Brokeback Lawfirm: Oh the Irony
One of you posted this in the comments, and we subsequently verified it with sources at the firm. Late last week, this announcement was made internally at Sullivan & Cromwell:
I am pleased to announce that Vince DiBlasi, Andrew Gerlach, Tracy Richelle High, Jessica Klein, Keith Pagnani, Melissa Sawyer, Karen Seymour, and Fred Rich, as Chair, have agreed to serve on a new working group focusing on the recruiting process and the associate experience. The group has been charged with looking at all aspects of our recruiting strategy and process, and, in conjunction with the Associate Development Committee, our approach to associate career development and every aspect of the associate experience at the firm.We have no higher priority than continuing to attract the most promising law students, and then to provide them, and all our current lawyers, with training, professional opportunities and an overall experience that is second to none. I would be grateful if each of you would share your own ideas and suggestions with any member of this group.
Rodgin Cohen
Some of you will accuse us of seeing everything through an Aaron Charney lens, but we'll pose the question anyway: Could this be a response to the public relations fallout from Charney v. S&C?
As for the composition of the working group, we have to ask: What's up with the half measures, Rodge? If you want to put S&C's best, jack-booted foot forward, why not throw Krautheimer and Korry on it too?
If you have any suggestions for the S&C committee, please offer them in the comments. We recommend weekly Leni Riefenstahl screenings to improve associate morale.
(The timing couldn't be better -- there's a Riefenstahl renaissance afoot.)
(48) Comments
In addition, J. Klein is one of the associates working on the Charney case!
WOW. Whether you actually have picked a side or not in the Charney case, the firm doing this is a stunning move and not in a good way.
Melissa Sawyer is mentioned in the Charney Complaint too. What is S&C thinking? I guess they are doing this snub their nose at everyone. They should have at least waited until this all dies down - whether they are in the right or not.
Fred Rich is great choice.
S&C's motion to dismiss will be granted with ABC granted leave to file an amended complaint. The case will then settle and S&C will withdraw its complaint.
The clients don't seem to care about the Charney thing, considering the M&A group is the leading the first quarter '07 worldwide league tables.
Interesting 11:23. That is not based on the time period of the suit though. that is receivables.
Anyone ever hear if S&C's bonuses have been matched?
I can't imagine Goldman or AIG care too much about their law firm's publicity (at least at this point--things may change if more damaging stuff comes out). As for recruiting, sure it might hurt a bit, but I am not even sure the average 2L at my school knows, much less cares.
Tomorrow Charney will be sued for defamation by one of the associates gratuitously named in his complaint. Let's see how Lat spins that as somehow to Charney's advantage.
I agree that the publicity is there now but that it could get way worse. My take is that Charney has pretty much nothing to lose at this point though. The firm is not in the same situation and while they could probably put this to rest now and let time heal over any remaining "ugliness" out there, they probably won't. That will make for a very interesting trial. Cannot wait.
i bet that people involved in the Charney case are involved in the recruitment process because S&C expects that questions about the case will come up and these are the people that can best deflect Q&A's.
Clients won't care, as long as the work gets done. 2Ls will care, although not the current ones because they already interviewed when this suit started. Next year's 2Ls will care, and I think it will hurt S&C. It just sounds like such a miserable place to work. Once they lose their edge in recruiting, work product will suffer, thus the vicious cycle begins.
on another note, doesn't vince diblasi look like the mother's boyfriend in the Lost Boys? The head vampire?
Yes. The video store guy. A Nazi-lover adn a vampire. poor guy
12:03 PM and 12:10:
No way - the head vampire looked older and had lighter hair - DiBlasi kind of looks like Bob Saget.
Fred Rich? Without a doubt one of the nicest partners I have ever dealt with in my career. Great guy.
NO ONE IN THE MEETING HAS VERIFIED ANY OF CHARNEY'S ALLEGATIONS!
Charney's being sued for defamation from an associate named in the suit? For real and for true? Any more details? This is awesome.
But I thought stuff said in legal proceedings get at least a qualified - if not total - immunity from defamation suits. I suppose the theory of this alleged new suit is that Charney blitzed the media with the suit, thereby diminishing the level of his immunity of what was said in the suit? Or that Charney's inclusion of the associate in his complaint was so gratuitous that it shouldn’t qualify for immunity.
But what are the damages? Maybe the defamation was about this associate's career and thus was libel per se.
Is this a hoax? Please tell me it's true.
1:10 - That's absolutely true, except when you publicize the complaint aggressively like Charney did.
I can't imagine why anyone named in the Complaint would sue though. It would seem to just give the Complaint more press and make things even nuttier. Maybe the firm is pressing the associate to do it to put pressure on Charney?
"It would seem to just give the Complaint more press and make things even nuttier."
Normally this is true, but this case couldn't get any more publicity.
I don't know about that. This case just gets nuttier and nuttier and just when you think it cannot get even worse... someone files for defamation or something and it gets even nuttier.
I don't think any plaintiff, in the history of the American court system, has publicized their complaint as aggressively as Charney.
WHO IS THE ASSOCIATE SUING FOR DEFAMATION?
There were only a few associates named in the complaint. Is it Grinberg?!
Perhaps? Or maybe Melissa Sawyer because now she has to serve on the new recruiting committee.
