We’re liveblogging the Kyle Sampson testimony. Our commentary will be added continuously to this post, so just refresh your browser for the latest.
We have high expectations — and we’re not alone. From the NYT:
“I think it will be the most interesting testimony we have heard since Professor Hill,” Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, ranking Republican on the Judiciary Committee, said as he recalled Anita F. Hill’s appearance in the confirmation hearing for Clarence Thomas for a Supreme Court seat. “I can’t think of anyone else who has quite the drama.”
(Of course, some are trying to dial down expectations. Sen. Chuck Schumer is warning us that the Sampson testimony probably won’t produce the proverbial “smoking gun.”)
Our commentary on the hearing, plus links to various news accounts, will appear after the jump.
* Pitcher Urbina sentenced to 14 years in Venezuelan prison. [ESPN]
* Son of N.C. St. coach facing multiple criminal charges. [SI.com]
* Barry Bonds’s trainer says he’s “never going to speak” in steroid investigations. [MSNBC Sports]
* Nine Bengals have been arrested in the past year, and one of them is Chris Henry. [ESPN]
* Titans cornerback “Pacman” Jones is the NFL’s latest problem child. [SI.com]
* NFL Commissioner Goodell will meet with Jones and Henry about their disciplinary problems with a new disciplinary policy forthcoming. [MSNBC Sports]
* Former NBA star Michael Ray Richardson wants you all to know he has “big-time Jew lawyers.” [ESPN]
From the New York Times home page, as of 11:30 PM on Wednesday:
Is this, like, a racial slur or something? Granted, it’s a buffalo-buffalo, not a water buffalo; but still…
The NYT subsequently fixed this photo screw-up (but not before an enterprising ATL reader took a screenshot). The Timesfolk replaced the buffalo-and-snowmobiles photo with a sinister-looking Kyle Sampson, accompanying Alberto Gonzales on an earlier visit to the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Sampson’s testimony begins at 10 AM today. We’re looking forward to it! Former Key Aide Testifies Today on Gonzales’s Statements [New York Times]
* Since charges have been dropped, we can only hope nothing more severe than spray painting occurred. Those poor goats and sheep, always such pervert-magnets. [LoHud.com (The Journal News)]
* I think the Vietnamese president lost a bet to our president. [Jurist]
* This, hopefully, will not offend anyone. [New York Times]
* The upside is that such drama is indispensable to country song-writing, so better her than me. [AP via Yahoo! News]
We just announced the results of ATL March Madness: Round 1. And you know what that means: Round 2! Update: Two of the four polls appear below. For formatting reasons, we are moving the other two polls to a separate post.
Hey, guess what? Seyfarth Shaw held some “focus groups” with its associates, and the focus groups told them: WE WANT MORE MONEY!!!
And Seyfarth Shaw, despite prior expressions of reluctance, decided to go along. Their memo, announcing associate pay raises, appears after the jump.
The first round of ATL MarchMadness is over. And we have some exciting results to announce — including a number of big-time upsets.
(If we had started the contest just a little bit later, we could have based it on the brand-new U.S. News & World Report law school rankings. But we didn’t, and there’s nothing to be done about that now.)
To see the current state of the brackets, click on the thumbnail image at right. Here are quick summaries of the eight match-ups that just took place:
1. Texas defeats Yale, 54-46
Oh well — upsets happen. Our alma mater gets sent home in the first round of the tournament. Ouch!
(But yeah, New Haven kinda does suck. The sky overhead was grey for all three years we were there.)
2. Michigan defeats Berkeley (Boalt Hall), 51-49
This one was a squeaker that went well into overtime. But in the end, the Wolverines devoured the sandal-wearing hippies of northern California.
3. NYU defeats Northwestern, 68-32
A veritable rout. Northwestern has been doing pretty well lately in terms of getting Supreme Court clerkships for its graduates. But the Biglaw placement opportunities available to NYU grads can’t be beat.
4. Columbia defeats Cornell, 71-29
An even bigger defeat. It’s tough to compete with the Manhattan heavyweights — but NYU and Columbia will face each other in the next round. Who will prevail in this enduring rivalry?
5. Chicago defeats Duke, 56-44
The weather sucks in Chicago; but you do get a pretty decent legal education. And the Duke campus was shaken by controversy earlier this year. (No, not THAT controversy…)
6. Georgetown defeats Harvard, 52-48
This battle of the behemoths concluded with a major upset: Georgetown took down the #3 seed, Harvard Law School. Perhaps HLS was hurt by the embarrassingantics of its LLMs?
