When Coudert Brothers closed in more obvious and partners 2005, it owed $23 million to its bank are caught by surprise, it only creditors, Citigroup and JPMorgan hastens a firm’s demise. Le- Chase & Co., and after paying that off gal industry consultant Brad the firm still listed $18 million in li- Hildebrandt, who has been abilities in bankruptcy, The American the trustee on at least eight Lawyer reported in 2006.
Recommended publications
  • Felix J. Kushnir Shareholder

    Felix J. Kushnir Shareholder

    Felix J. Kushnir Shareholder T 301-945-9298 F 301-230-2891 E [email protected] Felix Kushnir is a strategic business lawyer and advisor who represents private equity, venture capital and corporate clients in connection with mergers, acquisitions, dispositions, financings, technology transactions and joint ventures, as well as other transactional and securities matters. In 2019 and 2020, Felix advised clients in 26 M&A transactions representing over $980 million of enterprise value. Delivering more than just legal advice, Felix regularly provides introductions and guidance on partnerships and day to day business matters. As a result, he builds close relationships with his clients and is deeply involved in their businesses. In addition to mergers and acquisitions, Felix advises his clients in connection with venture capital financings, securities offerings, debt financings, recapitalizations and other strategic transactions, and he also serves as outside general counsel to industrial, government contracting, technology and emerging growth clients. One of his clients recently commented on his experience working with Felix, “Felix’s responsiveness and quick turnaround for our sensitive matter allowed us to accomplish our goals sooner than we expected and with a great result.” -client name withheld for confidentiality "We went into a sizeable M&A transaction knowing a whole lotta nothin’. Well, that’s not entirely true – we knew the legal work and negotiations were going to be complicated, labor-intensive, and stressful at times. The deal was all of those, but we realized quickly that we were in good hands with Felix Kushnir, and others on the M&A team at Shulman Rogers.
  • Lessons Learned from Law Firm Failures

    Lessons Learned from Law Firm Failures

    ALA San Francisco Chapter Lessons Learned from Law Firm Failures Kristin Stark Principal, Fairfax Associates July 2016 Page 0 About Fairfax Fairfax Associates provides strategy and management consulting to law firms Strategy & Performance & Governance & Merger Direction Compensation Management Strategy Development and Partner Performance and Governance and Merger Strategy Implementation Compensation Management Firm Performance and Operational Structures & Practice Strategy Merger Search Profitability Improvement Reviews Market and Sector Merger Negotiation and Pricing Partnership Structure Research Structure Client Research and Key Process Improvement Alternative Business Models Client Development Merger Integration Page 1 1 Topics for Discussion • Disruptive Change • Dissolution Trends • Symptoms of Struggle: What Causes Law Firms to Fail? • What Keeps Firms From Changing? • Managing for Stability Page 2 How Rapidly is the Legal Industry Changing? Today 10 Years 2004 Ago Number of US firms at $1 billion or 2327 4 more in revenue: Average gross revenue for Am Law $482$510 million $271 million 200: Median gross revenue for Am Law $310$328 million $193 million 200: NLJ 250 firms with single office 4 11 operations: Number of Am Law 200 lawyers 25,000 10,000 based outside US: Page 4 2 How Rapidly is the Legal Industry Changing? Changes to the Law Firm Business Model Underway • Convergence • Dramatic reduction • Disaggregation in costs • Increasing • Process Client commoditization Overhead improvement • New pricing Model efforts models • Outsourcing
  • Bingham Mccutchen, LLP

