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: firstname.lastname@example.org.
Things have changed recently in Korea – a few of our US and UK client firms are looking, very selectively, for a lateral US associate hire. Until just recently, there was not much hiring like this going on in Korea, since US and UK firms started opening offices there. We have already placed two US associates in Korea in the past month at top firms. Most of the hiring partners we work with in Korea do not actively work with other recruiters.
If you are a Korean fluent US associate in London, New York or another major US market, 2nd to 6th year, at a top 20 firm, with cap markets or M&A focus (or mix), or project finance background, and you are interested in lateraling to Korea to a top US or UK firm, please feel free to reach out to us at email@example.com or firstname.lastname@example.org. Our head of Asia, Evan Jowers, was just in Korea recently, and Evan and Robert Kinney will be in Korea in a few weeks. We are in the process of helping several firms open new offices in Korea (a number of which are interviewing our partner level candidates) and also helping existing offices there fill openings.
Professor Joel P. Trachtman has developed a unique, practical guide to help lawyers analyze, argue, and write effectively.
The Tools of Argument: How the Best Lawyers Think, Argue, and Win is a highly readable 200-page book, available for about $10 in paperback or e-book. Chapters focus on foundational principles in legal argument: procedure, interpretation of contracts and statutes, use of evidence, and more. The material covered is taught only implicitly in law school. Yet, when up-and-coming attorneys master these straightforward tools, they will think and argue like the best lawyers.
For most attorneys, time spent managing the books is a necessary evil at best. Yet it is undeniably a crucial aspect of running a successful practice. With that in mind, we invite you to view or download a free webinar by Above the Law and our friends at Clio to learn how to better manage your finances.
Take this opportunity to learn what it takes to streamline your accounting and get the most out of your time. The webinar agenda:
● The basics of accounting for lawyers.
● How legal accounting differs from regular accounting.
● Report and reconciliation issues surrounding trust accounts.
● How to pick and integrate the best accounting tools for your practice.
● Steps to prepare your tax return for your firm’s income.
Do not miss this crucial chance to optimize your accounting practices. Save time and get back to billing!