Dewey & LeBoeuf: More on the Merger
Please accept our apologies. After breaking the story on Friday afternoon, we kinda dropped the ball on the merger of Dewey Ballantine and LeBoeuf Lamb.
We'll write more about this transaction later. Sadly, we have to head offline for a bit. But in the meantime, here's an open thread for people to discuss the merger.
We'll get the ball rolling with a press-release-type statement that was sent to DB interviewees:
After receiving a callback from Dewey, the recruiting department sent me and all similarly-situated recruits the heads up: The new firm, to be dubbed “Dewey & LeBoeuf,” is set to roll out, “subject to approval by the partners in both firms.”Below is the email that I was sent. I apologize if you've already been notified.
The email, from Dewey Ballantine partner Henry Ricardo, appears after the jump.
EMAIL TO RECRUITS CONCERNING DEWEY BALLANTINE / LEBOEUF LAMB MERGER
From: Henry Ricardo
Sent: Monday, August 27, 2007 7:53 PM
To: Henry Ricardo
Subject: Dewey Ballantine Merger
As some of you might have heard by now, Dewey Ballantine and LeBoeuf, Lamb,
Greene & MacRea just announced that we have signed a memorandum of
understanding to combine, creating one of the world’s premiere
international law firms. The merger is scheduled to become effective on
October 1, 2007, subject to approval by the partners of both firms.
We regret that we could not discuss the merger with you during your recent
interview, but the merger was not formalized until late last Friday. We
hope you will understand that we could not discuss a merger that the two
firms had not yet agreed to undertake.
The merger is an enormously exciting opportunity for everyone associated
with both firms. The combined firm, to be called Dewey & LeBoeuf, will
have more than 1,200 attorneys in 12 countries with revenues approaching $1
billion. We will be the fifth largest law firm in New York and one of the
largest firms globally with offices in 26 cities. In terms of “fit,” the
two firms are highly compatible. We share similar institutional cultures,
values, and visions, including strong commitments to associate
satisfaction, diversity, pro bono legal services, and maintaining a
pleasant and professional office atmosphere.
While the merger brings tremendous opportunities, we also understand that
you might have unanswered questions. We want to do everything we can to
answer those questions so that you feel equipped to decide whether we are
the right firm for you. Please feel free to call Nicole Gunn, our Manager
of Legal Recruiting, any of the attorneys with whom you met, or me with any
questions. We will send you additional information about the merger as it
becomes available.
We look forward to staying in touch with you.
Sincerely,
Henry J. Ricardo
Chair, Legal Recruiting Committee
(42) Comments
VIVA LE BOEUF
dewey might want to check the spelling of its merger partner's name before sending out mass emails. MacRea?
Bigger = better?
Because I care only about myself, I can't help but ask how this merger will impact me as an incoming associate. In short, dewey still have jobs?
meh. such a retarded name, though.
I still hold out hope for a lawfirm named Dewey, Gippum & Howe
One highlight from Dewey's associates meeting yesterday was when Kessler declared that the merger is a positive development for everyone- including the lawyers who now want to leave.
12:48--
Everyone's a winner at Dewey & LeBoeuf.
Dewey is ridiculously desperate, and LeBoeuf is the only schmuck willing to take the ugly girl to prom.
Will this now open the floodgates of Dewey lawyers to Orrick?
I just can't get over "LeBoeuf"... how exactly is that pronounced? I think I've used it as innuendo before.
I think it rhymes with dooche.
The merger seems like a perfect match: number of lawyers and PPP are almost identical; top practice groups differ enough to complement each other.
Do we love beef may come out a player.
premiere?
@12:50 - Do you think they'll do a song using the Three Stooges backbeat?
Any incoming associates received any emails regarding this mega-merger of galactic proportions????
We heard they are sending out something today...
What's next? Wachtell, Cravath and Cromwell?
I would like to see one of the DC regionals marry. Seems like A&P, H&H, and C&B are all similar in size to DB & LL. Maybe its their turn to step up and get in the game. Being a DC regional is only going to get you so far. Maybe Orreck is feeling lonely.
sorry about that.
"We look forward to staying in touch with you."
That's the stupidest, most non-commital nothing of a sign-off that I have ever read in a letter.
DC dude:
I've heard grapevine discussion that A&P is looking to merge, albeit with a smaller firm, so perhaps aquire is the proper verb. Their LA office has tumbleweed rolling down the halls. Arnold & Orrick anyone?
Orrick, Heller Ehrman, Baker Botts, Vinson & Elkins, Arnold & Porter...all firms that are widely speculated to be in the hunt for a merger.
Viva LeBeef
I think the merged firm should be called "Dewey & Vanessa", and Boxy Brown should be the managing partner.
Nixon Lamb Ballantine Greene Peabody & McRae to 195K! Everybody = Winner.
The two big Minneapolis firms are supposedly in the hunt as well. (Faegre and Benson LLP and Dorsey and Whitney LLP)
actually, lat didn't "drop[] the ball on this." in fact, even the aba journal gave him a shout out for being the first to point to the deweyleboeuf.com domain name registration (at godaddy.com!) by the leboeuf partner. (see weblink below). this has been a good week for lat. the merger tidbit was great sluething and the nixon peabody thing was golden... makes up for a lot of the nonsense we've been reading on this site for the past few weeks.
http://www.abajournal.com/news/dewey_leboeuf_mega_merger/
Sucks for LeBuff that they're taking Orrick's leftovers.
