DOCSLIB.ORG

The Politics of Pro Bono

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Politics of Pro Bono THE POLITICS OF PRO BONO * Scott L. Cummings Pro bono has undergone a profound transformation. Whereas for most of American legal history, pro bono was ad hoc and individualized, dispensed infor- mally as professional charity, within the last twenty-five years it has become centralized and streamlined, distributed through an elaborate institutional structure by private lawyers acting out of professional duty. Pro bono has thus emerged as the dominant means of dispensing free representation to poor and underserved clients, eclipsing state-sponsored legal services and other nongovernmental mechanisms in importance. This Article examines the causes, features, and consequences of pro bono’s institutionalization. It begins with an analysis of the forces behind pro bono’s institutional rise, emphasizing the role of the organized bar, federal legal services, the nonprofit sector, and big law firms. This Article then maps the contours of pro bono’s institutional architecture, analyzing the structures of organizational collaboration, mechanisms of efficiency, strategies for accountability, and processes of adaptation that define pro bono’s operational identity. It concludes by probing the systemic consequences of pro bono’s new institutional centrality, weighing the pragmatic benefits of leveraged law firm resources against the limitations imposed by the dependence on private lawyers beholden to commercial client interests. * Acting Professor of Law, UCLA School of Law. I am enormously grateful to Richard Abel, Gary Blasi, Andrew Boon, Devon Carbado, Sharon Dolovich, Victor Fleischer, Jody Freeman, Joel Handler, Kevin Johnson, Bill Klein, Máximo Langer, Gia Lee, Albert Moore, Fran Olsen, Kal Raustiala, Gary Rowe, Bill Rubenstein, Rick Sander, Bill Simon, Ann Southworth, Clyde Spillenger, Louise Trubek, Adam Winkler, Steve Yeazell, Jonathan Zasloff, and the participants in the UCLA Faculty Workshop for their helpful comments and generous support. I am also thankful to Nancy Anderson, Kyle Arndt, Lance Bocarsly, Jan Chatten-Brown, Christina Chung, Brian Condon, Erick Cordero, Maya Crawford, Bill Dean, Peter Eliasberg, Lynn Etkins, Ted Fillette, Ruth Fisher, Mark Haddad, Maria Hall, Bruce Iwasaki, Jolie Justus, David Kahn, John Kiernan, Esther Lardent, David Lash, Karen Lash, Jan LeMessurier Flack, Helenka Marculewicz, Cathy Mayokas, Irene Morales, Tanya Neiman, Sharon Ngim, Julie Orr, Kathi Pugh, Gail Ruderman Feuer, Lowell Sachnoff, Steven Scudder, Debbie Segal, Dan Stormer, Ronald Tabak, Lauren Teukolsky, Maureen Thornton Syracuse, Donald Tolbert, and Judith Whitelock for sharing their insights about pro bono. This project benefited greatly from the efforts of Myra Saunders and the staff at the Hugh and Hazel Darling Library, and Joseph Doherty of the UCLA Empirical Research Group. I owe a very special debt of gratitude to Dan Grunfeld, whose mentorship has been formative and without whom this Article would not have been possible. As always, I am deeply indebted to Ingrid Eagly for her inspiration and support. Finally, thanks to Michelle Alig, Landon Bailey, and James Stein for their outstanding research assistance. 1 52:1 Cummings Cummings Handcrafted.doc (10/11/2004 1:12 PM) 2 52 UCLA LAW REVIEW 1 (2004) INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................3 I. THE INSTITUTIONALIZATION OF PRO BONO...................................................................6 A. Profession ...........................................................................................................7 B. State .................................................................................................................19 C. Civil Society.....................................................................................................25 D. Market..............................................................................................................33 II. THE NEW ARCHITECTURE OF PRO BONO....................................................................41 A. Collaboration ...................................................................................................41 1. Connectivity.............................................................................................42 2. Facilitation................................................................................................49 3. Coordination ............................................................................................55 a. Differentiation...................................................................................56 b. Formality ...........................................................................................62 B. Efficiency..........................................................................................................65 1. Transaction Costs.....................................................................................65 a. Exchange...........................................................................................66 b. Menus................................................................................................69 c. Scripts................................................................................................70 d. Signals ...............................................................................................71 2. Calibration................................................................................................72 a. Scale..................................................................................................72 b. Specialization ....................................................................................77 