* Are Biglaw's boom times over? Not necessarily. [Law and More]

* On the other hand, the people who cover Biglaw are cutting back. American Lawyer Media just laid off 42 staffers. [Gawker]

* Berkeley Law -- don't dare call it Boalt -- makes an exciting new faculty hire. [Is That Legal?]

* Could GMU Law sue the ABA? [PrawfsBlawg]

* Ex-judge Donald "Penis Pump" Thompson is back on the streets (but must register as a sex offender). [KTUL.com]

* Maybe Judge Thompson would have stayed out of trouble if a colleague had forced him to take estrogen. And that wouldn't have constituted sexual harassment. [Dealbreaker]

Associate Dean Walter J. Dickey, of the University of Wisconsin Law School, is no stranger to these pages. Back in 2006, ATL named him America's hottest law school dean (male, B-bracket).

Now he makes these pages for less positive reasons. From the Badger Herald:

The University of Wisconsin Law School canceled an event with controversial sexual content last Wednesday, and some students are calling the action a possible First Amendment violation.

The Wisconsin Law Students for Reproductive Justice had planned an event called “Sex Toys 101” to promote safe alternatives to sex, educate about sexual health and pleasure, and discuss law concerning sex toys, according to the group.

As long as you're outside Alabama, a Tupperware party for dildos should be just fine, right?

Well, maybe not. From a tipster:

[Dean Dickey] cancelled a sex toy party, sponsored by a pro-choice student group, because he found the sex-positive subject matter offensive. And he did it 2 hours before the event, without explanation. Then he hid behind adminstrative rules, then it became clear that he just didn’t like it. First Amendment violation, sex toys, Dean Dickey… You have to run this!

Dean Dickey's dictat displeased the students:

Members of the organization submitted a formal complaint to Law School Dean Ken Davis Friday, requesting a formal apology, refund of event expenses and clarification of student organization event rules.

In an interview Monday, Law School Associate Dean Walter Dickey said the event was canceled for content-neutral reasons, pointing to a Student Organization Office policy that prohibits the promotion or sale of commercial products by a private company.

Professor Marc Randazza's take: "That sure sounds reasonable, and it might be if it wasn’t bulls**t!"

Why does Professor Randazza view Dean Dickey's defense as BS? Find out, after the jump.

Any story that gives us the chance to deploy our Lesbians category is a good thing. Here's the latest Lawsuit of the Day, from the AP:

A Greek court has been asked to draw the line between the natives of the Aegean Sea island of Lesbos and the world's gay women.

Three islanders from Lesbos - home of the ancient poet Sappho, who praised love between women - have taken a gay rights group to court for using the word lesbian in its name.

One of the plaintiffs said Wednesday that the name of the association, Homosexual and Lesbian Community of Greece, "insults the identity" of the people of Lesbos, who are also known as Lesbians.

"My sister can't say she is a Lesbian," said Dimitris Lambrou. "Our geographical designation has been usurped by certain ladies who have no connection whatsoever with Lesbos," he said.

Leggo my... lesbo?

More lesbianic discussion, after the jump.

ATL broke the news earlier this month that Northwestern Law School selected Jerry Springer as commencement speaker for its May 16 graduation.

ATL got a shout-out in the Chicago Tribune, which described the controversy around Springer's selection. Despite some students' dissatisfaction, the decision is final:

Last week, the students who selected Springer announced in an e-mail to classmates that their decision had faculty approval and was final, emphasizing that he also was an Emmy-winning news anchor and political commentator who had drawn large crowds at previous speaking engagements.

On Sunday, Springer, a 1968 graduate of the law school, confirmed that he will deliver the address.

"The students invited me, and I'm honored," Springer said through his publicist, Linda Shafran. Although he has spoken on numerous college campuses, Shafran said, this will be Springer's first commencement address.

We had a poll last week asking, "Do you support Northwestern Law School's selection of Jerry Springer as its graduation speaker?" Here are the results. Springer had your overwhelming support, with over 76% voting in favor of the selection.

There was extensive discussion on our earlier post. We chose a few of your comments to highlight, after the jump.

Controversy surrounds choice of Jerry Springer as commencement speaker at Northwestern University Law School [Chicago Tribune]

Earlier: Jerry Springer to be Commencement Speaker at Northwestern Law School

O happy day! The AmLaw 100 rankings are out. For the rankings, click here; for commentary by Aric Press and John O'Connor, click here. (Note: registration / subscription may be required.)

We're surprised that the WSJ Law Blog's post on the release of the rankings has garnered so few comments (just four as of the time of this posting). The Am Law 100 is a big, big deal. As Ashby Jones explains:

The AmLaw 100, or the American Lawyer magazine’s annual list of the top-grossing law firms for the year previous, represents not only a boatload of work for AmLaw staffers. For law firm heads, it’s a report card of sorts. For law students and lawyers looking to move laterally, it’s a handy reference guide to who’s hot and who’s not. For GCs and other industry watchers, it’s a snapshot of BigLaw as a whole.

Membership in the Am Law 100 depends on a law firm's total revenue. The top five firms all chalked up double-digit increases in revenue, and the top two broke the $2 billion mark. Here are the top five (which are in the same rank order this year as last year):

Although the Am Law 100 firms are ranked by revenue, industry watchers generally pay more attention to the hallowed metric of "PPP," or "profits per partner." More data and discussion, about PPP and other subjects, after the jump.

