[Ed. note: Above the Law is committed to bringing you the most comprehensive and up-to-date information about how the economic crisis is affecting the legal industry. Towards that end, we’ve teamed up with the people at Lawshucks. They’ve done excellent work translating all of the layoff news into user-friendly charts and graphs: the Layoff Tracker.

This post, written by Lawshucks and cross-posted here, is what we expect will be a new weekend feature on the week that was — at least until the economy turns around, and all the layoffs stop.]

This week seemed like it would start off relatively quietly after recent hysteria. The week ending February 20 was the first week in which major law firms laid off more than 1,000 people in a single week and, of course, the week prior to that we had “Black Thursday” or the “Valentine’s Day Massacre” (although I will always think of the Valentine’s Day Massacre as Drexel Burnham Lambert’s bankruptcy filing in 1990, which was also a slight misnomer, as it, too, actually occurred on February 13).

In fact, this week did start off relatively slowly, with just over 100 people laid off from firms such as Sheppard Mullin, Dechert, Linklaters, and Baker & McKenzie. Although rumors had been stirring for much of the week, it was only on Friday that official word broke of the massive cuts at Latham & Watkins.

Analysis and context after the jump.

[Ed Note: On a regular day, a lot of these items could have been full posts. We’re sorry if we couldn’t give the full treatment to your particular tale of terror today.]

* Sonnenschein has closed its Charlotte office. Eleven attorneys will be relocated or let go. The ABA needs to send a special forces unit into North Carolina to search for survivors. [Am Law Daily]

* The password is “de-leveraging.” [Adam Smith, Esq.]

* Longtime Manhattan D.A. Robert Morgenthau will not seek re-election. The D.A. — who has been legally dead for at least 3 years — wanted to spend more time focusing on his eventual resurrection [WSJ Law Blog]

* Leave your presumptions in the courtroom. Out here in the real world, we prefer wild speculation. [Wall Street Journal]

* Maybe Bono should wear orange tinted glasses exclusively? [TaxProf Blog]

* How do you sue the voice of God? [Popsquire]

We interrupt today’s blood-letting to bring you the latest from the NYT weddings page. In keeping with the dark mood around here, all of this week’s contestants are brunettes. Here they are:

1. Sophie Jensen and Robert Lalley

2. Vicky Hallett and Jeffrey Miller

3. Gillian Deutch and Daniel Solinsky

See which of these newlyweds still have jobs, after the jump.

We reported yesterday that K&L Gates was likely to announce layoffs today. There is still no comment from the firm.

Firm chairman Peter Kalis’s “out of office” reply is somewhat curious given the news swirling around the firm today. Here’s what we received when we emailed him (again) today:

I will have infrequent access to email today. I will respond to your email as soon as possible. Thank you.

Peter Kalis
K&L Gates LLP

This has led some tipsters to believe that the layoff announcement will come Monday instead of today.

But whenever the news comes — if it comes — it looks like the firm doesn’t want associates jumping out of windows. Literally.

Details after the jump.

Given the crazy layoffs news today, a law firm cutting back on perks might seem like small beans. But with many perks, it’s not about the particular thing being offered (or taken away) it’s about what the perk says about the firm, its culture, and in some cases its financial health.

It looks like McDermott Will & Emery is taking away coffee in its Chicago office. Here’s the email from the head of the firm’s Chicago office:

These are difficult times for our business and legal communities. We, like all law firms, are looking at expenses that can be pared without diminishing the quality of the legal services that we provide to our clients.

Effective immediately, we are suspending our coffee services in the 45th floor lobby. We will, of course, continue to provide coffee and drink carts for client meetings. We will also continue to have the Flavia coffee service available on each of our attorney floors and will provide coffee to our clients in our 44th floor reception area.

We are also suspending, effective immediately, our evening food services. Lou and Walt are working on alternatives and will present those alternatives to you in the very near term..

If you have any questions, please call me.

George

Fair enough.

But after the jump, we see that other MWE partners were not all that happy with cutback.

The publishing industry might be rocky, but media litigation is smooth sailing. As always, the Job of the Week is brought to you by Lateral Link. If you are interested in hearing more about this position, please contact Justin Flowers (pictured), at jflowers@laterallink.com. Justin is a Director with Lateral Link; you can read more about him after the jump.

Position: Media/Litigation Associate

Location: New York, NY

Description: This New York boutique law firm is ready to grow and is looking for a litigation associate (Class of ‘04 - ‘07) with excellent academic credentials (Top 10 school, Law Review and/or Honors). A federal clerkship is a very strong preference, but not required if you’re just that good. Practice includes Media and IP (copyright and trademark) as well as White Collar and General Commercial Litigation work, but no prior Media/IP experience is necessary. Be prepared to learn to really litigate under the tutelage of a partnership that includes two former federal prosecutors and two former SCOTUS clerks. An entrepreneurial spirit and drive will help the successful candidate make the most out of this ground floor opportunity!

For more information about this position or to apply, please see Position 10397 on Lateral Link. Membership in Lateral Link is free and you can apply at www.laterallink.com.

Troubling rumors are circulating about Chicago-based Kirkland & Ellis. Tipsters say that: (1) layoffs are happening in the firm’s New York office, and (2) the start date for incoming associates is being pushed back to the end of the year.

The firm laid off 15 to 25 non-equity partners in January. Now it appears to be moving on to associates. A source says the firm started conducting layoffs of mid-levels in its New York office on Wednesday, and that they are still going on, writing this morning:

The layoffs are continuing today (mostly in the litigation and private equity departments). I’m not sure about the veracity of this, but I also heard that K&E’s NYC litigation department lost one or two big clients because they refused to lower their fees.

The firm spokesperson has not responded to our inquiries. If you have more information, please contribute to the comments, or send us a tip.

We’re also hearing that start dates for incoming associates at the firm have not been announced yet, but one 3L bound for Kirkland has gotten news that the start date will be December 2009 at the earliest.

Was told in writing that I won’t be starting until the end of the year for sure, and they left open pushing it back even further…. Guess my loans will have to wait….

Update: A 3L bound for Kirkland’s D.C. office questions the report of delayed start dates:

I am a graduating 3L that will be starting in the fall at Kirkland’s D.C. office. When I accepted the offer, K&E told me I would hear back in the spring about start dates, bar expenses, etc. I am not sure what 3L can have a “letter in hand” about start dates, I have not received any start date information, nor has a fellow incoming K&E associate whom I just asked.

A round-up of the firms that have pushed back start dates, after the jump.

The world is obsessed with celebrity professors Cass Sunstein and Samantha Power, who recently left the ivory tower to take high-ranking positions in the Obama Administration. He might someday sit on the Supreme Court; she's a winner of the Pulitzer Prize; and together, as we previously reported (see the update), they're creating the World's Smartest Baby.

How many HLS grads turned Harvard professors get named Fun Couple of the 21st Century by Esquire? The article begins:

If The Chronicle of Higher Education had paparazzi, a few of them would be camped outside this office right now.

The office is in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and inside are two Harvard professors. The first -- a tall woman in her thirties with long red hair -- is wrapped in a wool blanket.... The second -- a slightly older man who looks a bit like William Hurt -- wears a dark suit and is twirling a Wilson tennis racket, a favorite habit of his. They're talking about the usual -- Obama, the fight against extremism, the future of the Supreme Court. And also, who should order flowers for the priest who helped them out with wedding plans.

In a week, they're getting married in a small church in Ireland -- a fact that, if those paparazzi did exist, would send them into a Brad-and-Angelina tizzy.

Oh, but such paparazzi do exist. Harvard Law School student "Percy Thrillington" snapped a few photos of the happy couple, in an HLS parking lot -- the small parking lot just off Mass. Ave., next to the International Legal Studies library. They were unloading what said tipster described as "a rather dorky-looking red PT Cruiser."

(Hey, Percy, lay off the PT Cruiser. If it's good enough for Chief Justice John Roberts -- see photo at right -- then it's good enough for Cass and Sam.)

After a heated bidding war between top tabloid publications -- bids climbed well into the six figures, allowing Percy to pay for his law school education -- ATL emerged victorious. We now proudly present exclusive photographs of the world's leading legal-academic couple.

Check out paparazzi pics of the Power couple, after the jump.