C. Accountability .................................................................................................82 D. Adaptation .......................................................................................................89 1. Local .........................................................................................................90 2. Global .......................................................................................................96 III. PRO BONO AND THE PUBLIC GOOD ...........................................................................99 A. Possibility .........................................................................................................99 1. Pragmatism ...............................................................................................99 2. Flexibility................................................................................................103 3. Leverage..................................................................................................104 B. Tension ..........................................................................................................106 C. Constraint ......................................................................................................115 1. Cases .......................................................................................................116 a. Conflicts..........................................................................................116 b. Market Risk.....................................................................................122 c. Market Appeal ................................................................................123 d. Comparison.....................................................................................129 2. Lawyers ...................................................................................................135 a. Time................................................................................................135 b. Commitment...................................................................................136 3. Partnerships ............................................................................................140 a. Priorities ..........................................................................................140 b. Complexity......................................................................................142 PRO BONO: A POSTSCRIPT ............................................................................................145 52:1 Cummings Cummings Handcrafted.doc (10/11/2004 1:12 PM) The Politics of Pro Bono 3 INTRODUCTION The dominant narrative of pro bono over the past decade was one of a professional ideal under siege. Particularly as law firms experienced fan- tastic growth in the late 1990s, lawyers became subject to market pressures that placed strains on their capacity to engage in pro bono service.1 The dot-com boom created a market bubble at the nation’s biggest law firms, where spiraling profits were met by increasing billable-hour demands. Pro bono suffered under the new law firm economics, as lawyers sacrificed pub- lic service in the name of ballooning salaries and bigger year-end bonuses.2 Even as the blistering pace of Internet dealmaking screeched to a halt and volunteerism was resurrected in the new millennium,3 pro bono failed to regain its previous standing as associates fearful of looming layoffs were reluctant to appear too consumed with nonbillable work. The professional elite condemned pro bono’s retrenchment in the face of law firm commer- cialization,4 giving official sanction to the discourse of pro bono’s decline.5 1. See, e.g., Austin Sarat, Enactments of Professionalism: A Study of Judges’ and Lawyers’ Accounts of Ethics and Civility in Litigation, 67
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Washington Legal Found V. Massachusetts Bar Found.'S Faulty Analysis of Attorneys' First Amendment Rights Risa I
    Journal of Law and Policy Volume 2 | Issue 1 Article 6 1994 Iolta's Last Obstacle: Washington Legal Found v. Massachusetts Bar Found.'s Faulty Analysis of Attorneys' First Amendment Rights Risa I. Sackmary Follow this and additional works at: https://brooklynworks.brooklaw.edu/jlp Recommended Citation Risa I. Sackmary, Iolta's Last Obstacle: Washington Legal Found v. Massachusetts Bar Found.'s Faulty Analysis of Attorneys' First Amendment Rights, 2 J. L. & Pol'y (1994). Available at: https://brooklynworks.brooklaw.edu/jlp/vol2/iss1/6 This Note is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at BrooklynWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Law and Policy by an authorized editor of BrooklynWorks. IOLTA'S*LAST OBSTACLE: WASHINGTON LEGAL FOUND. V. MASSACHUSETTS BAR FOUND.'S" FAULTY ANALYSIS OF ATTORNEYS' FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS Risa I. Sackmary**s INTRODUCTION Thomas Jefferson once stated that "[t]o compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves, is sinful and tyrannical."' These words ring just as true today. When the State compels individuals to support organizations which are contrary to their political or ideological views, it violates their constitutional rights.2 Thus, due to the element of compulsion, mandatory Interest on Lawyers Trust Accounts programs (IOLTA) -- which require attorneys to use their clients' money to support various organizations 3 -- directly violate * In Massachusetts, the program is called IOLTA, Interest on Lawyers' Trust Accounts. Although other jurisdictions refer to this program as IOLA (Interest on Lawyers' Accounts) or IOTA (Interest on Trust Accounts), this Comment will use the Massachusetts terminology throughout.