    Bingham Mccutchen, LLP

    Diversity is powerful. is Diversity bingham.com Attorney Advertising © 2013 Bingham McCutchen LLP One Federal Street, Boston MA 02110 T. 617.951.8000 Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Bingham McCutchen® Bingham McCutchen, LLP 2014 VAULT/MCCA LAW FIRM DIVERSITY SURVEY One Federal Street Boston, MA 02110 Phone: 617-951-8000 Fax: 617-951-8736 www.bingham.com LOCATIONS Boston, MA; Hartford, CT; Los Angeles, CA; New York, NY; Orange County, CA; Lexington, KY; San Francisco, CA; Santa Monica, CA; Silicon Valley, CA; Washington, D.C.; Beijing, China; Frankfurt, Germany; Hong Kong, Hong Kong; London, England; Tokyo, Japan DIVERSITY LEADERSHIP Head(s) of Firm: Jay Zimmerman, Chairman and CEO; Steve Browne, Firm Managing Partner Diversity team leader(s): The Diversity Committee is chaired by 12 practicing partners. Focused on strategy, these partners comprise the Diversity Executive Committee, and its three working groups: Recruiting, Attorney Retention and Development, and Leadership and Business Development. The Diversity Executive Committee works with partner, associate and staff representatives - as well as leaders of various areas (such as Recruiting, Learning and Development and Marketing) - to implement our Diversity Action Plan. The Diversity Team Leaders are: Minita Shah-Mara, Director of Diversity and Inclusion; J. Bland, Diversity Executive Committee - Legal Recruiting; Ella Foley Gannon, Diversity Executive Committee - Legal Recruiting; Thurgood Marshall Jr., Diversity Executive Committee - Legal Recruiting; Julia Frost-Davies,
  • 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.
  • March 2, 2009 Roger P. Joseph Bingham Mccutchen

    March 2, 2009 Roger P. Joseph Bingham Mccutchen

    UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION WASHINGTON. D.C. 20549 DIVISION OF INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT March 2, 2009 Roger P. Joseph Bingham McCutchen LLP One Federal Street Boston, MA 02110-1726 Re: Master Portfolio Trust-Liquid Reserves Portfolio (File No. 811-10407) and Legg Mason Partners Money Market Trust-Western Asset Money Market Fund (File No. 811-04052) Dear Mr. Joseph: Your letter ofFebruary 24,2009 requests our assurance that we would not recommend that the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Commission") take any enforcement action under Sections 17(a)(1i, 17(di and 12(d)(3)3 ofthe Investment Company Act of 1940 (the "Act"), and the rules thereunder, ifMaster Portfolio Trust and Legg Mason Partners Money Market Trust (each, a "Trust," and collectively, the "Trusts"), each ofwhich is registered with the Commission as an open-end investment company under the Act, amend the agreements and letter of credit summarized below and more fully described in the letter. Liquid Reserves Portfolio is a series ofthe Master Portfolio Trust, and the Western Asset Money Market Fund is a series ofLegg Mason Partners Money Market Trust (each a "Fund," and collectively, the "Funds"). Liquid Reserves Portfolio is a master fund in a master/feeder Section l7(a)(1) generally makes it unlawful for any affiliated person of a registered investment company, or an affiliated person of such person, acting as principal, to knowingly sell any security or other property to the registered investment company. 2 Section l7(d) generally makes it unlawful for any affiliated person ofa registered investment company, or any affiliated person of such a person, acting as principal, to effect any transaction in which the registered investment company is a joint or joint and several participant with such person in contravention ofrules and regulations adopted by the Commission.
  • 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.
  • Tech Savvy Pg 7.Pmd

    Tech Savvy Pg 7.Pmd

    The BTI Tech-Savvy Team for Law Firms 2003 Published by The BTI Consulting Group, Inc. 167 Milk Street, Suite 340 Boston, MA 02109 (617) 439-0333 Best of the Best Jones Day Leaders Cooley Godward Howrey Simon Arnold & White Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher Sidley Austin Brown & Wood Honorable Mentions Bingham McCutchen Gray Cary Ware & Freidenrich Clifford Chance Holland & Hart Cravath, Swaine & Moore Mayer, Brown, Rowe & Maw Crowell & Moring Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison Dewey Ballantine Rader, Fishman & Grauer Foley & Lardner Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom Law Firms also Cited by Clients as Most Tech-Savvy Adams and Reese Merchant & Gould Allen & Overy Morgan, Lewis, & Bockius Alston & Bird Morrison & Foerster Andrews & Kurth Myers and Hulse Armstrong Teasdale Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe Arnold & Porter Palmer & Dodge Covington & Burling Patterson, Belknap, Webb & Tyler Faegre & Benson Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner Proskauer Rose Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi Greenberg Traurig Ryley Carlock & Applewhite Hogan & Hartson Sedgwick, Detert, Moran & Arnold Holland & Knight Shook, Hardy & Bacon Hughes & Luce Simpson Thacher & Bartlett Hunton & Williams Stroock & Stroock & Lavan Johnson, Finkel, DeLuca & Kennedy Sutherland Asbill & Brennan Jorden Burt Venture Law Group Kirkland & Ellis Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz Knobbe Martens Olson & Bear Warner Norcross & Judd Linklaters Weil, Gotshal & Manges Littler Mendelson Wiley Rein & Fielding McDermott, Will & Emery Wilmer, Cutler & Pickering McguireWoods Winston & Strawn This article reprinted with permission from The BTI Consulting Group, Inc. Further duplication without permission is prohibited. All rights reserved. Source: The BTI Tech-Savvy Team for Law Firms © The BTI Consulting Group, Inc. All rights reserved The BTI Tech-Savvy Team for Law Firms 617-439-0333 · www.bticonsulting.com.
  • Strategist ®