1:07 - how do you know that "NO ONE IN THE MEETING HAS VERIFIED ANY OF CHARNEY'S ALLEGATIONS!" Including Grinberg. This news, if true, would be unsurprising - but any indication how you would know this?
1:07 - how do you know that "NO ONE IN THE MEETING HAS VERIFIED ANY OF CHARNEY'S ALLEGATIONS!" Including Grinberg? This news, if true, would be unsurprising - but any indication how you would know this?
Wouldn't we have heard if the allegations had been verified?
If an associate is going to be suing Charney for defamation tomorrow, and is accusing Charney of publicizing his Complaint as a way to get around the rules about stuff like that... isn't that associate kind of doing the same thing as Charney by sending out an anonymous shot across the ATL bow? Also, there's no way an associate would be doing anything without clearing it past the powers that be at his/her employer so I gotta say based on the timing and stuff that if an associate actually does file a defamation case against Charney it is probably the firm looking to put pressure on Charney since Charney pretty much seems like he's got nothing to lose anymore if you think about it.
12:03 - excellent call. I think he looks just like that guy! Hilarious.
I don't get it. does it really even matter to ABC if he is sued? the guy is judgment proof or at least mostly judgment proof, and his professional and perhaps personal life would seem to be pretty much ruined anyway. ABC has nothing to lose now, it would seem, and every reason to make this as nasty for S&C as possible. Why would another civil suit matter to him? Wouldn't it actually be better due to the increased publicity, more chances to bring out the horrors at S&C, etc.?
What am I missing here?
Dunno if ABC is so judgment proof. If he somehow wins money from S&C - he could then owe that money to the associate in question who is suing him.
Also not sure how much ABC's life is "ruined." Though someone who sent stolen client documents to the WSJ, and then said the documents magically appeared on his doorstep, seems unemployable to me, - ABC has fans. Maybe one of the legal bloggers who think ABC's word is gospel will employ him.
In any event, if ABC defamed this associate, he/she has every right to sue him, judgment proof or not.
There is immunity for lawsuits and I sincerely doubt that the fact that it was publicized will defeat the immunity.
dumb law student,
you're assuming that just because ABC doesn't have a lot of money, he's judgment-proof/has nothing to lose. He could still have his wages garnished for years to come (if he loses). And given his education/experience, chances are --he can still find a job/have a life, even if not at a prestigious firm like S&C.
Surely S&C will not allow one of their idiot associates to attempt to sue for defamation.
Perhaps the alleged suit is about statements/allegations made to the media that were outside of what was said in the complaint. If so, that would reduce any immunity Charney may have had. Didn't Charney run to every media outlet to grant interviews. Maybe the defamation relates to an interview, and not to the specific allegations in the complaint.
As a 2L who met Fred Rich last fall during recruiting season, if he's in charge of this committee it's a good sign.
Fred Rich is awesome. I believe he is a genuinely good person, and his position of chair is probably indicative that this committee is more than just for show.
Like Steve Kotran, Fred Rich is a UVA Law grad. Just saying.
If it is more than just for show WHY put so MANY people from the Charney Complaint on it? It's not as if that firm is a small shop. I mean, there are literally a hundred plus people who could have ended up on that committee. No way was it an accident and no way is it more than just for show. What "show" exactly though - no one can tell. I am not thinking "good show" though.
Not just the Complaint obviously since DiBlasi is on it.
To David Lat: Save the vestiges of your manhood. Stop kissing Sullivan & Cromwell's collective ass.
I'm genuinely unimpressed with S&C.
I am surprised with those who are surprised by this.
U would think it'd be WAY more messed-up for S&C to publicly tout the meritlessness of the claims, but then to put all the people named in the Complaint / associated with the case on some kind of career quarantine in practice.
Assuming arguendo ABC's claims are meritless, and S&C mgmt BELIEVES them to be meritless, wouldn't it be pretty fucked -up to take the people Charney named and take them out of the running for such a commitee?
Fred Rich is a genuinely nice guy and a sharp lawyer to boot. He is also- I'm surprised that no one has pointed this out yet- a Friend of Dorothy's (is there a more PC way of putting that)?
Keith Pagnani is a decent guy, if a little on the abrasive side. Tracy High is a nice enough person and a good lawyer, but VERY partnership-focused and perhaps not the best person to put on a lifestyle-oriented committee.
Andy Gerlach, however, is an awful, awful choice. He was a gunner from day one and stabbed colleagues in the back every chance he got, which is impressive when you're talking about associates who had to do doc review for a year- he would CREATE opportunities to stab people in the back. Putting a guy like that on a committee is a surprisingly dumb move by S&C.
Fred Rich is a genuinely nice guy and a sharp lawyer to boot. He is also- I'm surprised that no one has pointed this out yet- a Friend of Dorothy's (is there a more PC way of putting that)?
Keith Pagnani is a decent guy, if a little on the abrasive side. Tracy High is a nice enough person and a good lawyer, but VERY partnership-focused and perhaps not the best person to put on a lifestyle-oriented committee.
Andy Gerlach, however, is an awful, awful choice. He was a gunner from day one and stabbed colleagues in the back every chance he got, which is impressive when you're talking about associates who had to do doc review for a year- he would CREATE opportunities to stab people in the back. Putting a guy like that on a committee is a surprisingly dumb move by S&C.
Didn't mean to post multiple times- sorry! Guess that's why I'm just not S&C material anymore.