    [Show full text]
  • Minutes of the Annual Meeting of the Wyoming State Bar
    Land & Water Law Review Volume 16 Issue 1 Article 14 1981 Minutes of the Annual Meeting of the Wyoming State Bar Wyoming State Bar Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.uwyo.edu/land_water Recommended Citation Wyoming State Bar (1981) "Minutes of the Annual Meeting of the Wyoming State Bar," Land & Water Law Review: Vol. 16 : Iss. 1 , pp. 333 - 360. Available at: https://scholarship.law.uwyo.edu/land_water/vol16/iss1/14 This Wyoming Bar Proceeding is brought to you for free and open access by Law Archive of Wyoming Scholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Land & Water Law Review by an authorized editor of Law Archive of Wyoming Scholarship. Wyoming State Bar: Minutes of the Annual Meeting of the Wyoming State Bar University of Wyoming College of Law LAND AND WATER LAW REVIEW VOLUME XVI 1981 NUMBER 1 MINUTES OF THE ANNUAL MEETING OF THE WYOMING STATE BAR September 3, 4, 5, and 6, 1980 Jackson, Wyoming The 39th Annual Meeting of the Integrated Bar and the 65th Annual Meeting of the Wyoming State Bar was called to order by President Thomas E. Lubnau at 9:00 a.m. on September 5, 1980, at the Ramada Snow King Inn, Jackson, Wyoming. Upon motion duly made, seconded, and unanimously carried, the reading of the minutes of the previous meeting was dispensed with. REPORT OF THE PRESIDENT Members of the Wyoming State Bar: As provided by Article II, Section 2 of the By-Laws of the Wyo- ming State Bar, I would like to report to you on the activities of our Bar for the past year.
    [Show full text]
  • Virginia State Bar MCLE Accredited Sponsors These Sponsors Have a History of Virginia Approved Programs
    Virginia State Bar MCLE Accredited Sponsors These sponsors have a history of Virginia approved programs. (Please contact sponsors directly for registration information.) CAUTION: Programs by out-of-state providers may advertise credit for courses that do not meet Virginia’s approval standards under MCLE Regulation 103 and the MCLE Board Opinions. SPONSORS MAY NOT APPLY IN VIRGINIA FOR ALL OF THE COURSES THEY OFFER. The Virginia State Bar is not responsible for content on sponsor websites. SPONSOR PHONE WEBSITE ACC National Capital Region 301-230-1864 www.acc.com/chapters/ncr/ Access MCLE 877-757-6253 www.accessmcle.com Alexandria Bar Association 703-548-1106 www.alexandriabarva.org ALI CLE – American Law Institute 800-253-6397 www.ali-cle.org ALM 212-457-7905 www.almevents.com American Association of Justice 800-622-1791 www.justice.org American Bankruptcy Institute 703-739-0800 www.abi.org American Bar Association 800-285-2221 www.americanbar.org/cle.html American Conference Institute 888-224-2480 www.americanconference.com American Health Lawyers Association 202-833-1100 www.healthlawyers.com American Immigration Lawyers Assoc. 202-507-7600 www.aila.org American Intellectual Property Assoc. 703-415-0780 www.aipla.org American Society of International Law 202-939-6000 www.asil.org American Society of Law, Medicine & 617-262-4990 www.aslme.org American University WCL 202-274-4075 www.wcl.american.edu/secle Arlington County Bar Association 703-228-3390 www.arlingtonbar.org Attorney Credits 877-910-6253 www.attorneycredits.com Attorney
    [Show full text]
  • Bostonbarjournala Publication of the Boston Bar Association
    FALL 2009 BostonBarJournalA Publication of the Boston Bar Association Timely Justice Threatened by Fiscal Challenges A Move to Streamline the Civil Justice System Crawford Comes to the Lab: Melendez-Diaz and the Scope of the Confrontation Clause Residual Class Action Funds: Supreme Court Identifies IOLTA as Appropriate Beneficiary Challenges and Opportunities for New Lawyers Maintaining Client Confidences: Developments at the Supreme Judicial Court and First Circuit in 2009 If Pro Bono is Not an Option, Consider Volunteering GROW YOUR 401(k) WISELY Six things you won’t hear from other 401(k) providers... We were created as a not-for-profit 1. entity, and we exist to provide a benefit We leverage the buying power of the 2. ABA to eliminate firm expenses and minimize participant expenses Our fiduciary tools help you manage 3. your liabilities and save valuable time Our investment menu has three tiers to 4. provide options for any type of investor, and our average expense is well below the industry average for mutual funds We eliminated commissions, which erode 5. your savings, by eliminating brokers We have benefit relationships with 29 6. state bar and 2 national legal associations.* LEARN HOW No other provider has more than one. YOU CAN * Alabama State Bar Illinois State Bar Association State Bar of Nevada Rhode Island Bar Association GROW YOUR State Bar of Arizona Indiana State Bar Association New Hampshire Bar Association State Bar of Texas Arkansas Bar Association Iowa State Bar Association State Bar of New Mexico Vermont Bar Association