This instant reaction to Latham’s layoffs is that the moves herald a paradigm shift among top law firms. The Faculty Lounge offers this analysis:

[A] massive layoff like this breaks most of the remaining market stigma around Big Firm layoffs. As I discussed previously, top tier firms have long been afraid of laying off associates for fear that rising 2L’s from Harvard et al would not accept their offers….

There is a small upside to this layoff - the significant severance packages may set an industry standard. But the flip side is that these layoffs may make other big firms feel that severance packages are the vitural equivalent of continued employment - that they take away most of the stigmatic sting of the act.

Latham could also be setting a precedent in the way it is handling its incoming first years. Just after the firm announced the layoffs, Latham sent out an email to incoming first years offering them a $62,000 stipend (plus the standard $13,000 Bar Exam stipend) for deferring their start date until October, 2010:

We are also offering an alternative for those who are interested in further deferring their start date until October 18, 2010. This Deferral Program provides an opportunity to use the intervening period to work at a public service organization or pursue academic, political or other interests.

It could be a good deal for some people.

But is Latham really a trendsetter? We explore after the jump.

When it comes to lateral movement of lawyers from one firm to another, things seem pretty dead. If you’re an attorney with a job, you’re probably just holding on for dear life. Latham, holla.

But it’s important to distinguish between lateral partner moves and associate moves. The latter are becoming increasingly rare, but the former continue to happen with regularity. As various firms founder and flounder, partners with business think: “I have a portable book in the eight figures. Why would I want to go down with these clowns?”

Of course, not every lateral partner move arises out of a rainmaker seeking greener pastures. Economic instability has resulted in some partners being prematurely put out to pasture, perhaps because they don’t generate enough business in these tough times, or perhaps because their firms went under. The American Lawyer refers to such lawyers as “accidental laterals”: they never intended to be on the lateral market, but they wound up there anyway.

We suspect that this latest lateral move, however, is not accidental. Superstar IP litigator Dale Cendali — who has been quite busy in the past year, representing the likes of Harry Potter author J.K. Rowling — is leaving O’Melveny & Myers for Kirkland & Ellis. Joining her at K&E are current OMM partners Claudia Ray, also based in New York, and Diana Torres, in Los Angeles. The exact timing is unclear, but look for a move sometime next month.

O’Melveny confirmed the news to ATL and issued this statement, through a firm spokesperson:

While we regret losing a talented group of lawyers, we are fortunate to have an exceptional team and deep bench of IP litigators specializing in patents, trademarks, copyrights, IP antitrust, computer hardware and software, media & entertainment, and life sciences. Our IP lawyers have national practices and have appeared in courts across the country.

More details, after the jump.

* Federal Judge Susan Illston, who will be presiding over Barry Bonds steroids case is reputed to be very sharp. [The New York Times]

* During his inauguration, chief judge Jonathan Lippman of the state Court of Appeals in Albany lobbied for pay raises during his speech. [Newsday]

* Citigroup’s corporate directors cannot be held responsible for losses resulting from the sub-prime mortgage mess, a Delaware judge says. [The Associated Press]

* “The House delayed a vote on legislation to allow bankruptcy judges to modify the mortgages of troubled homeowners.” [The Washington Post]

* The Justice Department will try the accused al-Qaeda operative, who has been long held by the government as an “enemy combatant,” as a civilian. The decision could be a factor in the upcoming SCOTUS discussion on presidential powers. [Bloomberg.com]

* A Judge ruled that the billions of dollars Leona Helmsley left to charity do not have to be spent exclusively on dogs. [Courthouse News]

Records are being set this morning at Latham & Watkins. At 8:00 a.m. Eastern time, managing partner Bob Dell sent out an email announcing that the firm is laying off 190 associates and 250 staff. These numbers are on top of any “stealth layoffs” that may have previously occurred at the firm in the past year.

Four hundred forty employees — 190 associates, 250 staff — is, as far as we know, more than any one law firm has ever laid off (not counting dissolutions). Latham is also the first Vault top ten firm to conduct major layoffs.

But Latham is also setting another record, of a more positive nature. Consistent with what we reported yesterday, the firm is offering “a comprehensive separation package, including payment of six months salary (up to total severance of $100,000) plus six months of continued medical coverage (through August 31, 2009).” This is the most generous severance package that any major law firm has given departing employees (see this table).

That will definitely soften the blow. But one LW source has a question:

No mention on any partner shifts — did they really grossly overshoot the number of associates and staff they needed for the economy we ended up with, but nail the number of partners needed just right?

According to Dell’s email, the cuts constitute approximately 12 percent of associates and 10 percent of paralegals and support staff. One LW tipster, however, tells us that in terms of U.S. associates being laid off, the number may be closer to 20 percent.

The full email from Robert Dell, plus more, after the jump.

Dewey & LeBoeuf has been slowly shedding people over the past few months. The firm closed down its offices and relocated attorneys from Charlotte and San Francisco. There was some forced attrition in November. The firm announced structured finance layoffs in December. And the firm laid off a significant portion of its Los Angeles associates in January.

Today, cuts have come to NYC and D.C.

The firm is not calling these cuts “layoffs.” Instead, the firm is finishing up semi-annual performance reviews and making cuts along those lines. The firm provided ATL with this statement:

Dewey & LeBoeuf maintains a semi-annual performance review process and we are currently in our year-end cycle. We do not comment on the specific outcomes of our performance review process or individual review conversations.

Some explanation about the Dewey & LeBoeuf review system, plus thoughts from tipsters, after the jump.

* Yes, the Philadelphia D.A. did rescind offers to 12 incoming attorneys. With fewer prosecutors, now is the time for Mets fans to go to Citizen’s Bank Park and “appropriate” some hardware. [The Legal Intelligencer]

* Are you an attorney worried about the economy? Legal bloggers feel your pain. [Law and More]

* Yo, I heard Calvin got a job at WacArnolds. Yeah. Lets rob that n***a. [ABC]

* Could somebody please stop the national embarrassment that is Roland Burris? Right now, even Chris Rock would rather have Flavor Flav in the U.S. Senate. [Law Dork 2.0]

* You gotta check out the headlights on this story. [My Law Life]

Could Friday end up being another Valentine’s Day Massacre? We’re already waiting to see if Latham will announce its layoffs tomorrow, but now we’ll also be waiting to see what K&L Gates does.

We believe that K&L Gates will announce layoffs on Friday. We believe it will affect most of the firm’s offices — even the ones in Texas.

The news broke late last night. We don’t have any conference room bookings to report, but there was an emergency partner meeting yesterday:

This rumor was sparked around last minute emergency Partner meetings yesterday afternoon. Some big decisions were going down in those meetings.

Tipsters from many K&L offices have written in about expected layoffs tomorrow.

Managing partner Peter Kalis did not respond to our requests for comment on the reports.

But K&L Gates has already indicated that layoffs were a possibility. Details after the jump.

News started breaking this morning about significant layoffs at the large New Jersey firm of Lowenstein Sandler. The firm has now had an opportunity to inform all of the affected associates, and is ready to confirm the layoffs. The following is from a firm wide email that just went out to all Lowenstein personnel:

With deep regret, we are today implementing a reduction in force affecting 21 attorneys and 32 staff members across all departments of the firm, representing just under ten percent of our total workforce. We also are reducing the size of our 2009 incoming class by three associates. These were extremely difficult decisions for the firm to make, and we delayed for as long as possible because of the quality and dedication of the employees who are being affected.

The numbers represent about 8% of the total attorneys at Lowenstein.

If you had been hanging around McGoverns Tavern (as our sources have), you’d know that the firm also rescinded offers to 3Ls:

Word is … that NJ firm Lowenstein Sandler is rescinding offers to 3L’s…. Source is third hand from a 3L who is at McGoverns Tavern right now, having had their offer rescinded.

The firm was able to confirm this news directly to ATL.

Read the firm’s statements after the jump.

We regularly receive tips about free events, often educational or charitable in nature, that might interest our readers. Because we don’t have the ability to give shout-outs to all, and to ensure consistent treatment, we direct everyone with events to promote to mention them in our Community section.

If your event is more commercial in nature, you can advertise on ATL. If your budget is limited, you can do a quicklisting, which will appear on the ATL main page.

We will mention events featuring participation by Above the Law. We will also mention events sponsored by our advertisers, like the happy hour sponsored by Major Lindsey & Africa, and the launch party of Practical Law Company.

