DOCSLIB.ORG

Law Firm Turnarounds

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Law Firm Turnarounds By William F. Brennan Dewey & LeBoeuf, the 20th largest law firm in the country Overly rich benefits provided to former partners via an according to the 2012 NLJ 250, has declared bankruptcy unfunded partner withdrawal entitlement; and is in the process of dissolving. According to the firm’s Compensation systems not perceived as equitable or management, in 2011 it had more than $900 million in pay levels significantly below market; revenues with average profits per equity partner of about $1.8 million. The Am Law Daily reported that those Loss of confidence in firm Leadership/Management; statistics were substantially overstated and had to be Inattention to client/practice concentrations; restated to $782 million in revenue and $1.04 million in average profits per equity partner, still impressive statistics Failure to react to market shifts; for a law firm. (Dewey says that the former numbers were Reliance on billing rate increases at twice the rate of and are accurate and are due to methodological inflation as primary means to increased profits. differences.) How could such a prominent law firm end up in such a mess? The occurrence of one of these problems, if corrected If Dewey’s situation is consistent with other law firm quickly, is unlikely to cause a law firm to fail, but the financial crises, it fell victim to a series of different issues simultaneous convergence of two or three, or an inability to that individually might have been manageable, but together adjust quickly, can spell doom for a law firm – a business proved to be insurmountable. Typically law firms in crisis structure that relies primarily on the shared trust of its co- face more than one of the following critical challenges: owners and thin capitalization. Loss of key clients; A strong economy can mask serious underlying financial problems. Firm leaders are convinced that generating more Loss of key partners; revenue (often by charging more and working harder) is the Regulatory or legislative change affecting key path of least resistance to address a cash flow shortfall. In practices; a recessionary economy all firms feel greater financial stress and firms that have not been prudently managed will Excessive reliance upon debt; be severely challenged. The protracted economic malaise Overhead expenses out of control; of the legal profession during the past several years has caused many law firms, including some of the largest in the country, to literally fight to survive. By William F. Brennan www.altmanweil.com Law firm failures are not that uncommon as indicated by A third party advisor can provide needed objectivity, this list of Am Law 200 law firms that failed during the past facilitate the process and ‘take the heat’ for what can be two decades: very painful and difficult decisions. Altheimer & Grey; In Altman Weil’s crisis management work, we help firm’s leaders prioritize which payments must be made to Arter & Hadden; continue operations, and which non-critical obligations can Bogle & Gates; be deferred. Every law firm CFO is capable of making those distinctions without any difficulty. The challenge is Brobeck Phleger & Harrison; implementing this process and dealing with the public Coudert Brothers; relations issues for those payees who have been relegated Heller Ehrman; to the “non-critical” list. Often times these issues affect long-time vendor relationships and friendships that may Howrey LLP; include vendors who are also clients and those who have Jenkins & Gilchrist; personal relationships with one or more partners. McKee Nelson; RESTORE TRUST IN LEADERSHIP Morgan & Finnegan; We have found that all too frequently the firm’s leadership Pennie & Edmonds; has understated the extent and magnitude of the fiscal crisis, and has projected optimistic results that did not Shea & Gould; and materialize. Rather than “confront the brutal facts,” they Testa Hurwitz & Thibeault. have not fully understood the magnitude of the issues Thacher Proffitt & Woods; confronting the firm, misinterpreted the financial data and/or have attempted to boost morale by portraying a rosier Thelen Reid & Priest; picture of future operating results wherever possible. Wolf Block Schorr and Solis-Cohen. For example, as partners leave for greener pastures Can a firm be saved when it is facing multiple critical elsewhere the lawyer headcount decreases so that even if threats to its existence? The answer is yes – if the firm revenues decline the “revenue per lawyer” statistic might acts quickly and decisively. increase due to the lag time in collecting receivables and the lower headcount. Clearly, the decline in revenues is not The primary steps in an effective rescue plan are: good and portraying it as if it were because “revenues per Stop the bleeding; lawyer” increased would be misleading. Restore trust in leadership; Once leadership loses the confidence of the firm’s lawyers Retain key partners; there is no choice but to change the leadership team. There is no time for the existing team to regain the trust of the Shrink to a profitable core operating size; lawyers. This is another area where the need for swift, Restructure operations and renegotiate commitments. decisive action may be best served by an independent expert who can guide the partners to consensus on new STOP THE BLEEDING leadership at a time of high tension and crisis. The underlying cause of the fiscal crisis must be addressed directly. Cash flow and liquidity are the primary concerns for Frequently the most qualified and respected individual is the law firm to continue operations and survive. Usually a unwilling to make the sacrifices required to accept a financially distressed firm will begin this process on its own, “battlefield promotion.” Other viable candidates must be but it often balks at taking all of the steps that are required. identified and consensus built around their elevation. In addition to assuming substantial potential risk as a leader of LAW FIRM TURNAROUNDS PAGE 2 OF 4 By William F. Brennan www.altmanweil.com a law firm that might implode, the partner’s clients and law partners until cash flow recovers. Then they can replenish practice will certainly suffer from less attention as the that capital by delivering results. partner focuses on the firm’s survival. Here is a telling paradox: those very clients are the lifeline for the partner if the firm does not make it, as the market seeks lawyers who SHRINK TO A PROFITABLE have sizable, profitable, portable and strategically important CORE OPERATING SIZE clients. Difficult decisions often have to be made to save the troubled law firm. The first step is to identify a core set of A willingness to make large personal sacrifices and clients, practices, offices and lead partners that will form the dedication to the law firm are essential qualities of aspiring surviving law firm. This is the inner ring. Surrounding this leaders. Some call this statesmanship or stewardship. group are the essential lawyers, paralegals and other Whatever one wants to call it, finding a leader who will timekeepers that service this business. This is the second place the firm’s interests and preservation above all else is ring. Finally the appropriate administrative support group an absolute requirement for a successful turnaround. Once and infrastructure is wrapped around creating the third ring. the selection process is complete, an announcement All else is redundant. Usually this will result in a smaller should be made that includes the new leadership’s honest law firm. assessment of the situation and an outline of the process going forward. Clear and forthright communications from Unfortunately, the execution of this outcome is far more this point forward is paramount. complicated than the more straightforward number crunching. Some personnel may be marginally profitable – RETAIN KEY PARTNERS that is they cover direct costs and contribute something to indirect costs that can not be relieved in the short-term The importance of listening to the concerns of partners and (such as long-term leases). And here exists another eliciting their input cannot be over-emphasized. The paradox where locked-in costs stymie efforts to achieve a partners have to believe their concerns are being heard, reduced core size. Yet another challenge may come from considered in a thoughtful and careful manner and that clients who may require a portfolio of services from their appropriate action will be taken. law firm. Some of those services may not be core, but are essential to retain important clients. Often those services Partners with vitally important clients, and their associated are less profitable and will require some creative re- revenue, have the most options in terms of moving to engineering to improve. another firm. In order for the law firm to have any chance for success, those partners and their clients must be The business of law is currently dominated by people and retained. The firm’s leaders must maintain an open, candid compensation expenses. Restructuring will affect the lives and constructive channel of communication. These and livelihoods of many individuals. It is one thing to partners want actions that will help them demonstrate to release an individual in a market where realistic alternate their clients that the firm can survive and their legal needs job prospects exist. This past economy was and in many will be properly serviced. The firm must demonstrate a ways continues to be an enormous challenge in this deep and thorough understanding of the situation and a respect. We have counseled many leadership teams on pragmatic, decisive approach to recovery. these issues as they struggled with business and moral implications of their decisions. The right course varies by Fair and competitive compensation is not the most firm and the immediate circumstances of their situation. important short-term consideration. However, a realistic Decision paralysis is not a viable position if the firm wants path to this end is absolutely necessary.
Recommended publications
  • 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
  • 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.
  • 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.
  • Staying Put the Great Recession Led to a Ten-Year Low in Lateral Partner Moves