    [Show full text]
  • SALT EQUALIZER Director of SALT in September
    SALT In This Issue Co-Presidents' Column Co-Presidents' Column, page 1 Eileen Kaufman, Touro College, Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center, and Tawab Mahmud, Seattle University September Deanship Workshop, page 3 School of Law October junior Faculty Development Workshop, page4 These are exciting times for SALT. Over the spring March Teaching Conference, page 5 and summer, SALT remained engaged in resisting LGBT Committee Update, page 6 assaults on academic freedom, civil liberties, and Eileen Kaufman and Tayyab Mahmud Bar Exam Committee Report, page 7 the rule of law. Concurrently, historic steps were Law School Admissions Data Website, page 8 taken to solidify the infrastructure of the organization so that it can play an even more effec- Essay on Supreme Court's School Integration tive role in the struggle for social justice, diversity and academic excellence. Decisions, page 8 We are thrilled to report that SALT has been awarded a generous multi-year capacity- Judicial Nominations Committee Report, page 11 building grant by the Open Society Institute (OSI). This will enable us to supplement our Peace-Post 9/11 Update, page 11 hard-working volunteer Board with full-time professional staff. Earlier, OSI had funded a Academic Freedom Committee Update, page 12 SALT Board retreat in 2006 at which we drew up a long-term strategic plan for the organiza- SALT Law School Reps Project, page 13 tion. In light of this plan, we submitted a grant application to enable us to hire full-time New SALT Website, page 14 professional staff. Following the positive decision on our application, the Board's Planning Hurricane Katrina Projects, page 15 Committee, consisting of Margaret Barry, Carol Chomsky, Howard Glickstein, Phoebe Haddon, SALT Board Elections, page 16 Joan Howarth, Beto Juarez, Jr., Eileen Kaufman, Holly Maguigan, Tayyab Mahmud and SALT 20077 Awards Dinner Report, page 17 Deborah Post, developed a job description for an Executive Director and advertised for the SALT 2008 Awards Dinner Honorees, page 19 position widely.
    [Show full text]
  • Pre-Paid and Group Legal Services: Thirty Years After the Storm
    Fordham Law Review Volume 70 Issue 3 Article 9 2001 Pre-Paid and Group Legal Services: Thirty Years After the Storm Judith L. Maute Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Judith L. Maute, Pre-Paid and Group Legal Services: Thirty Years After the Storm, 70 Fordham L. Rev. 915 (2001). Available at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr/vol70/iss3/9 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by FLASH: The Fordham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. It has been accepted for inclusion in Fordham Law Review by an authorized editor of FLASH: The Fordham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Pre-Paid and Group Legal Services: Thirty Years After the Storm Cover Page Footnote Professor of Law, University of Oklahoma. Invaluable research assistance was provided by Jonathan Grant Ellis (J.D. expected 2003, University of Oklahoma). Donald T. Bogan generously shared his understanding of the health care industry and ERISA. The University of Oklahoma provided research support. Of course, any mistakes or omissions are those of the author. This article is available in Fordham Law Review: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr/vol70/iss3/9 IPRE-PAID AND GROUP LEGAL SERVICES: THIRTY YEARS AFTER THE STORM Judith L. Maute* INTRODUCTION Middle America considers reasonable access to adequate and affordable health care to be a necessity of life. Government- subsidized care provides a minimal safety net for the poor, disabled, elderly or underemployed who cannot afford either private health care insurance or medical care on a fee-for-services basis.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction
    INTRODUCTION Nationally, approximately 40% of new attorneys work at firms consisting of more than 50 lawyers. Therefore, a large percentage of practicing attorneys work for small firms (fewer than 50 attorneys). Small firms generally do not have formalized recruiting procedures or a set “hiring season” when they recruit summer law clerks, school-year law clerks, or entry-level attorneys. Instead, these firms hire on an as-needed basis, and they hire year round. To secure employment with a small firm, students and lawyers alike need to be proactive in getting their name and interests out in the community. Applicants should not only apply directly to these firms, but they should connect via law school, community, and bar association activities. In this directory, you will find state-by-state hyperlinks to regional directories, bar associations, newspapers, and job banks that can be used to jump-start a small firm search. ALABAMA State/Regional Bar Associations Alabama Bar Association: http://www.alabar.org Birmingham Bar Association: http://www.birminghambar.org Mobile Bar Association: http://www.mobilebar.org Specialty Bar Associations Alabama Defense Lawyers Association: http://www.adla.org Alabama Trial Lawyers Association: http://www.alabamajustice.org Major Newspapers Birmingham News: http://www.al.com/birmingham Mobile Register: http://www.al.com/mobile Legal & Non-Legal Resources & Publications State Lawyers.com: http://alabama.statelawyers.com EINNEWS: http://www.einnews.com/alabama Birmingham Business Journal: http://birmingham.bizjournals.com
    [Show full text]
  • Thel SOUTH CAROLINA LAW QUARTERLY
    South Carolina Law Review Volume 5 Issue 4 Article 2 6-1953 South Carolina Bar Association Annual Meeting Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/sclr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation (1953) "South Carolina Bar Association Annual Meeting," South Carolina Law Review: Vol. 5 : Iss. 4 , Article 2. Available at: https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/sclr/vol5/iss4/2 This Conference Proceeding is brought to you by the Law Reviews and Journals at Scholar Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in South Carolina Law Review by an authorized editor of Scholar Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. et al.: South Carolina Bar Association Annual Meeting THEl SOUTH CAROLINA LAW QUARTERLY BAR ASSOCIATION TRANSACTIONS SOUTH CAROLINA BAR ASSOCIATION ANNUAL MEETING Held at the Clemson House, Clemson, S. C. With the Bar Associations of Anderson, Oconee and Pickens Counties As Hosts May 14-16, 1953 MINUTES Thursday, May 14, 1953 The fifty-ninth annual meeting of the South Carolina Bar Asso- ciation was called to order by the President, Honorable William Brantley Harvey, at 3:00 p. m., and after welcoming the members he presented Honorable William Law Watkins of the Anderson Bar as a representative of the host committee. Mr. Watkins welcomed the Association and announced some of the entertainment events. The President presented W. Croft Jennings, Esq., Chairman of the Tax Section of the Association, who then presided while this Section held a symposium on the subject of Estate Planning. Mr. Jennings introduced Mr. and Mrs. Howe P. Cochran of the Wash- ington and New York Bars.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 RELIGIOUS LAWYERING at TWENTY Fordham Law School
    RELIGIOUS LAWYERING AT TWENTY Fordham Law School, New York City Thursday, September 13, 2018 - Friday, September 14, 2018 Building on the seminal work of Tom Shaffer (On Being a Christian a Lawyer, 1981), the late 1990s saw a very creative ferment in reflection on how religious values might inform legal education and the practice of law. In 1997 and 1998, lawyers, judges, law students and law professors from various religious traditions gathered at Fordham Law School for two interfaith conferences: The Relevance of Religion to a Lawyer’s Work (1997) and Rediscovering Religion in the Lives of Lawyers and Those They Represent (1998). At about the twenty year mark, we pause to gather insights from personal and institutional journeys thus far, and look toward the future. Sponsors: CORAL (Council on Religion and Law) Institute on Religion, Law & Lawyer’s Work, Fordham University School of Law Cosponsor: Center for the Study of Law and Religion at Emory University Thursday September 13, 2018 Festschrift in honor of Howard Lesnick, Professor Emeritus, University of Pennsylvania Law School, author of Religion in Legal Thought and Practice, Listening for God, The Moral Stake in Legal Education, and numerous other articles and essays that are foundational to the field of religious lawyering. 4:00 p.m. Afternoon Discussion: Humanizing Legal Education “... I want to teach people to be people, to become people, to become more fully human. And what that means to me is to lead students to ask themselves: Who am I? What am I doing in the world? What do I want to do in the world? -- Howard Lesnick (1982), quoted in Roger C.