The late and great Judge Jerome Frank (2d Cir.) is credited with the quip that "a court's decision might turn on what the judge had for breakfast." It's often cited as a neat shorthand for the legal-realist view of judicial decisionmaking.

So, what did the judge have for breakfast? We may know the answer, at least in the case of Justice Clarence Thomas. Check out this clever project, reported in Radar:

In the late '90s, pop-culture historian Bill Geerhart had a little too much time on his hands and a surfeit of stamps. So, for his own entertainment, the then-unemployed thirtysomething launched a letter-writing campaign to some of the most powerful and infamous figures in the country, posing as a curious 10-year-old named Billy.

To his surprise, replies soon started pouring in. Everyone from Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld (on tree-fort diplomacy) to Oprah Winfrey, Mister Rogers, Janet Reno, and members of the Supreme Court had words of wisdom for Billy.

To wit, Justice Thomas. When "Billy" asked him for his favorite McDonald's food, CT responded: "I like the Egg McMuffin. Actually, I like almost everything there."

Perhaps that explains the post-SCOTUS weight gain of Justice Thomas (a former marathoner, as he recounts in his memoir, who was noticeably well-built at the time of his nomination to the Court). It seems that law firm associates aren't the only folks putting on the pounds.

The handwritten letter from "Billy," and Justice Thomas's response -- a typewritten letter, but with a handwritten note at the bottom confessing a weakness for McDonald's fare -- are pretty cool to look at. Check them out by clicking here.

The Billy Letters: Introduction [Radar]
The Billy Letters: Justice Clarence Thomas [Radar]

We received over 1,600 responses to yesterday's ATL / Lateral Link survey on your law firm weight gain. Overall, you've gained a ton. Or more.

As one commenter put it:

NY to 350!

...lbs. that is...

Well, ok, it wasn't quite that bad, but two thirds of you who are currently practicing law have gained weight:

  * 13.78% of respondents gained 1 to 5 pounds.
  * 13.36% of respondents gained 6 to 10 pounds.
  * 14.13% of respondents gained 11 to 15 pounds.
  * 6.78% of respondents gained 16 to 20 pounds.
  * 6.71% of respondents gained 21 to 25 pounds.
  * 4.59% of respondents gained 26 to 30 pounds.
  * 7.35% of respondents -- and roughly a fifth of respondents who graduated in 2002 or earlier -- gained more than 30 pounds.

Just under 12% of you stayed the same. And a fifth of you are bastards reported that you lost weight:

  * 5.72% of respondents lost 1 to 5 pounds.
  * 4.73% of respondents lost 6 to 10 pounds.
  * 3.82% of respondents lost 11 to 15 pounds.
  * 1.55% of respondents lost 16 to 20 pounds.
  * 1.55% of respondents lost 21 to 25 pounds.
  * 0.71% of respondents lost 26 to 30 pounds.
  * 2.69% of respondents lost more than 30 pounds.

Most respondents are eating in the office, grabbing food from restaurants, and enjoying a sedentary lifestyle:

  * About three quarters of respondents who are currently practicing law eat at least five meals a week at their firms.
  * About two thirds get at least five meals a week from restaurants.
  * Although roughly two fifths of respondents said their firms have gyms (25% have free gyms, 15% are at firms with subsidized gyms, and 2% are at firms with no discount), 60% of these respondents "never" use their firm gym, and 20% work out only once or twice a week.

Law students fared better, but still not that well, with roughly 55% gaining weight, and just under a third losing weight. Law students were just about as likely as practicing attorneys to gain 15 or fewer pounds, but a bit less likely to gain more, and a bit more likely to lose 15 or fewer pounds. Clearly, there's room for more recruiting lunches.

So, overall, don't you feel better about yourself now?

Last week, we reported on rumors of layoffs in the Atlanta and D.C. offices of Sutherland Asbill & Brennan. The post has amassed over 400, um, informed comments.

The fact of layoffs has now been confirmed by the firm. Although Sutherland never responded to ATL's inquiries, it did talk to Meredith Hobbs, who has this article in the Fulton County Daily Report. The number of firings was lower than rumored, with maybe 8 attorneys let go from the Atlanta office and maybe 7 from the D.C. office. (Managing partner Mark Wasserman uses a lot of modifiers: "fewer than," "about," etc.)

The legal tabloid AbovetheLaw.com sparked a firestorm of rumors when it reported Friday that Sutherland Asbill & Brennan was laying off 30 to 40 associates firmwide.

Sutherland's managing partner, Mark D. Wasserman, acknowledged that the 480-lawyer firm has cut its associate ranks. But he said the firm has asked fewer than 15 associates to leave, with about eight associates affected in the Atlanta office.

Wasserman said the cuts were based on "several factors," "including the slowing economy, plus associate and practice group performance."

The firm says it still plans to bring in all of its summer associates and attorneys starting in the fall. But there's this warning about the future from legal recruiter Melba Hughes:

“I think we're going to see law firms tighten their belt throughout the region. It's a natural course of events given the period we've just gone through,” she said.

That could mean law firms reduce head count through layoffs, attrition, more cautious hiring and “by looking for new and creative ways to manage their workloads,” said Hughes, which could mean using more contract and staff attorneys instead of partnership-track associates.

The firm did not comment on the herpes rumors.