If you’ll be in Washington next Tuesday, here’s an event at Georgetown Law, featuring yours truly (see the 11:45 a.m. panel), that might interest you:

Empirical Research on the Legal Profession: Insights from Theory and Practice

When: Tuesday, March 3, 8:30 a.m. - 4:30 p.m.
Speakers: Various. Check out the full schedule of events.
Where: Georgetown University Law Center, 600 New Jersey Avenue, NW, Washington, DC
Cost: Free, but please register in advance.

Hope to see you there!

Conference on Empirical Research on the Legal Profession [Empirical Legal Studies]
Empirical Research on the Legal Profession: Insights from Theory and Practice [PDF]

Management at Latham & Watkins continues to be incommunicado regarding the firm’s impending layoffs that we reported yesterday. Nonetheless, Above the Law has come by some information that could be positive for sleepless Latham associates.

Multiple sources have told ATL that Latham could be offering a six month severance package to the attorneys the firm is about to fire.

Of course, we don’t want to get everybody’s hopes up. As one source says:

I’d be shocked if that actually happens, given how bastard-y Latham been lately, but who knows?

But there are persistent rumors that Latham will try to combat the overwhelmingly negative press the firm has received by offering a soft (ish) landing to the departed.

Of course, the most humane thing to do at this point would be for Latham to make a public announcement and euthanize terrified associates.

Commenters and tipsters weigh in after the jump.

Earlier this month, duty called us to a midtown Manhattan bar to cover a Pink Slip Party for our sister site, Dealbreaker. Geared toward those laid off from Wall Street, the “party” was a depressing scene meant to bring job-seekers together with potential employers. There were more recruiters than potential employers around, though, and there were lines of people in suits waiting to sit at booths to go over their resumes with the recruiters.

Job seekers are similarly disadvantaged in the legal market, thanks to continuing layoffs. One unemployed lawyer is trying a novel new approach. He wants to turn the headhunter payment arrangement inside out, and pay a recruiter to find a job for him. From his Craigslist ad:

This economy sucks. It probably sucks for recruiters too! Therefore I want to make life a little more interesting. This may not be a huge amount of money, but if you’re already on commission it’s more than usual I imagine.. For any recruiter that helps me a permanent position as an associate attorney in relevant areas (defined below) I will pay the following immediately:

$60,000- $69,999 per annum I will pay you $3,000
$70,000 - $90,000 per annum I will pay you $4,000
$100,000 + per annum I will pay you $5,000

I am also looking for contract work in the short term. I will pay $300 for anything which is supposed to last more than a month.

This seems to make sense. Sometimes job seekers are advised to avoid working with a recruiter because it makes them more expensive, since the employer has to pay the recruiter a fee on top of the new hire’s salary. If the new hire foots the recruitment bill, the game changes.

Some people don’t like this idea. The Craigslist poster, who asked to remain anonymous, has had some angry responses, after the jump.

[This article was prepared by Tricia McGrath, a director in Lateral Link’s NY office. For questions please contact Tricia at tmcgrath@laterallink.com.]

This is an interesting time in the legal industry. In the past few months, we have watched the lay-offs of many strong associates and counsel. If you are one of the gainfully-employed associates, what can you do to secure your position at the firm? How can you prevent becoming a casualty in the future? By embracing the changes in the market and increasing your value to your firm!

Business development is about building relationships. You want to get to know people and have them know you. It is all about building a network of contacts that you can leverage in the future. No one expects a junior or mid-level associate to go out and land a Fortune 100 client - that’s not how it works. At your level, you should be building contacts and legal expertise, both of which you’ll need in the future. You should demonstrate to your firm that you have a potentially bright future in rainmaking.

Here are some additional basics for venturing into business development. The earlier you begin to build skills in this area, the more successful you will be either at your current firm or your next one!

Learn from Others

• Each firm has partners who are famous for their rainmaking ability - some are even legendary. Study how these partners get business. Many of them are probably experts in their field and sought out by clients.


• Study how senior associates and junior partners manage their business development efforts, as their strategies might be more suited to you.


• Pay attention to how partners and senior associates interact with clients. Client service is so important.


• If your firm offers seminars on business development, make sure that you sign up.


• After observing others, find a style that works for you.

***More after the jump.

Okay, let’s try to blow the lid off this thing. We know that some firms are rescinding offers to 3Ls, we just don’t know which ones.

Here’s a quote from yesterday’s Workplace Prof Blog:

I’ve just started hearing of major law firms rescinding or “indefinitely deferring” employment offers to this year’s 3Ls. At our school, this is disproportionately hurting our top students — students who clerked for major firms last summer, received what they thought was a job offer, did not participate last fall or early this spring in the job-search process under the rational assumption that they already had a job, and only now are being informed that that job does not exist. The information I’m hearing is that these students are not being given a stipend, a “severance” package, or anything else to help tide them over — they’re just being told “see ya later.”

We know things are bad for 2Ls. We know things are terrible for 3Ls without offers. We know clerks are chaining themselves to their desks.

But if you are a 3L who had an offer rescinded, you’ve essentially been fired before you started working. You’ll have to compete with all the other laid off attorneys, yet you’ll have zero Biglaw work experience.

We’re asking 3Ls to step forward and tell us which firms are rescinding offers. We’ll try to collect your tips, and figure out just how many firms are rescinding offers.

Send your tips to tips@abovethelaw.com.

3Ls Getting Hosed [Workplace Prof Blog]

Earlier: You’re a 2L? I want to say one word to you. Plastics.

[Ed. Note: The following piece was authored by “The Legal Tease” of Sweet Hot Justice fame. You can check out all of Legal Tease’s other musings from Sweet Hot Justice here.]

There have only been a handful of moments in my legal career—nay, in my life—when I’ve felt there was a decent possibility that all the people surrounding me in a particular space were about to collectively crouch down, bare fangs, and storm forward in a sweeping, feral frenzy of rage, ripping out the throat of whichever poor bastard happened to be in charge. Typically, this feeling has only kicked in while, say, waiting on the tarmac at O’Hare during a blizzard, or sitting in my 1L Property Law class on the day my professor announced that she didn’t believe in teaching black letter law. But last Thursday, it happened in a 6th floor conference room in my tense, hungry little corner of BigLaw.

You see, the powers that be at my firm had called a meeting that day. Not just a meeting, but the meeting—the one to address the recent, escalating fear crippling the associate ranks. True, BigLaw can hardly be described as an oasis of calm in any economy, but the paranoia around my firm lately has been palpable. In the past few weeks, each time I’ve heard a knock on my office door before 9 a.m., or received a call from an extension I didn’t recognize, or opened an email addressed to “All Associates-USA,” I’ve felt my body click into a fleeting state of stomach-sinking paralysis, wondering whether I’m about to be told that I’m officially being relieved of my obligation to show up for work on a daily basis. Call me neurotic, but the massive stealth layoffs ripping through my firm lately—paired nicely with radio silence from the firm’s management—can make a girl a little jumpy.

Turns out, though, my fears were totally unfounded. Because, you see, last Thursday, the firm finally stepped up and started talking. They held the meeting—a self-styled Q&A forum for all associates where the firm’s associate management committee promised to address several “topics of interest.” And oh, how they did. They cut through the typical administrative nonsense and dove right into the big topic. The topic that’s undoubtedly been clouding their minds in the past few weeks. The topic that apparently dwarfs any and all other possible topics that might be of interest to any associate. Anywhere. The topic so relevant, so timely, that it merited a good 25-minute discussion. That’s right, friends, my firm finally opened up and addressed this, the Most Important Topic Facing BigLaw Today: whether the firm should adopt a Casual Fridays dress code.

Things get worse after the jump.

* After visiting Guantanamo, Attorney General Eric Holder says the prison is “well-run now” but the administration is going to close it anyway. The White House just gave itself a big pat on the back. [Reuters]

* The court rejected a Long island surgeon’s bid to get $1.5 million in compensation for the kidney he donated to his estranged wife. [The National Law Journal]

*Bonus Watch part deux: Bank of America’s CEO will testify today in Andrew Cuomo’s investigation of the $3.6 billion in bonuses paid at Merril Lynch before the two banks merged. [Bloomberg.com]

* “The U.S. Supreme Court made it tougher to sue companies for antitrust violations. [Bloomberg]

* A federal identity-theft law that is a “favorite tool of the government” in immigration cases was flawed in the eyes of SCOTUS when they heard arguments about it yesterday. [The New York Times]

* Two former pro-Israel Lobbyists accused of espionage can use classified documents in their defense, a federal appeals court ruled. [The Associated Press]

* Former Covington & Burling staff attorney Yolanda Young is suing Covington & Burling for racial discrimination. [On Being a Black Lawyer]

* If you don’t want to deal with racism at a law firm, maybe you should just go clerk for a couple of years…. oh, wait. Scratch that. [The Root]

* Unless you have money. [What About Clients?]

