Segundo! Arriba!

Still TTT

Would it not be equally "unsightly" if the partner profits go up astronomically? I call BS on that excuse for witholding bonuses.

When was the last time that Weil led bonuses? I'm sure they will follow whatever is market. My prediction - same as last year without the "special" bonus and with many more firms either not matching or claiming to match but then giving the full amount only to top performers.

everyone knows that trickle-down economics FAILED

hell, $355 for an associate is good money in much of the country. You can get a junior partner for less than that at midwestern AMLAW second hundred firms.

LOL at all the 2Ls who go there for anything other than bankruptcy and find out that after doing 2 years of bankruptcy work they are out of demand...

Those are ridiculously high amounts. I've seen up to $550/hour for partner billing in a Chapter 11, but $950? And $295 for paraprofessionals?
Glad I'm not the clerk for that Court, because those time sheets are going to get heavily scrutinized once the Fee Applications start coming in. Thousands of hours to pour through; all the money you wish you made.
Total fees topping out in the millions.

Note to the Weil partners:

Do not try to bill a $400,000 spa retreat to Lehman.

"paraprofessionals" -- are these pofessionals with physical disabilities?

11: If cramped apartments and mediocre lunches count as physical disabilities, then yes.

Finally a post where MysTTTal does not make himself out to be a semi-illiterate bigoted asscrack. Keep doing this and readers will forget all that stupid shit.

$950 an hour is probably Harvey Miller. He's worth it.

13: I had to read the byline again to see if you were being sarcastic.

...Woah.

what other para people are there? Paralegals, and what else, para-secretaries? Para-mail clerks?

3 bills an hour for a paralegal?? A good one is valuable, but no paralegal I've ever worked with is that good.

how does a 1L show an interest in bankruptcy law? thank you guys so much for your advice. if i get a 1L sa position this summer it will be because of all of you.

-nervous T-10 1L

8: Yeah, I'd rather go to a firm that's losing all of its business in this depression. /sarcasm

Sorry about your tiny pink bankruptcy department.

@18: Personal experience. Rack up some credit card debt, fail to pay it, and declare chapter 7 or chapter 13.

8 - if you think this bankruptcy cycle is only going to be two years...well, you just don't know that much to begin with.

MysTTTal

Thanks 20!

*hustles over to citicards.com*

Should I put this under the 'personal' or 'professional' section of my resume?!?!

-nervous T-10 1L

@23: "Interests: Skiing, golf, insolvency"

OK. I just got myself a brain and some courage for my nerves. Thanksssss.

Is Milbank also raking it in given they are representing the creditors committee? Or do the creditors not pay as much for representation?

21, don't forget that 2Ls wont start for another 2 years... so it would be a 4 years from now. 4 year ch. 11's although rare may happen, but the bulk of the work (and the corresponding need for juniors) is in the beginning

bankruptcy llm here...950 is a bit much and will be heavily...heavily scrutinized

28
I agree. Bankruptcy clerk here. Place a bit more emphasis on the HEAVY.
You in the St. John's program. Last I checked, it was the only one. I ask out of curiosity for how you like the program, as I'm considering it myself.

28
I agree. Bankruptcy clerk here. Place a bit more emphasis on the HEAVY.
You in the St. John's program? Last I checked, it was the only one. I ask out of curiosity for how you like the program, as I'm considering it myself.

elie, this was a pretty good post. although i don't condone making entire posts out of comments from other threads, i think it's cool that you comment on/respond to comments a little more than lat did. just my thoughts, of course.

some firm has to lead with bonuses and every firm will have issues of explaining them to somebody (i.e., clients). I would be interested in hearing more from bankruptcy people why Weil, which will be swimming in money either way, can't share the wealth with its associates.

There are paralegals who bill out at nearly $300? I was not aware of that.

32, large bonuses would probably be recovered by the trustee as preferences. There was a thread on this a few days ago.

34
I think that thread was talking about bonuses paid from the Debtor to its counsel. Those would almost certainly be avoidable as preferences.
However, once a fee application is approved and the firm itself gets its award, it can give all the bonuses it wants to its associates. That would not be recoverable as a preference unless the firm itself was in bankruptcy. Then, the bonuses might be considered preferences.

26; Debtor-side bankruptcy work is where the big bucks are made, far more so than creditor-side work.

35, no, the trustee can go after bonuses that a law firm representing a debtor pays to its associates. It's sometimes refered to as the windfall-bonus preference, or something like that. It doesn't happen often, but it happens.

Weil already pays above market bonuses to a large percentage of its associates, from 4th year upwards -- I think they're called "distinguished" bonuses or something.

Weil already pays above market bonuses to a large percentage of its associates, from 4th year upwards -- I think they're called "distinguished" bonuses or something.