In The Trenches: Sutherland trims associate ranks [Fulton County Daily Report]

Earlier: Nationwide Layoff Watch: Sutherland Asbill & Brennan

* Good news: the economy apparently didn't slip into recession in the first quarter. That's what the second quarter is for. [AP]

* Election-year inertia hits Congress. [New York Times]

* Al Franken's accountant is a big fat idiot. [AP]

* Not your ordinary family reunion. [CNN]

* State appellate court affirms jury verdict against Port Authority in case arising out of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. [New York Times]

For the second installment of the Asia Chronicles, we're going interactive. Please click on this Youtube link, minimize, and read on.

Come with us, won't you, to a world of your imagination. Imagine that you're an associate at a major U.S. law firm in Asia, paid the same salary and bonus as your colleagues back home. Imagine further that $87,500 of your salary is excluded from federal income tax. Imagine that your firm pays your rent, and, even though this would normally be considered taxable income, it is excluded from taxation as well.

One of the ACLs who lived in this "world that defies explanation" paid off his entire $120K+ law school debt in one year and is on track to put away over a quarter million during the next two years. How? With extra salary and a much lower tax burden, he takes home approximately 15% more cash than he would in the U.S. He has no car or other transportation expenses (walks 10 minutes from home to office), usually works late enough to expense his dinners, and pays no rent. He takes so many business trips that frequent flier miles and hotel points take care of most of his vacation expenses. At least 80% of his paycheck goes straight into his 401K and other investments. The rest goes to magnums of Cristal (he admits he could do better).

Before we jump into the details, let's set out some assumptions:

Assumption #1: There are tons of U.S. firms in Asia; some pay less, some pay more. A sizable group of firms pays competitive packages (yes, we said "packages") at or near the top of the market. This entire discussion focuses on that group because, let's be honest, for most of us "the law" isn't our calling. We don't sit up at night thinking about Section 4(2) of the U.S. Securities Act or wonder about the components of a conversion formula in a share purchase agreement (wait, maybe someti... ok, no ... never). So, for the purposes of this discussion, let's just assume that it's mostly (almost entirely) about the Benjamins. (Or Maos? Lees?)

Assumption #2: There are U.S. lawyers in Vietnam, Indonesia, Thailand, etc. But, to borrow from XOXO/Greedy Associates lingo, this discussion focuses on "BIGLAW" in the major Asian markets (i.e., Tokyo, Singapore and the greater China region) at "Vault"-listed firms. HTH.

On to the main event. Salaries. Three words: New York levels. Bonuses. Three words: New York levels. That's right. When you guys over in New York rejoice over the raises, so do we. But, there's more. A few years ago, there was this evil little SOB of a concept called "tax equalization" whereby firms, for whatever reason (well, we know the reason; you do the math), decided to pay their overseas U.S. associates an amount in salary that was equal, after tax, to what an associate in New York would be paid. Yes, that means poor little Billy in Asia was "theoretically" paying New York city and state tax. Firms have since moved away from this model. In a low-tax region like Singapore or Hong Kong, this means associates can take advantage of the low tax rates. What's that, you say? The U.S. taxes on worldwide income? Fear not. Certain provisions in the tax code are geared towards providing tax breaks for U.S. citizens working worldwide. Bottom line, associates in Asia at U.S. law firms also pay less in taxes each year.

Ohhh, and it doesn't stop there. Remember the reference we made to "packages" above? Firms in Asia (except in, only God knows why, Singapore ) foot the bill for their associates' housing expenses. Many firms pay this housing allowance in cash each month, some pay the rent directly to the landlord. Many firms then let associates keep the difference between the rent and the allowance. The word on the street is that a certain Wall Street law firm whose name begins with an S and ends with a T pays top of the market at about $80,000 a year. So, if you're an associate at this unnamed Wall Street firm that rhymes with Pimpson Cratcher and your rent is $40,000 each year, you're pocketing an extra $40,000. It's the "special bonus" that never stops giving.

According to Evan Jowers of Kinney Recruiting (who has eyeballed perhaps more offer letters from the major US and British firms in Hong Kong / China than any other person in the industry), "The housing / expat packages at the top U.S. and British firms in Asia are likely to go higher in the next year or two. Many of these firms have substantially raised their packages in only the past 6 months, with there now being many more firms in the what I consider to be competitive housing allowance range in Hong Kong, $65,000 to $80,000, than a year ago. In fact, the number of firms with housing packages over $70,000 in Hong Kong has more than doubled in the past six months."

More delicious details, after the jump.

* Hit on a woman and get a free haircut. Saudi Arabia, is that the best punishment you can come up with? [ABC News]

* Vault and the Minority Corporate Counsel Association have created a new database for measuring law firm diversity. [Vault.com]

* Media turning to the Illinois Supreme Court to get into R. Kelly's case records. Really? More is needed than "R&B star," "sex," "videotape." and "13-year-old girl?" [Law.com]

* In other celebrity news, Spitzer's lady friend is back in the news with a $10 million suit against "Girls Gone Wild." [Law.com]

We don't want to ruin any surprises, but we've got some high-quality material for you this week at Legal Eagle Wedding Watch. There may even be a sparkly credential or two that we haven't seen in this space in a while. (Cough -- Rhodes -- cough.)

Behold, our outstanding finalists:

1.) Keira Driansky and David Simon

2.) Maya Nath and Benjamin Curtis

3.) Alexa Davidson and Marc Suskin

4.) Francesca Harper and Eric Cohen

More about our featured couples, after the jump.

Here's an update to a story we've covered previously: defendant Victor Wright's attack upon Assistant U.S. Attorney Carolyn Pokorny (E.D.N.Y.). With a razor. In a Brooklyn courtroom, in the middle of a sentencing hearing.