* Heller Ehrman paid out $7 million to departing or retired partners in 2008. Heller Ehrman dissolved in 2008. You know what’s cool? Ownership. I’m going to go home and deny my television Windex, because I can. [The Recorder]

* It’s nice to see Roxana St. Thomas is catching on. [The Onion]

* Former Cadwalader associates have had more time to figure out what to do with their new found freedom. One option is to start a website where you get to review all the partners you used to work for. Let’s hope this takes off. [Rate A Partner]

* SHELDRAKE: I only wish I could help, there’s no spare s*** at the moment. Remember the greatest writers starved … JOE: Are you trying to be funny? SHELDRAKE: I believe in self-denial, gives a man some moral backbone. JOE: Can you loan me three hundred bucks? [Mama Law]

While the bad news continues to rain down on practicing attorneys, law students are the ones sitting there with a “deer in cataclysmic meteor event” look on their faces.

It’s been a while since we gave law students a chance to vent their frustrations, so here we go.

Today, NALP is out with actual statistics showing how 2Ls are seeing their jobs disappear in a pyroclastic flow. From a synopsis in the National Law Journal:

The median number of offers to 2Ls for summer associate positions at firms of all sizes fell from 15 in the fall of 2007 to 10 in the fall of 2008. The decline was even steeper at firms with 700 or more attorneys, where the median number of summer associate offers fell from 30 in 2007 to 18.5 in 2008. Additionally, fewer callback interviews yielded summer associate offers in 2008. In recent years, about 60% of callback interviews led to summer associate offers. Last fall, however, only 47% of callback interviews led to offers.

And after scrolling through the 20-page NALP report, we also noticed the shortening of summer programs:

Summer programs were typically 10 to 12 weeks long, regardless of firm size. Over three-quarters of offices reported summer programs of either 10, 11, or 12 weeks, although the lengths reported ranged from 6 to 19 weeks. For the vast majority of offices (80%), the 2008 summer program length was the same as in 2007. About 11% reported that their program was one or two weeks shorter compared with 2007; however, about 5% reported that their summer program was one or two weeks longer.

More numbers, statistics, and reasons to trade in your J.D. for a certificate of attendance in refrigerator repair, after the jump.

Remember when being a staff attorney was a viable option in the Biglaw universe? As we have previously reported, many big firms are laying off their staff attorneys. Today, Dechert adds its name to that growing trend.

Within the past few hours, we received a number of tips about staff attorney layoffs at Dechert.

Our sources tell us that Dechert will lay off 10 staff attorneys today. The number accounts for about 1/4th of the firm’s total staff attorney force.

Dechert laid off 19 attorneys two weeks ago, and 72 staffers back in December. So this news should not be particularly surprising.

But it is another indication that the economic crisis is taking a toll on all types of Biglaw employment.

Good luck to the 10 staff attorneys leaving Dechert.

Earlier: Staff Layoff Watch: A Roundup
Nationwide Layoff Watch: Dechert Cuts 19
Dechert Ices 72 Staff Positions

In lieu of Wednesday’s ATL / Lateral Link featured job survey post — lolcat lover Justin Bernold is on vacation — we bring you a questionnaire about a topic near and dear to your hearts: Continuing Legal Education (CLE).

If you’re at a firm that’s experiencing a slowdown due to the downturn, with many free (and non-billable) hours to kill, now is a good time to rack up CLE credits. In Notes from the Breadline, Roxana wondered: can CLE credits be rolled over, like cell phone minutes? In some jurisdictions, yes.

To take the survey, which serves both editorial and marketing purposes for us, please CLICK HERE. You can also share your thoughts on CLE in the comments.

Your feedback is greatly appreciated. Thanks!

CLE survey for ATL [SurveyMonkey]

Hello, friends. The tables we’re compiling these days are not fun ones. We’ve posted running lists of the firms that have frozen salaries — as well as a list of those that haven’t — and, in this post, a list of the going rates in severance packages.

With layoffs still going strong, knowing the severance terms at your firm is more important than ever. As reported earlier today, 70 to 150 Latham associates could be handed three-month goodbye presents on Friday.

We put together a casual comparison of severance packages last week, and we asked those with knowledge to weigh in. ATL readers offered several corrections and additional information. We even had a firm spokesman email us to correct a listing.

We offer a new table, after the jump, along with the same caveats from the first time around.

Ed. note: Have a question for next week? Send it in to advice@abovethelaw.com.

ATL —

I’m a third year associate (in M&A) at one of the firms that is offering a voluntary severance package to those associates willing to take it. As you guys reported, there are layoffs in store anyway, but the firm will not divulge the amount of severance they will be paying for those who they are planning to lay off. My hours are as high as they can be given the work available and I don’t have any sense one way or another from the partners if they’re planning to can me. Do you have an opinion on whether I should take the voluntary severance?

Dead Man Walking

Dear Dead Man Walking,

For the sake of argument, I’m going to assume you’re referring to Pillsbury’s lofty-sounding Voluntary Departure Plan. Somewhere along the line it appears that Pillsbury got confused as to whether it was asking associates for their necks or running an elite Masonic Lodge, because under the terms of the program, you can’t just tell Pillsbury that you’ll take their three months offer and scram. Instead, interested attorneys must “express interest” and then “state their desire to be included,” by rapping thrice on the door to HR and uttering the phrase: “A Man, A Plan, A Canal: Panama.” High-ranking firm members will then confirm or nullify the applications for membership.

No doubt your firm believes that giving associates a illusory “choice” is a glorious act of munificence, but the choice they’re posing is really no different than those posed by the Inquisitors to the Cathars or by the English to William Wallace: convert or be killed, confess or die, quit or be fired. If you take the buyout, you might not have been fired otherwise. If you don’t take the buyout, you may be fired anyway and get less severance. And the worst possible scenario: you may apply for the buyout, GET REJECTED, and then have to explain to colleagues that that you were fired from being fired.

Based on the limited facts, I would take the money and run. Third-years in corporate are like lambs for the slaughter. Plus, this whole ridiculous “program” sounds like a convenient excuse to provide garbage severance to laid off associates under the guise of “but we offered you a buyout!”

Only you know all the factors: your work quality, your hours, your horoscope. In the words of Anton Chigurh, “You need to call it. I can’t call it for you. It wouldn’t be fair.”

Good luck.

Your friend,

Marin

Elie plays the role of Marius Pontmercy in tonight’s performance, after the jump.

It is definitely time for someone to set fire to the Hot Topic in the Mall of America.

On Friday, a lawsuit was filed in Minnesota federal court on behalf of “The Vampyre Nation” requesting sovereignty from the United States of America. But let’s pretend it was filed it on Ash Wednesday.

Remember when people went to jail to work out and change religion?

More hilarity from Jonathon Sharkey after the jump.

There have been a lot of rumors about impending layoffs at Latham & Watkins. Major layoffs. The firm has not responded to our multiple requests for comment, but here is the best information we’ve been able to collect over the past few days.

We’re hearing that at least 70 - 150 people will be laid off from Latham. We believe that it is all going to go down this Friday.

The layoffs will primarily affect the offices in New York, Chicago, D.C., Los Angeles, and San Francisco. Conference rooms have been booked in all of those cities for Friday the 27th. The conference room schedule, which is available online for all Latham associates to see, is how most people are finding out about the layoffs coming at the end of this week. A tipster reports:

The online conference scheduler for Latham’s NY office has multiple rooms in the conference center checked out for all of Friday to Dave Gordon (L&W NY’s office managing partner), with multiple adjacent conference rooms checked out to the head of HR, as well as the head of the technology department. This is clearly not a typical occurrence.

We understand that partners in the New York office have been very open about the fact that a large number of people will be let go, and first-years are far from safe.

And while LW doesn’t seem to want to talk about this publicly, firm management has already decided on which people will be let go. The list will be given to the full partnership sometime tomorrow.

Why is Latham being silent about layoffs that everybody already seems to know about? We offer some historical context after the jump.