    [Show full text]
  • Why Law Firms Collapse
    Why Law Firms Collapse John Morley1 Law firms don’t just go bankrupt—they collapse. Like Dewey & LeBoeuf, Heller Ehrman, and Bingham McCutchen, law firms often go from apparent health to liquidation in a matter of months or even days. Almost no large law firm has ever managed to reorganize its debts in bankruptcy and survive. This pattern is puzzling, because it has no parallel among ordinary businesses. Many businesses go through long periods of financial distress and many even file for bankruptcy. But almost none collapse with the extraordinary force and finality of law firms. Why? I argue that law firms are fragile because they are owned by their partners, rather than by investors. Partner ownership creates the conditions for a spiraling cycle of withdrawals that resembles a run on the bank. As the owners of the business, the partners of a law firm are the ones who suffer declines in profits and who have to disgorge their compensation in the event the firm becomes insolvent. So if one partner leaves and damages the firm, it is the remaining partners who bear the loss. Each partner’s departure thus has the potential to worsen conditions for those who remain, meaning that as each partner departs, the others become more likely to leave as well, eventually producing an accelerating race for the exists bank. This kind of spiraling withdrawal is sometimes thought to be an unavoidable consequence of financial distress. But if law firms were not owned by their partners, this would not happen. Indeed, the only large law firm in the history of the common law world that has ever survived a prolonged insolvency is also one of the only large law firms that has ever been owned by investors.
    [Show full text]
  • July 2006 Vol.67, No
    -. • . I ~* ~/~~ : 0ur Success! * 't*" 1~ its insureds. Isn't it time you JOINED THE MOVEMENT and insured with AIM? AIM: For the Difference! Attorneys Insurance Mutual of Alabama, Inc. 200 Inverness Parkway Telephone (205) 980-0009 Toll Free (800) 526-1246 Birmingham , Alabama 35242-4813 FAX (205) 980-9009 Service • Strength • Sec u rity [ml -UT.lffl ISI ALABAMA --ll dh•iJion o/-- [NS URAN CE SPECIALISTS, INC. ISi ALABAMA, a division of Insurance Specialists, Inc . ( ISi), in its fift h decade of service to the national association marketplace, is proud to have maintained service to the Alabama State Bar since 1972. ISi is recogni7.£<1as a leader among affinity third party administrators, and maintains strong affiliations with leading carriers of its specialty products. Association and affi.nity gro ups provide added value to Membership benefits through offerings of these qua.lity insurance plans tailored to meet the needs of Members. INSURANCE PROGRAMS AVAILABLE TO ALABAMA STATE BAR MEMBERS Select tlie products tlrat you want i11formatio11011 from tlie list below, complete tlie form and retum via fax or mail. Tlrere is 110 obligation. 0 Long Term Disability 0 AccidentaJ Death & Dismemberment Plan D Individual Tenn Life 0 Business Overhead Expense 0 Hospital Income Plan D Medica re Supp lement Plan Alahlnu S1:1teBnt Mt:fflbn N11mc AJI< Spou~NarM ,.,.. ' ordq)c-ndcntJ OffictAddtffl (Sum, Ory.Sr,1tt,Zip) OfficePhone HomePhone Fu Q«upat1on E-mailAddm.a: 0,/1 me for 011 appointmelllto discwscoverage at: O Home D Office RETURN COMPLETED REPLY CARD TO: Fax: 843-525-9992 Mail:[$[ ADMINISTRATIVBCENTBII • SALES · P.O.
    [Show full text]
  • The Law Firm Lifecycle: Why Some Firms Fail the Law Firm Lifecycle: Why Some Firms Fail
    The Law Firm Lifecycle: Why Some Firms Fail The Law Firm Lifecycle: Why Some Firms Fail Summary Law firms are just like any other organization, sometimes achieving great success, and other times going defunct. This article goes over the latter firms. Dewey & LeBoeuf was once a thriving The reasons vary, but financial difficulty is a international law firm with 1,000 attorneys, common denominator, although that difficulty offices in 26 locations, profits of one million has different underlying causes. Some dollars per partner, and clients that included firms fail because of fraud, misfeasance or Walt Disney and eBay. But the firm fell apart, mismanagement. Others go under because declaring bankruptcy and dissolving in 2012 they can't survive an economic downturn or amidst scandal and bleak finances. The firm's adapt to changing business practices. Partner top leaders are currently on trial in New York and client migration (especially when they for grand larceny and other charges stemming become toxic) can also lead to dissolution, as from alleged efforts to "cook the books" and can infighting among firm power players or conceal financial troubles. a firm's inability to find the right firm or firms to merge with in order to compete in a legal Click here for recent updates about the Dewey market increasingly dominated by full-service & LeBoeuf trial on JD Journal. "BigLaw" firms. Of course, most law firm dissolutions are complex and involve more Dewey is not alone. Other large firms and than one cause. countless small firms have also collapsed in recent decades, although most did not Misfeasance and Scandal engage in bad dealings or alleged criminal activity.
    [Show full text]