Fortunately, Wright was subdued by the court reporter and defense counsel (among others). We posted a (profanity-laced) transcript of the proceedings here.

Now we have a copy of the video, which was leaked by someone in the U.S. Marshals Service. It's not the greatest quality, and it has a certain Charlie Chaplin-esque quality. But it's still worth checking out, for an eyewitness view of the chaos.

Bonus factoid, from the New York Post: Wright "likely hid the blade in a body cavity." ICK.

To access the clip, click on the image below, then click again on the video on the right side of the page. Enjoy.

SHOCK: Razor Blade Attack Inside NYC Courtroom [WCBSTV.com]
VIDEO OF RAZOR ATTACK LEAKED [New York Post]

Earlier: 'Whereupon there is screaming'
Lawyer of the Day: Harry Batchelder (And Court Reporter of the Day: Ron Tolkin)

We have a longstanding obsession with Judge Janice Rogers Brown, the diva-licious D.C. circuit judge who frequently surfaces as a Supreme Court contender. We first wrote about her almost four years ago, and we've been JRB groupies ever since.

When we attended a lunch talk by her last year, she struck us as quite fashionable. We described her outfit (see blurry photo at right) as "an elegant, impeccably tailored, black wool-knit suit, with gold buttons and trim. The skirt was demure, falling below the knee. We're going to guess it was a St. John."

But maybe we overestimated Judge Brown's sartorial sense. Check out the opening paragraph of her opinion in Aktieselskabet AF v. Fame Jeans Inc. (PDF), an important trademark opinion construing a recent SCOTUS ruling:

BROWN, Circuit Judge: For some reason, a pair of jeans labeled Jack & Jones will sell for the equivalent of $96. Clearly there is magic in the name, and Fame Jeans tried to capture that magic by registering Jack & Jones as a trademark in the United States. Aktieselskabet (Bestseller), which generated the magic by selling Jack & Jones jeans elsewhere in the world, opposed Fame’s trademark application.

Complaining about $96 jeans? "Sounds like something Andy Rooney would say," quipped Natalie Hormilla, associate editor of ATL's sister site, Fashionista. In this day and age, hundred-dollar jeans hardly qualify as "magic[al]."

If Judge Brown finds the notion of $100 jeans offensive, Her Honor should steer clear of 18th Amendment -- the jeans maker, not what ushered in Prohibition -- and sass & bide (an Australian fashion label, not a law firm). Their jeans can retail for as much as $300 a pair, according to Fashionista assistant editor (and resident denim expert) Britt Aboutaleb.

Then again, who needs $300 jeans, when you get to hide the judicial booty underneath a black robe?

Aktieselskabet AF 21. November 2001, v. Fame Jeans Inc. [U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit (PDF)]

Richard Peltz teaches torts and con law at the William H. Bowen School of Law at the University of Arkansas at Little Rock. Within Arkansas, he is a well-known expert on freedom of speech, cited by the Arkansas Supreme Court. In 2005, he exercised his freedom of speech while talking about affirmative action during a con law lecture. From the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette:

In that class, Peltz displayed a satirical article about the death of Rosa Parks and made comments about friends who weren’t admitted to law school because of affirmative action, according to a letter students wrote about a year and a half later to law school Dean Chuck Goldner. The students also said Peltz promised to give black students who scored as high as white students an extra point on the final exam.

Apparently, the satirical article was Now We Can Finally Put Civil Rights Behind Us, from the Onion.

Though the issue was resolved in 2005, the allegations of racism reemerged in 2007, during a controversy over there being no black students on the Law Review. (The admissions website says the school has 440 students, and that 30% of the 2007 entering class was "of color.")

From this description, it sounds like there's a race war brewing at the UALR's Law School. And Professor Peltz just put himself in the middle of it, suing his black students and Arkansas's black law association for defamation:

In a nine-page lawsuit filed last week, he complains that the defendants, students Valerie D. Nation of Little Rock and Chrishuana L. Clark of Pine Bluff, who are officers or former officers with the university’s Black Law Student Association, and attorney Eric Spencer Buchanan, president of the W. Harold Flowers Law Society, have been making false accusations against him around the law school and statewide legal community since the fall of 2005. In the lawsuit, he asks for unspecified punitive and compensatory damages.

Ironically, if Peltz's suit is successful, it may limit speech on campus, says Jonathan Knight, director of programs on academic freedom and tenure at the American Association of University Professors in Washington, in the Gazette.

Getting sued by your law professor? Worst. Homework. Ever.

Read about another professor-versus-student lawsuit, after the jump.

Today's ATL / Lateral Link survey focuses on weighty matters. Literally.

In an interesting counterweight (as it were) to Kash's post about prison weight loss litigation yesterday, the Chicago Tribune had a story on a proposed law in Massachusetts that would ban discrimination based on weight. (Apparently, Michigan, the District of Columbia, San Francisco, and Madison, Wisconsin already have similar anti-discrimination provisions in place.)

Since Daily Kos has already "stolen" a poll on whether the law's a good idea, I won't ask that here -- although those of you with an appetite for debate can weigh in in the comments. But while weight debates hang heavy in the air, what I will ask is whether your time in law has expanded more than just your acumen.

So, have your salad days as an associate or law student yielded a beefier frame?

Has partnership given you more substance?