After yesterday’s staff layoff news, it may come as no surprise that Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney is the latest firm to freeze associate salaries for 2009. From a tipster there:

Buchanan Ingersoll announced a salary freeze for 2009 for all associates except “unusual” cases, e.g., laterals who were brought in at what is now perceived to be slightly undermarket salaries last year may get bumped a little. Several other raises on a case-by-case basis, but they will be few.

Better a freeze than a lay-off, we say. We’ve updated the list of firms that have chosen not to institute class year raises. The list is now 47-firms strong. Check it out, after the jump.

* Michael Jackson “beat it” without paying his legal bill. [The Daily Breeze]

* Former Merrill Lynch CEO John Thain testified for 2.5 hours yesterday in New York in Attorney General Andrew Cuomo’s office, but wouldn’t say which employees got some of the $3.6 billion bonus pie before the merger with B of A. How are we supposed to know which men to date when we get laid off? Kidding….[Bloomberg]

* More than 100 clients of a man who pretended to be an immigration lawyer got free advice from Lawyers at the New York City Bar Association. [The New York Times]

* SCOTUS had a big day yesterday, ruling on a Utah union case and a case involvingIndian reservations, and hearing arguments on environmental cleanups. Ruth Bader Ginsburg was the first to ask questions. [ABA Journal]

* In Houston, a Republican on the congressional judiciary has called for the impeachment of U.S. District Judge Samuel Kent, aka the groper we’ve been writing about, who is still hoping to get retirement funds from the state. [The Houston Chronicle]

* Show me the money. Lawyers, bankers, and accountants stand to make $1.2 billion in fees from GM’s bankruptcy. [Bloomberg.com]

Ed. note: Welcome to the latest installment of “Notes from the Breadline,” a column by a laid-off lawyer in New York. Prior columns are collected here. You can reach Roxana St. Thomas by email, at roxanastthomas@gmail.com, or find her on Facebook.

There are certain pieces of news that no one wants to deliver, and which seem so unpalatable that the need to announce them induces dread, discomfort, or simply the desire to hide in one’s apartment and alphabetize the bookshelf. Examples of such revelations might include “I wrecked the car,” “There’s a typo in your tattoo,” “Your boyfriend belongs to the Celine Dion Fan Club,” or “I forgot to save the document, and then my computer crashed.” Having the ensuing conversation is sure to be unpleasant; knowing that you’ll probably have it every day is enough to make the standard bikini wax, by comparison, seem delightful.

But the wheel is turning; you may not be able to hold on, but you can’t let go. If, like me, you are fired abruptly (and without a generous parting gift from the sponsor), it does not take long to realize that time is among the luxuries not included in your severance package. You have approximately one day, give or take a few hours, to stare into space pondering your fate, wonder why you didn’t throw a paperweight, kick over a chair, or scream “fuck you!” during the meeting at which you were “terminated,” and debate whether it is too late to eat a large meal, return to the assignment partner’s office, and induce vomiting. After that, take a deep breath. Notwithstanding widespread belief to the contrary, they weren’t kidding. And, although being “terminated” sounds like a CIA euphemism for “being killed,” it is, in fact, both far better and way more complicated; if the firm simply had you ‘disappeared’ (an option that many have probably contemplated), your to-do list would be considerably shorter. For better or worse, the fact is that when your job ends, the work begins.

So, if you find yourself tasked with this unwelcome new avocation, where to begin? As a preliminary matter, take note: post-employment may feel more like a stress test than a learning experience, but there are certainly lessons to be derived from the floundering, confusion, and free-flowing advice that characterize its early days.

Among them are a few basic (but helpful) concepts. First: tell everyone. Second: be prepared for the responses, from the ridiculous to the sublime, which will invariably pour in.

Read about some of the suggestions, after the jump.

Sheppard Mullin could have gone the full “stealth” layoff route. The firm has been laying off people incrementally over the past couple of months for a variety of reasons: some performance based, others because of the economy. The firm could have left former employees confused and current employees frightened about what is going on at the firm.

But this evening the firm decided to come clean and present the information in a reasonable and straight forward manner. In response to an inquiry from Above the Law, the firm released this statement:

At yesterday’s meeting of the Sheppard Mullin Associates’ Forum, firm management announced that by the end of this week about 25 attorneys firmwide will have been let go since the beginning of the year. Some of these terminations were performance-related; others were true “lay-offs,” done in order to adjust professional staff levels in practice groups whose level of business has been adversely affected by the economic downturn.

The terminations have been carried out incrementally over the last two months, because firm management has very carefully assessed each associate’s performance in the context of the level of work projected for the associate’s practice group.

As we said a long time ago, there are attorneys out there who would have been fired during any economy. But given the current economic climate, there are a lot of people being let go that would have been able to hang on if times were better.

With this statement, Sheppard Mullin is at least replacing a lot of speculation with solid facts.

Good luck to the 25 people let go — regardless of the reason. The economy can’t stay this terrible forever.

Earlier: Prior ATL coverage of law firm layoffs

* The five richest and the five poorest zip codes by IRS reported income. Apparently, living in the shadow of the Queensboro Bridge is the modern equivalent to the trials of Sisyphus. Still, it’s gotta be better than living in Texas right? [TaxProf Blog]

* Has anybody actually met the mysterious “Ed.” of Blawg Review fame? He’s like a Smoking Man’s Keyser Soze wrapped in a legal fiction. [What About Clients?]

* Dear New York Post. If you must make a cartoon that references monkeys, try it this way. You’re welcome. [Courtoons]

* With all the layoffs going around Biglaw, one starts to think that Shinyung Oh was just the first shot across the bow. [Law and More]

* There should soon be a new head of the DOJ Civil Rights Division. It looks like this one actually believes in civil rights, which will be an interesting change over there. [WSJ Law Blog]

* In ancient cultures, when rainmakers failed to produce rain, they were eaten. [Litination]

* So, here’s a quote from Kanye West: “My game was very sexual. The main character was, like, a giant penis. It was like Mario Brothers, but the ghosts were, like, vaginas.” This quote is put in context on our sister site, Edificial. [Edificial]

Earlier this month, we reported that Paul Hastings laid off a number of attorneys in its Atlanta office. Last week, we learned that the firm Paul Hastings took a slight dip in profits per partner in 2008.

You know what is coming next. A tipster reports:

I just wanted to let you know that stealth layoffs are ongoing at Paul Hastings. Rumor has it that the grim reaper is making rounds to many offices [in California].

Other tipsters report that the current round of layoffs at Paul Hastings has a truly international feel:

I heard that PH laid off 50% of its associates in the Shanghai office as compared to the same time last year.

We’re still waiting for a firm response after the jump.

The 90’s were good to Billy Blanks of Tae Bo fame. His taekwando-boxing hybrid workout routine was all the rage across the land, with Paula Abdul a notable follower.

After his career peaked, the legal troubles started. In 1999, he filed a $10 million suit against his agent, because his agent wasn’t licensed to be an agent. And he hired Seyfarth Shaw to represent him. The case did not go well, and Blanks kick-boxed a malpractice suit Seyfarth’s way. One of Seyfarth’s L.A. partners, William Lancaster, bore the full brunt of Blanks’ aerobic fury, because Blanks alleged that he missed the statute of limitations by four weeks because Lancaster was dilly-dallying in the Superior Court system rather than taking his complaint to the labor commissioner, where it belonged.

The malpractice suit was decided in Blanks’ favor, and he was awarded $30 million. But the Second District Court of Appeals has reversed the judgment and remanded the case to the trial court. But not without a cardio-kick to Seyfarth. From the Legal Pad:

[The] Second District Court of Appeal ruling that gave [Seyfarth] that dancing-with-joy moment wasn’t very kind to their law firm: It almost scoffed at their defenses to a celebrity’s claim of legal malpractice….

[Justice Richard Aldrich] had a warning for Seyfarth (and the trial judge) on remand. Aldrich speculated that Seyfarth will argue that Lancaster’s decision to delay filing a TAA petition was “a reasoned choice” or a “prudent trial strategy.” But he indicated that won’t be easy.

“Although attorneys have wide latitude in selecting strategy,” Aldrich wrote, “Seyfarth will have the burden to explain why its choice to delay filing a TAA petition was based upon a rational, professional judgment that would have been made by other reputable attorneys in the community under the same or substantially similar circumstances.”