37
I've never heard of any such doctrine. Especially not one that would come into play after the fee application was granted.
There could be a situation where an individual filed a fee application, failed to disclose a profit-sharing scheme with his firm or another individual, has the application granted, and gets hit for it later.
However, I don't think that would technivally be an avoidance action.
Assuming it is, so long as it is a FIRM that submits the fee application, and then the Court approves the amount sought in that application in total, any bonuses later paid to associates of that firm cannot be recovered as a preference.
Preferences can, by definition, only be transfers between the Debtor and a creditor or other party which takes place without the court's permission.
Once the money goes into the firm's coffers, it is no longer within the jurisdiction of the bankruptcy court or the standing of the trustee to seek a determination of whether the firm's use of the money rightfully earned is appropriate.
If you could cite a case or two or maybe Collier on Bky. and show me the doctrine you speak of, I would like that. But, I think such a doctrine does not exist until that point because it doesn't make sense under bky. law in the first place.

32 here. thanks for the bankruptcy analysis. just seems to me that these associates (esp mid level and higher) will be in high demand during the next couple of years. if weil is rolling in money and working its associates like dogs without sharing the wealth, I would think there would be an exodus to workout groups in banks, hedge funds, etc.

32 here. thanks for the bankruptcy analysis. just seems to me that these associates (esp mid level and higher) will be in high demand during the next couple of years. if weil is rolling in money and working its associates like dogs without sharing the wealth, I would think there would be an exodus to workout groups in banks, hedge funds, etc.

32 here. thanks for the bankruptcy analysis. just seems to me that these associates (esp mid level and higher) will be in high demand during the next couple of years. if weil is rolling in money and working its associates like dogs without sharing the wealth, I would think there would be an exodus to workout groups in banks, hedge funds, etc.

32 here. thanks for the bankruptcy analysis. just seems to me that these associates (esp mid level and higher) will be in high demand during the next couple of years. if weil is rolling in money and working its associates like dogs without sharing the wealth, I would think there would be an exodus to workout groups in banks, hedge funds, etc.

Weil to 190!

sorry for the multiple posts. kept getting error message

Right now, the demand in bankruptcy is for mid-levels, not really junior level associates. There is a steep learning curve and the really top notch shops simply do not have the time to re-train people who have never touched the stuff. The people who are the easiest to convert are corporate attorneys - particularly those with experience in secured lending and asset sales.

Right now, the demand in bankruptcy is for mid-levels, not really junior level associates. There is a steep learning curve and the really top notch shops simply do not have the time to re-train people who have never touched the stuff. The people who are the easiest to convert are corporate attorneys - particularly those with experience in secured lending and asset sales.

Who announced bonuses first last year and when was it?

Weil represented a bk'd power company. Lived high on the hog and overbilled like crazy. Stayed at the Ritz Carlton with 20 attorneys to attend a case management hearing while the bk'd company lived on a budget. Might be a great gig but you never want to use them once you are out because you feel raped during the entire BK process.

The fees charges by Weil are standard for top debtor shops (Weil, K&E, Skadden). The debtor gets stuck paying not aong their counsel, but also the counsel for the creditors' committee (Milbank).

I can't imagine associates getting stiffed on bonuses -- BK associates especially, they work liike dogs.

It's not a question of getting "stiffed" on bonuses. It's a question of getting to keep them after they're paid. See 34 & 37.

It would be ironic for an i-bank to whine that lawyer fees are too high. Ironic indeed.

Um, I'm a first year associate, not at Weil, and I get billed out at $420.

But see 35 and 40.
When a firm pays bonuses out of money that it has already earned after court approval, the money cannot be recouped as a preference. The Court has no control over what happens to money in law firm coffers if it obtains such money after court approval. I don't know where you learned bankruptcy law, but I've actually researched the question for my own practice and curiosity, and I've found no doctrine allowing for post-fee-application-approval-bonus avoidance.

I lost all respect for Weil when last year they hired this complete dumb fuck from my school ( a top 50ish school in the DC area).

They should be embarrased.

Bankruptcy lawyer here -- you guys are idiots. Bonuses paid to associates who have been retained as professionals by the debtor (post-petition) and whose fees have been approved by the court are NOT preferences for a variety of reasons, most notably because 99% of the time these fees are not incurred pre-petition, no antecedent debt, etc. Bonuses to employees at Lehman...that's another story.

Signed,
v50 bankruptcy midlevel associate

57, you apparently aren't aware of the new windfall bonus provision. Associates should be thankful that many trustees aren't either. But there was a case recently where a particularly agressive trustee recouped some Alston & Bird associate bonuses for the bankruptcy estate. I'm sure some trustees will not think it worth pursuing, particulary in larger bankruptcies, but this will be big news in the near future.

All associates will get the same bonus at Weil -- the bankruptcy associates working on Lehman aren't getting hooked. There is no windfall. This debate is irrelevant.

Not sure about anyone else, but I trust Weil's judgment over 58....

59, it's not about Weil's judgment. They do what they have to (and sometimes should) do. It's a question of what happenms later, and Weil can't control that.