* New study shows "that the race of the defendant by itself plays a major role in explaining who is sentenced to death." [New York Times]

* GI Bill fails to deliver for some veterans. [Washington Post]

* Day in court for Austrian who held daughter captive for 24 years and fathered her 7 children. [CNN]

* French prisons full of Muslims. [Washington Post]

* Karl Rove gives campaign advice to Barack Obama. [CNN Political Ticker]

Time for a shout-out to this writer's home state. Over in New York, Biglaw lawyers tend to look down upon their cousins across the river. Dismissive jokes about "Jersey firms" are commonplace.

But large-firm lawyers in New Jersey are doing just fine, thank you very much. From a tipster:

As a Jersey guy, you may find this interesting: According to the NJ Law Journal, Lowenstein Sandler just became the first NJ firm with profits per partner in the seven figures: $1,102,700. Average compensation per partner is not far behind, at $977,500.

And it's not just Lowenstein Sandler that had a good year. Although New Jersey firms slowed their hiring and trimmed equity partner ranks in 2007, showing signs of being affected by the dire economic times, they still did pretty well. From the New Jersey Law Journal (subscription):

Growth in total revenues and net profits [among the New Jersey Top 20 firms] thus slowed in 2007. Revenue rose by 7.67 percent to $1.53 billion from $1.42 billion in 2006, compared with a 9.6 percent hike in last year's survey.

Profit growth was even slower, up only 5.62 percent to $519.3 million from $491.6 million, compared with a 9.9 percent bump the prior year.

When fewer lawyers produce more revenue, it means each is working harder. Indeed, revenue per lawyer showed a pronounced spike: up 5 percent to $517,650, more than three times the 1.4 percent rise to $493,000 reported last year.

Likewise, since there were fewer equity partners sharing the bottom line, profits per partner growth enjoyed an eight-fold increase, rising 6.62 percent to $594,100, compared with a sluggish 0.8 percent to $557,200 in last year's survey.

By New York standards, PPP of $600K is small potatoes. But it's still a handsome income -- and grows more appealing if the hours, cost of living, taxes, and partnership prospects are better over in Jersey. [FN1]

Time for New Yorkers to think about jumping to the other side of the Hudson? Or time for another round of pay raises for Garden State associates?

[FN1] These matters are open to debate, of course. Some New Jersey firms, such as the super-profitable Lowenstein, have reputations as sweatshops for demanding a lot of their associates.

Streamlining for Austere Times [New Jersey Law Journal (subscription)]

* Federal regulators shoot down "Try Legal Weed" as a beer slogan. [Snark Hunting]

* Torture chic? [Agenda Inc.]

* Blawg Review #157, on Canada's National Day of Mourning (in memory of "those workers whose lives have been lost or who have been injured in the workplace"). [Thoughts from a Management Lawyer via Blawg Review]

* It's the day you've all been waiting for: Records from Backstreet Boys litigation unsealed! [Courthouse News]

* PETA's not going to be happy about this one. Dolphin killed during a Sea World performance. [Local 6 News via Drudge]

* Sexual assault via telephone? [Quizlaw]

This suit points to an upside of being in federal prison county jail for capital murder: weight loss!

But this inmate is not happy about it and is suing the prison. Broderick Laswell entered prison at 418 pounds and says he's "literally being starved to death," losing about a half-pound per day. From the Arkansas Democratic Gazette:

Broderick Lloyd Laswell says he isn’t happy that he’s lost 105 pounds over the past eight months and is down to 308 pounds.

Laswell is an inmate in the Benton County Jail and has filed a federal court suit complaining about the diet he’s been fed by the county.

Facing a possible death penalty, this seems like the least of one's concerns. But food is one of life's great pleasures... even prison gruel.

“On several occasions I have started to do some exercising and my vision went blurry and I felt like I was going to pass out,” Laswell wrote in his complaint. “About an hour after each meal my stomach starts to hurt and growl. I feel hungry again.”

If the lawsuit doesn't work out, maybe he could work out some kind of weight loss spokesperson deal with the prison system, like Jared of Subway fame.

Murder-case defendant complains about jail diet, resulting weight loss [Arkansas Democrat Gazette]
Broderick Lloyd Laswell suit: I'm only getting 3000 calories a day [Overlawyered]

We inquired into this topic previously, and one of you even put up a Community post. What's up with those special bonuses for senior associates over at Sullivan & Cromwell?

This gossip has been circulating:

Rumor has it that S&C put out a memo about the senior bonuses [last week]. Apparently, the $2.5 million they "put aside" [mostly] went to cover the Cravath special bonus. The actual amount of the bonus was unknown as of last night as far I could tell.

The memo, which I don't have, seemed to suggest that the money was spent, but that they were going to give a small amount because they had promised. If S&C senior associates are lucky, maybe they'll get a gift certificate to Chili's.

And it's true. We couldn't get our hands on the memo, but we have confirmed with sources at the firm that S&C paid out its special "senior associate bonuses" last week. We don't know the numbers for all years, but word on the street is that current fifth-years received around $2,500.

Three grand is small compared to the whopping year-end bonuses that Sullivan already paid to its senior associates. But contrary to our tipster, it buys you more than a few meals at Chili's. Maybe the Cheesecake Factory?

In related news, the Sunday Styles section of the New York Times has an interesting article entitled "Not-So-Personal Finance." It's all about how among young people -- say, folks in their twenties and thirties -- open discussion of salaries and compensation isn't as taboo / tacky as it is among older folks. Lawyers get a shout-out:

Several workers under 35 said that greater salary transparency among friends only makes sense in an age when there is so much information freely available online. Young professionals, in fact, have all sorts of ways to find out how much their friends make, even without asking. Associates at law firms anonymously report their own salaries to Web sites like www.greedyassociates.com.