Billy Blanks is giving Seyfarth quite the work-out.

Seyfarth off Hook for $30 Million Award — for Now [Legal Pad]
Court Throws Out $30 Million Legal Malpractice Award [Metropolitan News-Enterprise]
Second District Court of Appeal Ruling

Remember Kathleen DeLaney and Courtney Thomas? Almost a year ago, this comely couple was named an ATL couple of the week. In the words of Laurie Lin, “Team DeLaney-Thomas, you’ve shaken LEWW out of our winter doldrums with your sterling credentials and sizzling good looks. Congratulations!”

Now ATL would like to congratulate the DeLaney-Thomases on something else: a fabulous new home. Once again, they make their appearance in the New York Times:

For three years, Kathleen DeLaney Thomas and her husband, Courtney Thomas, lived in a Chelsea rental of 900 square feet. “That apartment felt big when we moved in and small when we moved out,” Mrs. Thomas said….

The place had scarce closet space and an unnecessarily large second bedroom, carved from the living room, that made for a claustrophobic feel. Wedding gifts were stacked in the hall or stored at Mr. Thomas’s mother’s house in New Jersey.

ATL readers from Texas, this is your cue: “In Texas, you could live in a 5,000 square foot mansion for the same amount!”

The sluggish elevator drove the couple mad. If they were paying so much in rent — around $3,300 a month — they would rather get a return on their outlay. Once they saved enough for a down payment on a condominium, Mrs. Thomas said, “we were totally ready to go.”

And go they did — to Brooklyn, where all the cool kids live nowadays.

Read more about their fabulous new pad, after the jump.

As many of you know, CDO’s are dead. Derivatives are dead. And lawyers who used to work on these financial instruments are either laid off, waiting to be laid off, or quickly becoming experts in the exciting field of bankruptcy and restructuring.

But what is a firm to do with all those structured experts sitting around and planning employment discrimination lawsuits? McKee Nelson has an interesting idea: sell to someone else.

AmLaw Daily and Legal Week reported this morning that McKee Nelson was in advanced talks to send a team of its corporate attorneys to the U.K. firm Ashurst:

The McKee Nelson group informed the firm’s partnership of the talks yesterday, indicating that the team — which covers structured finance, derivatives and municipal finance — was almost certain to move, according to the report. Ashurst is hoping that a number of associates also will join the group.

Above the Law obtained McKee’s statement officially announcing the move this afternoon:

McKee Nelson LLP announced today that its municipal financial products and equity derivatives practices, as well as a portion of its CDO and corporate practice, will move to its international structured finance alliance partner, the UK law firm Ashurst.

That seems to beat the bag out of what Pillsbury is offering today.

Details on how many associates will be making the move are still being worked out, but moving large portions of practice groups that have hit the skids — instead of firing them — seems positively excellent in today’s market.

Granted, McKee Nelson has already been through two rounds of layoffs. But a move like this shows that the firm is at least thinking outside of the box when it comes to managing an oversupply of attorneys during an economic crisis. Maybe this will mean something to law students come recruitment time?

Read the full McKee Nelson press release, after the jump.

Readers of Above the Law, as well as travelers on the Acela, learned last week that Pillsbury plans to conduct attorney layoffs. Today, the firm released more information to its employees about the firm’s impending “force reduction.”

Before it turns to firing people, Pillsbury is offering attorneys and staff “voluntary departure.” From a firm-wide email:

As you were advised last week, Pillsbury is planning to implement a reduction in workforce that will affect attorneys and staff…. As part of this reduction process, the Firm is offering a voluntary departure plan to associates, senior associates and counsel.

Can you really fall on your sword when somebody has a gun to your head?

Details on Pillsbury’s Faustian bargain voluntary departure plan, after the jump.

Times are tough for we media folk these days. Newspapers across the country are declaring bankruptcy, magazines are dying, and Atlantic Magazine has even predicted the end of the New York Times.

Given the challenging environment for journalism, we thought you might be worried about the fates of Sue: For Women in Litigation and KNOW: A Magazine for Paralegals. We know you have a special interest in Sue since one of you ATL readers was responsible for naming the magazine.

Though the magazine’s publisher, Chere Estrin of EstrinLegalEd, filed for Chapter 11 in December (Bankruptcy Petition # 2:08-bk-32520-BR), the magazines struggle on. We surfed over to their websites and discovered that KNOW is down to 6 issues per year, and that Sue just released its inaugural issue, albeit a digital version only. According to the website:

Sue is a 100-percent digital publication. It looks just like a hard-copy magazine except that you will view it on your PC. You can even ‘turn’ the pages. The inaugural edition is Feb./Mar. 2009.

Well, that sounds snazzy. We didn’t get a chance to peruse the digital mag, but it must be good given its endorsements. The homepage proclaims:

Sue Magazine has been recognized in AmLaw Online; The National Law Journal; The ABA Journal; Above The Law and other prestigious publications.

We’ve been called many things, but prestigious is a new one.

Earlier: Move over Marie Claire and Elle, Sue’s coming to town
We Don’t KNOW How This Magazine for Paralegals Will Do

Back in December, we reported that Proskauer Rose laid off 35 associates and 25 staff. We believe that the firm fired first-years as part of the layoffs. Proskauer said it was taking these actions in response to the “worldwide economic crisis.”

Yesterday, AmLaw Daily reported that Proskauer partners also felt the pain of 2008:

Proskauer Rose’s profits per equity partner dropped 10 percent in 2008 to $1.4 million. Revenues increased marginally, by 1 percent, to $634 million in 2008. Revenue per lawyer dipped slightly to $916,000, as did head count: total attorneys went from 685 in 2007 to 692 in 2008.

In this economy, Proskauer chairman Allen Fagin was reluctant to complain about $1.4 million dollars per partner:

Fagin echoes other law firm leaders when commenting on his firm’s performance this past year, saying that, given the challenges, he is satisfied. The results “put us in the vicinity of most of the firms we would consider peers,” he says — the group, according to Fagin, includes Mayer Brown and Latham & Watkins.

Let’s see: Mayer Brown laid off 33 attorneys in November, and Latham is doing Latham things, so it sounds like Proskauer did a pretty good job when picking its “peer firms.”

And there might be more layoffs on the horizon for Proskauer:

Fagin says there is an “ongoing examination” to ensure that staffing levels are right.

In the words of the late, great, Mr. Arnold: “Hang on to your butts.”

THE AM LAW 100: Proskauer’s Profits Fall 10 Percent, Revenues Up Slightly [AmLaw Daily]

Earlier: Nationwide Layoff Update: Proskauer Rose

* SCOTUS will look at the separation of church and state when they decide whether “a cross to honor fallen soldiers can stand in a national preserve in California.” [The Los Angeles Times]

* Lawyers say Madoff must have had help with his Ponzi scheme. [Bloomberg]

* Attorney General Eric Holder visited Guantanamo yesterday to see what is needed to close the prison. [The Associated Press]

* Meanwhile, a Pentagon official who inspected Guantanamo at Obama’s request is under fire from human rights activists for filing a report (which declares Gitmo humane) that is little more than good public relations for the administration. [The New York Times]

* What do you do when your boss gets indicted for securities fraud? You get another job. A team of seven bankruptcy lawyers left Dreier LLP for Epstein Becker Green. [EBG]

* A federal judge encouraged the Obama administration to decide whether to keep pursuing a case against 11 Vietnam War Veterans accused of trying to overthrow Laos’s communist government. [The Associated Press]

* Judge says: UBS must respond to the U.S. lawsuit seeking disclosure of 52,000 names of people who allegedly used Swiss accounts for tax evasion. [Bloomberg]

* Are there true alternatives to layoffs? Well, I suppose people could just quit. [Adam Smith, Esq.]

* Dan Slater’s excellent tenure at the Wall Street Journal Law Blog has come to a close. We’re excited to see what he does next, and wish him the best of luck. In the meantime, longtime editor Ashby Jones becomes the main law blogger. [WSJ Law Blog]

* Proskauer Rose “disaffirms” statements to the SEC about Stanford Financial Group. [The Conglomerate]

* Here is a lawyer website that is focused on helping lawyers not be lawyers every second of every day. [The Complete Lawyer]

* The Obama administration has released its first Gitmo detainee. Binyam Mohammed, do not screw up. [SCOTUSblog]

* Speaking of shutting things down, how long before the “tech savvy” Obama people crush this Twitter feed? [Twitter - Eric Holder]

* Justice Ginsburg gets right back to work. [CQ Politics]

* Meanwhile, Senator Bunning should probably spend more time on Baseball Prospectus, and less time on WebMD. [Louisville Courier-Journal]

* 200 weeks of Blawg Review and counting. In blog years, that is a geological epoch. [Blawg Review]

Last week, Pillsbury was busy throwing mama from the train. But underneath the layoff news, the firm instituted other cost cutting measures. On Tuesday, Pillsbury decided to freeze salaries.