7. UVA defeats Penn, 69-31
Want a Wilkinson clerkship? Go to UVA. Also, Penn probably wasn’t helped by that whole shooting incident.
8. Stanford defeats UCLA, 63-37
Northern California versus Southern California is one of our nation’s great regional rivalries. And this time around, the Bay Area prevailed.
After being ejected from March Madness in the first round, UCLA grads will have to content themselves with L.A.’s beautiful weather and plastic-surgery-enhanced population — and their school’s great track record of turning out judicial divas, like Judges Janice Rogers Brown (D.C. Cir.) and Kim McLane Wardlaw (9th Cir.).
We’re putting together the polls for round 2, which should be available shortly. So check back soon! Earlier: ATL March Madness: Law Schools, Round 1 (Part 1) ATL March Madness: Law Schools, Round 1 (Part 2)
When we were drawing up our LIST OF SHAME (latest version here), Squire Sanders & Dempsey got dropped along the way. To make the list more manageable, we limited it to firms with a significant New York presence.
Some readers appealed that decision. These two comments are representative:
“The updated List of Shame doesnt include some firms like Squire Sanders and others anymore. I wonder if that’s because they matched (I dont think they did) or because they don’t have big NY offices, so supposedly they shouldn’t be on the list to begin with. If it’s the second explanation that’s right, then we have to get them returned to the List of Shame”.
“PLEASE add Squire Sanders to the list. They’re actively seeking a larger New York presence (currently 2 associates). And they certainly suck as much as any of the other firms on the list. Give them the credit they’ve worked so hard to achieve. Pretty please.”
We’ve also heard, through the grapevine, about a general lack of transparency at SSD concerning associate compensation. So we thought that it might be worth poking around — especially in view of this recent comment:
A post on the Greedy Ohio website indicates that Squire Sanders has raised first year salaries outside of Ohio. Can anyone confirm or deny? Any add’l information?
Is this correct? Do you have any other information about Squire Sanders & Dempsey? If so, please comment on this post, or email us (subject: “Squire Sanders & Dempsey”). Thanks. Re: any info on JD salaries [Greedy Ohio]
Ed. note: The Asia Chronicles column is authored by Kinney Recruiting. Kinney has made more placements of U.S. associates, counsels and partners in Asia than any other recruiting firm in each of the past seven years. You can reach them by email: email@example.com.
Please note that Evan Jowers and Robert Kinney are still in Hong Kong and will stay FOR THE REMAINDER OF THIS WEEK. We still have a handful of available slots for meetings with our Asia Chronicles fans. If we have not been in touch lately, reach out and let us know when we could meet! There is no need for an agenda at all. Most of our in-person meetings on these trips are with folks who understand that improving a legal practice through lateral hiring is an information-driven process that takes time to handle correctly.
Regarding trends in lateral US associate hiring in Hong Kong, we of course keep much of what we know off of this blog. Based on placement revenue, though, Kinney is having one of our most successful years ever in Asia. We are helping a number of our law firm clients with M&A, fund formation, cap markets, project finance, FCPA and disputes openings. These are very specific needs in many cases, so a conversation with us before jumping in may be helpful. As always, we like to be sure to get the maximum number of interviews per submission, using a well-informed, highly targeted, and selective approach, taking into account short, medium and long-term career aims.
Making a well informed decision during a job search is easier said than done – the information we provide comes from 10 years of being the market leader in US attorney placements at the top tier firms in Asia. There is no substitute for having known a hiring partner since he/she was an associate or for having helped a partner grow his or her practice from zip to zooming, and this is happily where we stand today – with years of background information on just about every relevant person in all the markets we serve, and most especially in Hong Kong/China/Greater Asia. So get in touch and get a download from us this week if we can fit it in, or soon in any case!
The legal industry is being disrupted at every level by technological advances. While legal tech entrepreneurs and innovators are racing to create a more efficient and productive future, there is widespread indifference on the part of attorneys toward these emerging technologies.
When the LexisNexis Cloud Technology Survey results were reported earlier this year, it showed that attorneys were starting to peer less skeptically into the future, and slowly but surely leaning more toward all the benefits the law cloud has to offer.
Because let’s face it, plenty of attorneys are perhaps a bit too comfortable with their “system” of practice management, which may or may not include neon highlighters, sticky notes, dog-eared file folders, and a word processing program that was last updated when the term “raise the roof” was still de rigueur.