Greedy Associates? That's a bit "five years ago." If you check out their front page now, you'll see it's overrun with spam and postings about lawyer salaries in Kiev (no offense to our Ukrainian brethren).

We realize that the readership of Above the Law isn't exactly a random sample, but please take our poll:

Not-So-Personal Finance [New York Times]

Earlier: Associate Bonus Watch: Sullivan & Cromwell Matches (and More)

There's been a lot of good news lately over at Morrison & Foerster. E.g., bigger bonuses; enhanced parental leave.

But if you're hoping to work for the widely admired firm in Orange County, you're out of luck. The firm is closing its Orange County office as of June 30, 2008. The closing was announced last week by firm chairman Keith Wetmore, via email.

For those of you who follow MoFo's fortunes, the closing shouldn't come as a huge surprise. Back in February, we reported on how the firm was essentially dissolving its summer program in Orange County. (To its credit, the firm offered incoming OC summer associates the chance to work in another office for the summer or financial support for pro bono work.)

Update: More here from The Recorder, which reports that the MoFo-OC closing was triggered in part by "the departure of its office leader and another partner to Manatt, Phelps & Phillips."

The email announcing the Orange County closing, after the jump.

Last week, we posted Part Three of the results from our ATL / Lateral Link survey on bar stipends and reimbursements, salary advances, and signing bonuses (which covered the range of firms from Akin Gump to Proskauer Rose). We got quite a few tips in response, as well as quite a few comments in person, at the NALP conference in Toronto.

Find out whether today's installment will at last make it to Wachtell, Weil, WilmerHale and beyond . . . after the jump.

But before we get there, let's quickly review what we said about the table last week:

The table below shows four things for each firm:

  * how the firm helps new associates with bar exam expenses (reimbursement of actual expenses or a fixed stipend),

  * whether the firm pays new associates a signing bonus or graduation bonus (not counting clerkship bonuses, which are discussed elsewhere),

  * whether the firm provides salary advances (i.e., loans) in any particular amounts, and

  * whether the firm provides a pro-rated bonus (a "stub bonus") for the period between your start date and the end of the year first year.

As always, please send us a tip if any of the details about your firm are missing or wrong or fraught with nuance. Also feel free to let us know whether these stipends and bonuses are subject to repayment if you leave, and whether your firm helps out with relocations, both topics of surveys last week.

And now, that introduction aside, read on to see the fourth batch of results from our ATL / Lateral Link survey on bar stipends and reimbursements, salary advances, and signing bonuses. Check it out, after the jump.

We know you all love rankings!

Earlier this month, Leigh Jones of the National Law Journal reported on which schools sent the highest numbers of 2007 law school students to the 250 top-ranked law firms:

Columbia Law School landed in the No. 1 spot again as the school that sent the greatest portion of graduates to NLJ 250 law firms, with nearly 75% of its students in 2007 taking jobs among the nation's largest law firms. The school ranked No. 1 last year, when 69.6% of its graduates went to NLJ 250 law firms. Boston College Law School rounded out the list of the top 20 go-to law schools, with 36.8% of its 261 juris doctor graduates in 2007 heading for full-time jobs at NLJ 250 law firms.

All together, the top 20 law schools that NLJ 250 law firms relied on most to fill their first-year associate ranks sent 54.9% of their graduates to those firms, compared with 51.6% in 2006.

Northwestern won the most improved award. It moved from number 11 to the number 2 spot, sending almost 74% of its grads to top law firms. Two newcomers to the list were UCLA and Boston University. Texas and Fordham fell off the list.

Columbia "won" in terms of the number of students sent to the top 250 law firms, but NYU sent the most grads to firms ranked in the top 20.

Note the NYC and Chicago rivalries in the top four spots. So exciting!

Over at Empirical Legal Studies, Professor Bill Henderson analyzes the data in more detail, focusing on a chart showing the percentage of students at each law school that were hired by a NLJ 250 firm (which he dubs the "funnel cloud" -- fun stuff!). He concludes:

[The] chart has at least two takeaways: (1) the funnel cloud formation shows large law firm employment payoffs are non-linear and that the vast majority of schools offer similarly modest, but not insignificant, entree to this sector; (2) based on the volume of green and red at the top of the chart, most large firms prefer to recruit deeper into the class at a Top 20 school (and will pay a price premium of $160,000 per year) rather than shifting their model to lower ranked schools. 53% of all new NLJ250 jobs between 2005 and 2007 went to Top 20 biggest feeder schools from 2005.

For additional data -- including PDFs showing the employment outcomes of different law schools by region (e.g., NLJ 250 firm, other law firm, clerkship, unemployed) -- check out the links collected at the end of Professor Henderson's post.

Hiring more deeply into top schools [National Law Journal]
Large Law Firm Hiring -- Introducing the "Funnel Cloud" [Empirical Legal Studies]
What rankings don't say about costly choices [National Law Journal]

The Supreme Court once again wades into the choppy waters of election law. Yeah, you know you love it.

From SCOTUSblog:

The Supreme Court, voting 6-3, on Monday rejected a constitutional challenge to Indiana’s law requiring voters to show a photo ID before they may cast a ballot. Three Justices said the evidence offered against the requirement in Indiana did not support a challenge to the law as written — that is, a “facial” challenge – and three others said the law only imposed a minimal and justified burden on voters. Three Justices dissented.