    Staying Put the Great Recession Led to a Ten-Year Low in Lateral Partner Moves

    www.americanlawyer.com February 2011 THE LATERAL REPORT STAYING PUT The Great Recession led to a ten-year low in lateral partner moves. BY VICTOR LI FTER A RECORD YEAR for lateral moves What accounts for the drop? For one thing, the 2009 in 2009, law firm partners looked around numbers were artificially high because the market was in 2010 and decided that there was flooded with partners from firms that went under, such as no place like home. In the 12-month Heller Ehrman, Thacher Proffitt & Wood, Thelen, and period ending September 30, 2010, WolfBlock. (Those four firms accounted for 15 percent only 2,014 partners left or joined of the 2009 moves.) Additionally, continued economic un- Am Law 200 firms. That number certainty in 2010 meant that some firms were reluctant to was a hefty decrease—27 percent—from the same period hire. “In general, firms have been much more opportunistic a year earlier, when a whopping 2,775 partners moved. In [about partner recruiting], and that’s due to the relative sta- fact, 2010 marked the lowest number of partner moves bilization of the industry,” says Ari Katz, national director since 2000, when only 1,859 partners switched firms, and of legal recruiting at Bingham McCutchen. was well off the average of 2,458 partner moves each year Still, some firms defied this trend. DLA Piper could from 2005 to 2009. have installed turnstiles in its lobbies with all the turnover Illustration By JOHN UELAND it experienced as it brought in 67 partners, more than any other Am Rochester-based partners departed for LeClairRyan after our survey Law 200 firm, and was also among the leaders in departures—42.
  • Prominent Antitrust Litigator Leaves Heller for Sheppard