On the bright side, now Dewey doesn't have to open its own office in Albany.
My understanding is that LeBoeuf contacted Dewey about the merger - not the other way around. Perhaps Dewey is not the one that is desperate to merge?
^ If LeBoeuf contacted Dewey, it was only because LeBoeuf knew that Dewey had a reputation for being easy.
It's true, LeBeouf did contact Dewey to merge, as did a lot of firms after the Orrick thing fell through. Seems logical, they were looking to get bigger and so was Dewey. What also came out at the Dewey meetings (heard from Dewey associates) is that apparently there had been NO substantive talks with Orrick prior to the media leaking the merger to the press. Now they have a signed agreement with LeBoeuf, so I guess it will happen.
Honestly, seems like a great fit to me.
While the Dewey-LeBoeuf merger must be approved by a vote of the partners of each firm, an inside source has it that LeBoeuf chairman, Steve Davis, is adamantly opposed to a truly anonymous ballot. Rumors indicate that voting methodologies being considered range from a flat out public ballot to weighting each partner’s vote by his or her partnership interest—common to all methodologies is the ability to identify the voters. Any vote that is not truly anonymous, i.e., ballots cast in secret and counted by an outside third party consultant (like the Oscars), will skew the results. Why, one might ask, would a public ballot skew results . . . after all we live in a country where our voting rights are cherished and where our soldiers have given their lives overseas to foster democracy? The answer is simple: Because democracy is unknown to the LeBeouf partners; anyone disagreeing with the powers that be have been castrated career-wise, economically disappeared as if LeBoeuf is some third world dictatorship like Haiti in the sixties. A “no” vote would be professional suicide if the nay-sayer were known, reprisals would be certain and severe—it’s happened before and the partnership is well aware of it. If the Dewey-LeBoeuf merger is such a great deal for all LeBoeuf partners, and not just for a select few whose loyalty has already been purchased, what have you got to fear, Papa Doc Davis?
While I agree with the comment above regarding LeBoeuf's need for a truly democratic vote (since to have anything else would make a mockery of the process and the notion that LeBoeuf partners are truly partners) I totally disagree with the characterization of Steve Davis as a tyrant. He has had to make some very important decisions over the past few years and could not have done the wonderful job he has done with the firm if each of his decisions had to have been put to a vote.
Let us hope that with a decision as important as a merger (one that will have a profound and important impact on each and every partners career) that LeBoeuf management does decide to have a truly anonymous/per capita vote such that each partner can vote the way they feel without worrying about what management or his partners think of his decision.
The Dewey partners should seriously consider the advisability of merging with LeBoeuf. With all the rumored concern about an anonymous vote, not one of the approximately 200 partners at LeBeouf appears to have read their partnership agreement. Apparently, it only takes one partner to request that the vote be secret. Great lawyers, heh? Instead of whining about it, you would think there was at least one LeBoeuf partner with the chutzhpa (or one with nothing to lose) that would ask for a confidential vote. Go LeBoeuf!
The Dewey partners should seriously consider the advisability of merging with LeBoeuf. With all the rumored concern about an anonymous vote, not one of the approximately 200 partners at LeBeouf appears to have read their partnership agreement. Apparently, it only takes one partner to request that the vote be secret. Great lawyers, heh? Instead of whining about it, you would think there was at least one LeBoeuf partner with the chutzhpa (or one with nothing to lose) that would ask for a confidential vote. Go LeBoeuf!
The Dewey partners should seriously consider the advisability of merging with LeBoeuf. With all the rumored concern about an anonymous vote, not one of the approximately 200 partners at LeBeouf appears to have read their partnership agreement. Apparently, it only takes one partner to request that the vote be secret. Great lawyers, heh? Instead of whining about it, you would think there was at least one LeBoeuf partner with the chutzhpa (or one with nothing to lose) that would ask for a confidential vote. Go LeBoeuf!
The Dewey partners should seriously consider the advisability of merging with LeBoeuf. With all the rumored concern about an anonymous vote, not one of the approximately 200 partners at LeBeouf appears to have read their partnership agreement. Apparently, it only takes one partner to request that the vote be secret. Great lawyers, heh? Instead of whining about it, you would think there was at least one LeBoeuf partner with the chutzhpa (or one with nothing to lose) that would ask for a confidential vote. Go LeBoeuf!
SCANDAL--How do you spell scandal "Steve Davis". Words out that Davis and his henchmen, but namely Steve DeCarmine, have strong armed their partners by calling them to make sure they voted for the merger ASAP. The vote done via computer was timestamped. Loyalty measured by how early the partner voted. Most partners hadn't even been given time to read the info material. Dewey partners watch out. The "DEVIL" you know is better than the one you dont.
Merger approved and announced.
Unrelated trivia: George Clooney filmed his new movie "Michael Clayton" at Dewey's offices.
Still partial to LeDewey
9/18 5:11: Scandal??
The partners were called? On the phone? Was it a strongly worded phone call? On the phone? Because wow. That's so scandalous.
And of course computer votes are timestamped. Computers timestamp everything. Loyalty measured by how early you voted? Says who? Sounds paranoid and wildly speculative.
You know, I hear Steve Davis can hear your thoughts. And timestamp them. Better wear your tinfoil hat to work.