The decision, in the case of Crawford v. Marion County Election Board (07-21) and a companion case, was the only ruling of the day. The Court also issued new orders, but granted review of no new cases....

Here is Lyle Denniston's take:

The voter ID ruling may turn out to be a significant victory for Republicans at election time, since the requirement for proof of identification is likely to fall most heavily on voters long assumed to be identified with the Democrats — particularly, minority and poor voters.

(But not those six-figure-earning, Ivy-League-educated Obama types, of course. They have multiple forms of ID, including passports, which they use for ecotourism visits to Costa Rica.)

Later today -- there's nothing up now except a link to the opinion -- check out Election Law Blog, for the analysis of election-law guru Rick Hasen.

Update: Rick Hasen's write-up appears here. Professor Hasen predicts:

It will encourage further litigation, because it relegates challenges to laws imposing onerous burdens on a small group of voters to "as applied" challenges, but those challenges will be difficult to win. The lack of a majority opinion, moreover, injects some uncertainty into the appropriate standard for reviewing other challenges to onerous election laws.

Breaking News: Supreme Court Upholds Voter ID Law [Election Law Blog]
Court rejects voter ID challenge; no new grants [SCOTUSblog]

What's with Oklahoma judges and indecent exposure? Our only other Oklahoman Judge of the Day, State Judge Donald Thompson, was sentenced to four years for indecent exposure (and using a penis pump) in the courtroom in 2006.

Today's honoree is a Tulsa County district judge from the criminal division. He too seems to have trouble keeping the goods under wrap, and is facing felony charges for it:

Judge Jesse Harris was charged Thursday with two counts of indecent exposure resulting from a March 9 incident involving an ex-girlfriend and her friend in a parking lot at an east Tulsa motel. He was arrested and after being booked at the Tulsa Jail, he was released on his own recognizance. Harris denies the allegations.

Tulsa World refrained from giving a graphic description of the encounter. But the arresting officer spilled all the dirt in the affidavit [PDF]:

Victim one is Harris's ex-girlfriend, Kali Nolen. According to Tulsa World, she and Harris met when she was a process server during a 2002 lewd molestation trial. Such a romantic story...

Details revealed in Tulsa County judge's indecent exposure case [Tulsa World]
Judge's accuser offers details [Tulsa World]

* Sen. John McCain defends his use of his wife's private jet for campaign trips. [CNN Political Ticker]

* Mortgage industry resists greater regulation. [New York Times]

* 60 Minutes with Justice Antonin Scalia. [CBS via WSJ Law Blog]

* From the M&A front lines: Mars to snap up Wrigley's for $23 billion; Yahoo! lets Microsoft deal deadline pass; Continental ditches merger talks with United. [New York Times; AFP; New York Times]

* Dirty old man: 73-year-old Austrian confesses to holding his daughter captive in the basement for almost 24 years -- and fathering seven children by her. [CNN]

The Atlanta office of Paul Hastings suffered a tragedy last week. Jermaine Acevedo, a temp worker in Paul Hastings' record department, shot and killed Raven Buckley, a Paul Hastings secretary, and then killed himself. The murder-suicide happened Friday afternoon outside of Paul Hastings' building. From the Atlanta Journal-Constitution:

Buckley had worked as a legal secretary there for about a year. Both were working Friday, said police.

They dated at one point, but it wasn't clear to police if they were still dating when the confrontation took place Friday afternoon about 3:30 p.m.

According to police, Buckley was in the courtyard in front of the Bank of America Plaza with a friend on break when they believe Acevedo encountered her, though police don't know the exact circumstances.

At some point, according to police, Buckley and Acevedo were talking while sitting at a picnic table in the courtyard when their conversation escalated into an argument.

Buckley jumped up to leave, according to police. Acevedo grabbed her and held her down. He pulled out a handgun and shot her three times, at least once in the head. He then shot himself in the head.

On Friday night, law firm spokesperson Lapiano released a brief statement that the firm was "deeply saddened and shocked by this tragedy. Our thoughts and prayers are with the victims' family and friends. Please be assured that we are cooperating fully with local authorities on this ongoing investigation."

Lapiano said Saturday the firm planned to bring grief counselors in Monday to help the staff deal with the killings.

Acevedo was 30 and Buckley was just 25.

'Awful' tragedy: Law firm rocked by murder-suicide [Atlanta Journal-Constitution]
Paul Hastings Secretary Killed in Apparent Murder-Suicide Outside Atlanta Office [Law.com]

* We're not the only ones obsessed with Nina Totenberg. NPR sold out of their first run of Nina Totin' Bags. [NPR Shop]

* Will it be as marketable as a book on how NOT to get sued? [What About Clients?]

* "Your Honor, I Move To Strike Your Mother For Cause" [Deliberations]

* The winning bid for the Red Sox shirt buried in Yankee stadium was $175k, with the proceeds going to The Jimmy Fund. But what if the 174k over the asking price isn't actually tax-deductible? [TaxProf Blog]

* Musical Chairs: UVA hires constitutional law expert Frederick Schauer away from Harvard. [Virginia Law]

* This was too dirty for a full post, even for Kash. NY law firm Bivona & Cohen is pre-emptively suing a secretary who gave a partner a lap dance with a happy ending, and kept the "towel of proof." [Law.com]

Two venerable institutions are working on re-branding.

In this new promo video, Venable wants to clarify that its name starts with a "V."