    Prominent Antitrust Litigator Leaves Heller for Sheppard

    THURSDAY, AUGUST 21, 2008 SINCE 1888 Prominent Antitrust Litigator Leaves Heller for Sheppard By Rebecca U. Cho Snider’s move, but not- of his book of business, but in the past, his Daily Journal Staff Writer ed that Heller continues book has been in the range of $5 million to have a strong antitrust to $10 million. His practice also includes LOS ANGELES — Prominent antitrust practice. securities class actions, accountants’ liai- litigator Darryl Snider jumped from Hel- “I wish him the best bility, mergers and acquisitions and bank ler Ehrman to the Los Angeles office of of luck. Beyond that litigation. Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton on I’m not going to have Sheppard’s antitrust practice leader, Gary Wednesday, becoming the second partner any comment,” Hubbell L. Halling, said the firm hopes to grow its this week to join Sheppard from San Fran- said. antitrust bench in Los Angeles. Halling, cisco-based Heller. In antitrust and secu- who is based in San Francisco, said Snid- Snider Blaine Templeman, a New York intellec- rities litigations, Snider er’s hire in Los Angeles is a boost to the tual property partner formerly with Heller, has represented Mercedes Benz of North 25-member practice group and to the firm. also defected for Los Angeles-based Shep- America, KPMG, Deloitte & Touche, Mas- “He has a long history of doing very pard on Monday. co Corp. and Altria, among others. In 2007, significant matters for very large and im- Snider, 59, said the timing of his move he successfully represented Philip Mor- portant clients, whether on the East Coast, is coincidental with last week’s dissolution ris U.S.A.
  • Nameprotect Trademark Insider®

    Nameprotect Trademark Insider®

    NAMEPROTECT TRADEMARK INSIDER® Comprehensive Guide: Trademark Industry IN THIS ISSUE: Top 200 Trademark Firms Top 100 Company Trademark Filers 2003 Industry Summary Madrid Protocol Annual NameProtect Trademark Insider AwardsTM Annual Report 2003 NameProtect ® digital brand protection Methodology Pre-Publication Review The NameProtect Trademark Insider® is developed through analysis of public Upon request, NameProtect is happy to offer any attorney, law firm or company trademark filings data compiled by the United States Patent and Trademark the opportunity to review our rankings prior to publication. Interested parties Office (PTO) and maintained in NameProtect's global trademark data center. may submit a request for pre-publication review to the Trademark Insider edi- tors at [email protected]. Data Integrity In order to ensure the integrity and accuracy of the law firm and company rank- Disclaimer ings presented herein, NameProtect employs the following data integrity practices: NameProtect makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of the data provided within this report. However, for various reasons including the potential for 1) Collection. As a trademark services provider, NameProtect collects and incomplete or inaccurate data supplied by the United States Patent and aggregates PTO and other trademark filing data from around the world, which Trademark Office, we cannot warrant that this report or the information con- is maintained in electronic form in the Company's trademark data center. tained herein is error free. NameProtect will not be liable for any reliance upon the 2) Normalization. In order to create this report, data from numerous fields data, analysis, opinions or other information presented within this report. within the PTO data set is normalized and parsed for detailed aggregation and Contact Information analysis.
  • Understanding the Lateral Hiring Frenzy Richard T

    Understanding the Lateral Hiring Frenzy Richard T

    Understanding The Lateral Hiring Frenzy Richard T. Rapp, Principal, Veltro Advisors, Inc. Why is lateral hiring proceeding at a frenetic pace even though legal employment is far below its 2007 peak? According to The American Lawyer, “Among Am Law ​ ​ 200 firms, the lateral partner market was so overheated that 92.5 percent of respondent to [their] new partner survey released in November said that legal 1 recruiters already had approached them.” ​ Is lateral hiring at this pace a destabilizing force in the law industry or a sensible, productive feature of the legal labor market? And is it transitory or will it last? To know the answers requires stepping back to understand the economics of the market for lawyers. We can address this in two parts: first, managerial motives for lateral hiring which are easy to understand and, second—and harder to grasp—the market forces that propel lateral mobility, the likes of which we do not find in most other markets for senior talent. As it turns out, the best way to think about lateral hiring among law firms is as a kind of arbitrage; arbitrage that is likely to persist as long as the gains to partners from shifting are available. When we think about arbitrage we usually think about buying and selling to capture the gains from differences across markets, for example, differences in Euro­Dollar exchange rates between London and Singapore. But more generally, arbitrage refers to any effort to gain by exploiting differences in prices. In this case it is differences among law firms in the price of legal talent that is the main—though not the only—motivator of lateral moves by senior lawyers.