Presumably the judgment is what amount of bonus to pay. If they pay market, which they will, zero chance there is an issue or that bonuses will be recouped.

54-

You forgot to add..."and I am a liar."

58.
57 is spot on in his analysis, as I have already pointed out via 35,40, and 55 (though 57's blanket statement that we are all idiots was offensive since he really recapped my own analysis in a more concise manner).
There is no such thing as the new windfall bonus provision. Bankruptcy law clerk here, who updates the library weekly, and the latest Collier and Norton supplements contain nothing on such a "provision." Neither do the cumulative BAPCPA revision manuals. Neither does the code.
And the case of which you speak involving Alston & Bird, which was decided in S.D. Ga., called In re Friedman, does not support your position at all. That case dealt with the recovery of PRE-PETITION transfers as fraudulent conveyances. To the extent any of the payments that the Trustee is seeking to recoup are from work done post-petition, it was most certainly not fees which had been approved through the designated court procedure under 11 USC 330 and related provisions.
Stop trying to impress with your knowledge of this new, novel provision. It does not exist. I promise.
It's also okay to be wrong. Just step back and admit it when you are.

Best,
35/40/55

$355 for a first year at a firm like Weil is pretty reasonable. I am a first year at a much lower ranked firm and I just entered my time on a high billing rate matter at a rate of $470/hour. It was pretty shocking.

These fees are market for a top firm (not to mention one with arguably the best bankruptcy practice in the world).

What the problem is?

Are bankruptcy judge's assistants allowed to call lthemselves "clerks"?

63, I'll try not to be snippy. The relevant part of the Friedman case is that the trustee went after law firm associate bonuses. I'm not sure why the bankruptcy "experts" on this board interjected the pre-/post-petition distinction. Don't firms do pre-petition work, and aren't associates bonused, in part, on the basis of that work?
--34, 37, 58

66,
Not worthy of discussion other than good luck with your law career making statements filled with such arrogance

67,
If any bonuses were sought by the Trustee as being recoupable it was bonuses paid by Friedman. In that case, the issue was whether the Trustee could recoup the money paid to Alston & Bird as a whole firm. If that implied that Alston & Bird was then going to take back bonus money paid to associates, then that is a call Alston & Bird is required to make. It has nothing to do with the Trustee.
And people drew the pre-/post-petition distinction because context is everything. In response to some saying the Weil was going to be high on bonuses this year because of the work it is performing, people like you started coming up with these brilliant theories about why bonuses couldn't be paid because they could be recouped as preferences and/or fraudulent transfers. By definition, those theories require the Trustee to go after payments made from the Debtor to another individual. The Trustee himself does not go after payments made inter-firm. He is going after the payments made to the firm itself.
There is virtually no context where the Trustee himself can go after payments made by the firm to its employees (in the form of associates). Again, to make this very clear, if a firm who is being hauled into court for accepting improper payment by the debtor decides it's going to recoup bonuses it paid to help offset its own losses in such litigation, that is a unilateral decision by the firm, not the Trustee.
As a result, the Trustee does not, and cannot, himself go after law firm associate bonuses.

Weil has got some scam going. Good work if you can get it.

68, isn't the real point that Weil associates stand to lose their bonuses, and not whether it's because the trustee goes after them or Weil is forced to call them back on its own? I'm as much of a law geek as the next guy or gal, but I think you're missing the big picture.

70
Fair point. I just can't see that Weil would ever be in a situation where it pays large bonuses and takes them back. I guess anything can happen, but I would doubt it. Weil prides itself on the quality of work it performs, and though associates might take a lot of abuse to have the privilege of working for such a well-respected firm, I think a firm-wide recoupement of bonuses by the management would lead to serious problems. But could it happen? I admit, yes.
Would it happen in the form a trustee going after the bonuses themselves? I still stand firm at no.
Still, fair point nonetheless, my prior comments have not been addressed at the bigger picture.

950 an hour for top partners is not going to be scrutinized that closely. What he did while billing might.

I wonder if the Bankruptcy Departments are going to be hiring?

Its hard to switch people over to bankruptcy. It is completely upside down if you have not seen it before. I would assume Mid-level associates, and just finished Bankruptcy Clerks would be the go to guys.

950 an hour for top partners is not going to be scrutinized that closely. What he did while billing might.

I wonder if the Bankruptcy Departments are going to be hiring?

Its hard to switch people over to bankruptcy. It is completely upside down if you have not seen it before. I would assume Mid-level associates, and just finished Bankruptcy Clerks would be the go to guys.

I would love to see Weil try to "recoup" bonuses from associates after they have already been paid. No firm in their right mind would try something like that. If the trustee somehow recovered money from Weil, the partners (the guys who make the fee arrangements) would take that hit. Not the associates. Query: would recoupment even be legal after the bonuses were paid out?

74, I think the fear was that the trustee could go after the associates directly.