From their marketing firm's website comes this insight into the new image:

Working with Greenfield/Belser, we sought to create a visual identity for our firm that best represented our firm’s personality:

* proud but not boastful
* self-assured but not cocky
* confident and competent but not arrogant
* decisive and resolute but flexible and adaptable
* enduring, built for the long haul but evolving with changing needs

We also sought to reinforce to existing clients and convey to prospective clients, the attributes that we are known for (in the view of our clients):

* a firm that gets what’s really important to me
* the best of both worlds, quality and excellence at a fair price
* real human beings, not robots
* genuine interest in me, my business and my concerns
* they tackle our problems like they’re their own
* they’re confident, determined, authentic, resolute, innovative and respected

Our New Brand

V is the first letter in the word “Venerable,” and “Victory,”and “Vision,” and…Venable. We have made very minor modifications to our logo. But we will now also incorporate a strong visual element throughout our materials – The Venable “V.” “V” is a powerful letter and we want to own it. It is strong and unique.

Very vinteresting.

The second re-branding campaign has been discussed before in these pages. Berkeley has issued a press release clarifying their name. An excerpt:

Names

* Our official name is the University of California, Berkeley, School of Law. With external audiences, we will use our official name in full or in one of two abbreviated forms: UC Berkeley School of Law or Berkeley Law.
* We will continue to use the name Boalt Hall with alumni and with the internal law school community.

Approved
University of California, Berkeley, School of Law
UC Berkeley School of Law
Berkeley Law
Boalt Hall (within the “family”)

Discouraged
Berkeley School of Law
Berkeley Law School
Boalt Hall School of Law (or other permutations)

Please notice the Boalt logo at the top of the press release page. Mixed messages... we're confused...

Berkeley paid a public relations firm $25,000 to come up with the brilliant new moniker, UC Berkeley School of Law. We wonder why they didn't take ATL readers' (free) advice and call it the White Guys With Asian Girls School of Law.

Rumors are circulating about layoffs in the D.C. and Atlanta offices of Sutherland Asbill & Brennan. We reached out to the firm for comment, but they have not responded yet. This is what we have heard.

One ATL tipster says:

Just curious about whether ATL had heard that Sutherland, Asbill, and Brennan had laid off a bunch of folks (expected to be between 32 and 40, when it's all said and done) in the Atlanta and DC offices. Apparently it's been handled pretty poorly and has obviously left a lot of associates in the lurch, both those fired and the remaining people who are waiting for the other shoe to drop.

Another tipster says:

I've heard a few rumors (well, verified facts rather) about massive layoffs in Sutherland's DC and Atlanta offices recently. Rumors put the number at over 30 attorneys, including very junior attorneys. Put out the call and reveal the mystery that is the Sutherland Slaughter!

If you have any info to share, please email us. Thanks.

Heading into the weekend, a post on those looking for love seems appropriate.

A tipster sent us this Craigslist missed connection that emerged from a SCOTUS hearing this week:

cute tall blond at supreme court argument - m4m - 36 (dc)
Reply to: pers-655332634@craigslist.org
Date: 2008-04-24, 10:46PM EDT

on 4/23. Me short with dark hair with woman. You sat behind me.

The tipster reports that "on 4/23 the court heard METRO. LIFE INS. CO. V. GLENN and MEACHAM V. KNOLLS ATOMIC POWER LAB. Which one attracted the unrequited?"

ERISA conflicts of interest and employee downsizing programs... We can see why the Craigslist poster might have been looking for distraction.

This isn't the the first time sparks have flown at the Supreme Court, though Desperately Seeking 'The Supreme Court Clerk of My Heart' got points for greater creativity in his missed connection ad.

Another tipster sent us this law school student's posting:

law student looking - 25 (williamsburg)
Reply to: pers-607649012@craigslist.org
Date: 2008-03-15, 10:14PM EDT

hey ladies!

I am 25, from San Diego, and in Williamsburg to study law... I have been here for two years and am newly single...

I have been here for two years, but all the law school girls are like friends/sisters to me - so NOT dating prospects in any way

so... I am on here seeing if any ladies want to meet up for coffee, go on a date, and get to know one another

you be: attractive, open, talkative, and intelligent
I am: same

NOT, NOT, NOT trying to use this as a sex service (If I wanted JUST sex, believe me I could get that - and so could you - easily)

Since this dates back to March 15, maybe a love connection has been made. If said Williamsburg law student wants to update us on his search for a non-law-school-lady-friend, send us an e-mail.

Last week's Job of the Week was extremely popular, so we are offering up another in-house gig, this time a little further south. Here is the latest Job of the Week, brought to you by Lateral Link.

Position: In-House Counsel (Labor & Employment)

Location: Memphis, TN

Description: This multi-national company's legal department is seeking an experienced employment attorney who will provide legal counsel in the ordinary and special activities of the corporation to ensure protection of the corporation's legal rights and compliance with the law. Attorney must have a JD and at least 5 years' quality experience running and overseeing a Company's side of a union organizing campaign. Must be a member of the TN Bar or willing to sit for the TN Bar upon joining the Company. The Company offers competitive compensation with the possibility of relocation assistance.

Skills: Union avoidance training experience, NLRB and/or NMB case handling experience, Corporate campaign experience (a plus), Transportation industry experience (a plus).

For more information, please see job #8511 over at Lateral Link.

Earlier: Prior Job of the Week listings (scroll down)

You gotta love South Florida. It's such a fun, crazy place. It has South Beach, the nightlife, the fashion, the wild news-making Broward judges... Joining the ranks of Judges of the Day from Brow