Pillsbury is one of the firms with a two tiered associate payscale. A tipster reports that a number of Pillsbury associates were already receiving below market pay, before last week’s freeze:

[I]n June of 2007, Pillsbury decided to meet the Biglaw salary raises that occurred at the time (albeit they were a later mover on the raise issue). However, they also said in June 2007 that new requirements were tied to the salary increases. Departing with prior firm practice, any associate who did not meet a minimum of 1800 billable hours for 2007 would be advanced in class year, and would be advanced in their billing rate, but would be “held back” in salary step increases.

The 2007 policy was made less onerous because there was an easy way for associates to make that money back in 2008:

If the associate that was “held back” in pay for their 2007 numbers billed 1950 hours or above in 2008, they would (a) be advanced in class and salary to become equal again to their actual class year, and (b) would be given a “true up” bonus for 2008 whereby they would be paid the difference in salary they were supposed to be making during 2008, but did not because they were held back in terms of pay.

Pay plans made in 2007 are about as relevant as Adrien Brody standing on the same stage as Robert DeNiro and Anthony Hopkins. It’s nice for context, but painfully out of place given current standards.

After the jump, we look at what Pillsbury is doing now.

Back in November, Buchanan, Ingersoll & Rooney cut 15 to 25 staffers (though the firm declined to call them “layoffs”). Last week, it appears that the firm made additional cuts to its staff — and this time the firm is being clear about what is going on. Buchanan’s executive director Nolan Kurtz told Above the Law:

The firm eliminated about 25 to 30 administrative operations positions last week. Given the overall economic climate, we believe that it’s more important than ever to ensure that we have the right staffing in place firmwide.

The firm also announced the news directly to associates, on Friday. According to a tipster:

[Buchanan Ingersoll] announced Friday another round of cuts after several Harrisburg corp. and Philadelphia IP lawyers resigned….

Kurtz Buchanan told the [attorneys] that laying off staff was not because of the economy but good planning.

Will attorneys soon follow staffers into unemployment? Maybe. More from Mr. Kurtz after the jump.

Happy Monday. To kick off the new week, we have more law firm layoff news.

The latest dispatch comes from Kaye Scholer. The firm conducted layoffs in the Corporate and Finance department on Friday. The number of affected attorneys is not known, but is believed to be at least five, including some first- and second-year associates.

In November 2008, the firm claimed that it was dismissing some lawyers for performance-based reasons. Back then, managing partner Barry Willner stated: “While we are obviously mindful of the difficult economic situation affecting all of us, we have no current plans to engage in layoffs or other terminations outside of the normal course of our business.”

Alas, three months later, the economy looks worse than ever. So bad, in fact, that Kaye Scholer finds itself chasing after gangsters for legal fees.

More details about last week’s layoffs, after the jump.

We received over 1,400 responses to our ATL / Lateral Link survey on layoffs, and last week we reported on associate fears and law firm strategies.

Today, we’ll talk about what attorneys are actually doing to protect themselves against, or cope with, a layoff.

Surprisingly, about 40% of respondents said that they weren’t doing a thing. A few commenters provided more detail on their non-coping strategies:

Drinking

crossing my fingers for three months’ severance

Drinking…. heavily.

Smoking weed; watching movies; working out; learning to play guitar

More details on how attorneys are responding to the slowdown, after the jump.

On Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Samuel Kent lost a motion to have his obstruction of justice charge dropped or moved to a different trial.

Today, he copped a plea and announced his intent to retire. According to the Wall Street Journal Law Blog:

The jurist pleaded guilty to one count of obstruction of justice today and retired from the bench, avoiding a trial on several charges that he sexually abused two female employees….

“Judge Kent believes that this settlement is in the best interest of all involved,” his attorney, Dick DeGuerin, said after this morning’s hearing. “A trial would have been long, embarrassing and difficult for all involved.”

Long and difficult? Sounds about right.

Update: Read more about Judge Kent’s fate over here.

Breaking News: Judge Kent Cops Plea, Resigns [WSJ Law Blog]
Judge Kent accepts plea deal and retires from bench [Houston Chronicle]

Can you imagine having to pay your firm money over the next couple of months because the firm overcompensated you at the beginning of 2009? That is the situation facing a number of Patton Boggs associates over the next couple of weeks.

Patton Boggs has a three tiered associate compensation system. A firm spokesperson explained the details to Above the Law:

Patton Boggs has three base billable hour tiers for associates: 1650, 1800, and 1900. Associates on one of the lower tiers who reach a billable hour total of a higher tier are automatically paid the salary differential in the early part of the next year.

Associates who don’t make their hours are bumped down to one of the lower tiers. But the whole decision making process is done as part of the firm’s annual performance reviews, many of which haven’t taken place yet. A tipster explains the consternation among many Patton associates:

If an associate is bumped down, their salary will be bumped down accordingly in an amount to be determined by the firm (i.e. not the full published drop between the 2008 rate for [1900] and the 2008 rate for 1800 - as in some instances that could amount to up to 65K). So some don’t know if they will be bumped or, better yet, how much their salary will be for 2009. In general, people were pleased just to bump down as opposed to getting laid off or some other alternative.

But:

But here is the kicker - associates [won’t know if] they are being paid at the [1900] rate until after their review, if at that time they are bumped down to 1800, they have to PAY THE FIRM BACK the difference in pay for the first 2 months of 2009. The “overpayments” will be spread out over 4 paychecks.

After the jump, the firm explains that this is nothing new at Patton.

The folks from across the Pond bring us Lawyer of the Day Michael “Did I really just say that?” Wachtel. Wachtel is a former Freshfieldser who is now a partner at Watson Farley & Williams.

The Lawyer conducted an interview with Wachtel last week. It was your standard interview with the regular questions: When do you usually leave the office? (9 p.m.) What’s on your Ipod? (The Byrds Play Dylan) What two items would you take to the beach? (Suntan lotion and beer). But in the middle of the interview, Wachtel dropped a bomb, if you will:

Who’s your hero and why?
Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah, not because of his politics or his ideology, but because he refused to be intimidated by a much stronger foe, and he won.

The leader of Hezbollah is the first guy to leap into his mind? Wachtel has lived in and done a lot of work in the Middle East according to his bio, but still…

We appreciate the sentiment of a small guy defeating a big foe, but would advise choosing a more politically-correct hero like David, Gandhi, Nelson Mandela, Erin Brockovich, or Luke Skywalker. Whipping out an advocate of suicide bombings and the destruction of Israel as your hero is a bit, um… unwise.

Roll On Friday has a statement from Watson Farley & Williams. The firm makes it clear that Wachtel “does not approve of any terrorist activities or unlawful or immoral acts of violence,” after the jump.

At the MGM Grand, I was making money and folding often. Happy and rich (before everything went horribly, horribly wrong), I started talking to a player on my right. He claimed to be a mechanic, and expressed incredulity that the economic downturn was hurting lawyers:

You can’t fire a f****** lawyer, they’ll sue you ass.

Spoken like a man that has made more than one unreasonable estimate in his day.

Outside of the Biglaw bubble, lawyers are viewed as particularly litigious. Who knew?

According to the National Law Journal, law firms are also worried about former associates suing the firm:

After the layoff criteria are established, Hathaway [a Littler Mendelson shareholder] said firms should conduct a statistical analysis to ensure there is not “disparate impact” — meaning no one group, such as women or minorities, is affected disproportionately. Ekelman suggests to clients that they form a small review committee to analyze layoff criteria and decisions to ensure that they are applied fairly and consistently.

This is increasingly important because more attorneys than ever before are taking legal action against their former firms, Hathaway said.

But is there really a right way to fire people? More after the jump.