    Strategist ®

    The Bankruptcy LAW JOURNAL ® NEWSLETTERS Strategist Volume 31, Number 11 • September 2014 Law Firm Clients Defeat Bankruptcy Trustees in New York Court of Appeals By Michael L. Cook represent them, a major inconvenience for the ness.” 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 81087, at *18. clients and a practical restriction on a client’s A law firm only owns unpaid compensa- The New York Court of Appeals, on July right to choose counsel.” Id. at *20. In addi- tion for legal services already provided with 1, 2014, in response to questions certified by tion, “clients might worry that their hourly fee respect to a client matter. In the words of the the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Cir- matters are not getting as much attention as New York court, “a client’s legal matter be- cuit, held that “pending hourly fee matters are they deserve if the [new] law firm is prevent- longs to the client, not the lawyer.” Id. at *15. not [a dissolved law firm’s] ‘property’ or ‘un- ed from profiting from its work on them.” Id. The Thelen and Coudert trustees’ litigation finished business’” under New York’s Partner- More important, New York has a “strong pub- will now return to the Second Circuit for dis- ship Law. In re Thelen LLP, _________ N.Y.3d lic policy encouraging client choice and, con- position. Because of this final ruling on appli- _________, 2014 N.Y. LEXIS 1577, *1 (July 1, comitantly, attorney mobility.” Id. at *21. Quot- cable New York Law, the court should direct 2014).
  • United States District Court, SD California. QUALCOMM

    United States District Court, SD California. QUALCOMM

    Untitled Document 2/28/10 4:30 AM United States District Court, S.D. California. QUALCOMM INCORPORATED, Plaintiff. v. BROADCOM CORPORATION, Defendants. Broadcom Corporation, Counter-Claimant. v. Qualcomm Incorporated, Counter-Defendant. Civil No. 05CV1392-B(BLM) May 1, 2006. Adam Arthur Bier, Christian E. Mammen, James R. Batchelder, Day Casebeer Madrid and Batchelder, Kevin Kook Tai Leung, Law Office of Kevin Kook Tai Leung, Cupertino, CA, Barry Jerome Tucker, David E. Kleinfeld, Foley & Lardner LLP, James T. Hannink, Kathryn Bridget Riley, Randall Evan Kay, Brooke Beros, Dla Piper US, Brandon Hays Pace, Heller Ehrman LLP, Heidi Maley Gutierrez, Higgs Fletcher and Mack, San Diego, CA, E Joshua Rosenkranz, Heller Ehrman, Evan R. Chesler, Richard J. Stark, Cravath Swaine and Moore LLP, Richard S. Taffet, Bingham McCutchen, New York, NY, Nitin Subhedar, Heller Ehrman, Menlo Park, CA, Jaideep Venkatesan, Heller Ehrman, Menlo Park, CA, Jason A. Yurasek, Perkins Coie LLP, San Francisco, CA, Patrick Taylor Weston, McCutchen Doyle Brown and Enersen, Walnut Creek, CA, William F. Abrams, Bingham McCutchen, East Palo Alto, CA, for Plaintiff. Alejandro Menchaca, Andrew B. Karp, Brian C. Bianco, Christopher N. George, Consuelo Erwin, George P. McAndrews, Gregory C. Schodde, Joseph F. Harding, Lawrence M. Jarvis, Leonard D. Conapinski, Matthew A. Anderson, Ronald H. Spuhler, Scott P. McBride, Stephen F. Sherry, Thomas J. Wimbiscus, Jean Dudek Kuelper, McAndrews Held and Malloy, Chicago, IL, Allen C. Nunnally, Daniel M. Esrick, John J. Regan, John S. Rhee, Joseph F. Haag, Kate Saxton, Louis W. Tompros, Richard W. O'Neill, Stephen M. Muller, Vinita Ferrera, Wayne L. Stoner, William F.
  • 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.
  • 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,
  • 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.