* Legal experts write a letter to Congress suggesting term limits for Supreme Court justices. [The Washington Post]

* SCOTUS will discuss whether judges should excuse themselves from voting in cases involving big campaign contributors when they hear a case involving a West Virginia judge. [Detroit Free Press]

* 3 jurors who convicted Alfred Trenkler of a bombing that killed a Boston Police officer wrote letters begging the judge for a new trial, after a book about the case convinced them of his innocence. [The Boston Globe]

* Today in Houston, U.S. District Judge Samuel Kent will go on trial, facing accusations that he fondled two female court employees. [The Associated Press]

* Madoff’s investors wont have an easy time in court; securities law is not on their side. [The Washington Post]

* Drop everything, click on this site, and move your cursor over the pictures, to reveal the greatest firm photos known to mankind. [The Ticktin Law Group]

* Some Disturbia news about the potential charges against Chris Brown [Popsquire]

* Mega-jerk Stephen Fowler, who hurled every conceivable vicious insult at his”new wife” on Wife Swap, threatens to sue over a website’s publication of his home address. Unfortunately for Fowler, when the presiding judge sees the episode, he or she will be forced to recuse himself or herself. [Reality Roll Call]

* The Stimulus Plan is creating tax attorney jobs? Oh, but tax work is so hard and boring. I guess we’ll have to take what we can get. [MSNBC]

* So long friends, old and new. Thanks for reading! See you next week for Pls Hndle Thx.

Not satisfied with just oil spills and attorney spills, Faegre & Benson has aimed its tanker at staff. Yesterday, the firm sent out the dreaded email:

With regret, we will reduce by 58 the number of Legal Administrative Assistants, Administrative Department Staff, and Paralegals in our U.S. offices. Tomorrow will be the last day at the firm for the individuals impacted by this decision.

The email also references a Sophie’s Choice buyout previously made to staff, which was accepted by nine:

An additional nine members of our staff accepted the Voluntary Separation Package offered earlier in the month. Their last day will be Friday, February 27.

If severance for all terminated staff is the same, it thus appears that staff who chose the buyout and got an extra week’s pay chose wisely.

But go go gadget, attorney skills: the question is, will staff that chose to voluntarily separate be eligible for unemployment? That depends on the state. Let’s hope that those nine staff checked the books in Minnesota prior to making their choice.

The full email, after the jump.

Justin Peacock is living the dream. The lawyer-turned-successful-writer dream, that is.

His first novel, A Cure for Night, got rave reviews. The Washington Post called it “terrific.” The New York Times praised Peacock for forgoing “the flashier precincts of John Grisham, where all is conspiracy and the legalese is leavened with bombs and gunplay, and head[ing] toward Scott Turow country, where characters get enmeshed in the murky, moral corners of the actual law.” The Mystery Writers of America recently nominated Peacock for an Edgar Award for Best First Novel.

After all the accolades, Peacock, 38, quit his litigation job at Patterson Belknap last year to concentrate full-time on writing. We caught up with him at Ozzie’s Coffeehouse in Brooklyn on a rainy Wednesday afternoon this week. Read our interview on making the transition from law to writing, after the jump.

When non-lawyers ask what’s happening in the world of law these days (i.e., what ATL is covering), our first response is usually one word: layoffs. It’s been a dominant theme in our coverage since the fall. Non-lawyers are often sympathetic, but couch their sympathy with, “Well, lawyers get six months of severance, right? Getting fired is like a paid vacation for them.”

Well, not exactly. According to one of Justin’s surveys on the slowdown, three months is actually the market rate for lawyer severance packages at large law firms. That time goes by surprisingly fast in this economy. For many of those laid off in the fall, severance checks will soon stop coming. What’s your plan after severance stops?

One tipster wrote in asking us for more details on the going rates on severance:

Could you somehow publicly give honorable mention to the firms who are treating their associates fairly and with the respect they deserve? It would also be tremendous information for those of us who are in a precarious position. At least we would know what would be reasonable to request if and when we are laid off.

Earlier today, we gave props to McKee Nelson for handling layoffs well (or at least as well as such things can be handled). But not every firm uses lube is kinder and gentler in the dismissal department.

We’ve prepared a (very informal) round-up of the severance packages at various firms, self-reported by affected lawyers. Check out the numbers, after the jump.

There was no LEWW last Friday because last week’s wedding pages were even bleaker than the Biglaw employment news. We’ve bounced back nicely, though, because Valentine’s Day fell on a Saturday this year, making this week’s weddings section a February feast of premium nuptial news.

We present three outstanding couples for your consideration:

1. Parisa Sabeti and Ted Zagat

2. Jessica Holzer and Hans Nichols

3. Kendall Burman and Eric Volkman

Check out these newlyweds’ résumés and pictures, after the jump.

Layoffs are a fact of life in this terrible economy. But not all layoffs are created equal. They can be handled well, or they can be handled… poorly.

McKee Nelson, which last November laid off 32 (17 lawyers and 15 staff), recently announced a new round of cuts. This time the firm let go of 46 employees: six lawyers and 40 staffers.

While unfortunate, at least McKee Nelson handled the matter with class:

Whether the market is bull or bear, there will always be bankruptcies. And where there’s broken companies, there’s bankruptcy attorneys. If you’ve got the requisite experience, Lateral Link has the job for you. As always, the Job of the Week is brought to you by Lateral Link. There are currently dozens of Lateral Link members interviewing for positions throughout the country.

Position: Bankruptcy Associate

Location: New York, NY

Description: The New York office of this top international law firm is looking for an associate with
2-4 years of experience and excellent academic credentials. Previous bankruptcy experience is
required.

For more information about this position or to apply, please see Position 10062
on Lateral Link. In addition to this opening, Lateral Link has numerous other openings for experienced Bankruptcy Associates. Current members can also contact their personal search consultant directly to discuss this position. Membership in Lateral Link is free and you can apply at www.laterallink.com.

Remember that kid from first grade who just couldn’t get his act together and start reading like the rest of us? Apparently that kid grew up to be The National Law Journal. In an article entitled Hiring from top schools steady in ‘08, the Journal provides some watershed facts:

Despite the economic nosedive that began gaining momentum in 2008, the nation’s biggest law firms hired just about the same percentage of graduates from top schools last year as they did the year before.

At the same time, firms among The National Law Journal’s 2008 survey of the nation’s 250 largest law firms brought aboard more graduates from the 20 schools that they relied on the most, which themselves had larger classes.

Bigger classes? MORE hiring? Sounds good to me! But the Journal delivers its shocking conclusion:

The development suggests that law firms were not well positioned for the recession they now face.

Find out where the Journal has been living, after the jump.

As tips continue to roll in about layoffs, I am reminded of The Hangman, the poem by Maurice Ogden. It begins:

Into our town the Hangman came,
Smelling of gold and blood and flame.
And he paced our bricks with a diffident air,
And built his frame in the courthouse square.

Sadly, the Hangman has come to ply his trade at Carter Ledyard. We’ve heard that at least nine attorneys, ranging from junior associates (including first- and second-years) to counsel, were fired:

The 9 who were laid off last week were told last Monday, February 9, that they had to be out of the office by last Friday, giving them 4 days to clear out and wrap things up right before a holiday weekend.

Find out why nine may not be the loneliest number, after the jump.

* Lobbyist Vicki Iseman settled her suit with the New York Times. The NYT will run a note in today’s paper explaining that it did not intend to insinuate that Iseman and John McCain had gotten it on. Iseman and the Times are a bit at odds over the meaning of their joint statement though. [BLT]

* Texas Judge Sharon Keller is on the hot seat for going home early the day a stay of execution was going to be filed. [Houston Chronicle]

* Just when you thought Eliot Spitzer’s name would appear in the news only as a byline on Slate, the prostitution prosecution will unseal court records that may change that. Judge Jed Rakoff ordered the hand-off of wire records on Spitzer to the New York Times. [New York Times]

* Does your firm have a best friend in India? [The Lawyer]

* Former federal prosecutor, Deutsche Bank lawyer, and Boston University Law grad Robert Khuzami will head up the enforcement division of the Securities and Exchange Commission. That’s a big job these days. [Washington Post]

* Swiss Bank UBS agreed to disclose the names of 250 tax-evaders to the Department of Justice earlier this week. But the U.S. would like a few more names. Like 52,000 more. [Courthouse News Service]

Some big news just in, from Am Law Daily:

In one of the sharpest drops in revenue and profitability among Am Law 100 firms, Cravath, Swaine & Moore saw 2008 gross revenue fall 13 percent, while profits per partner tumbled 24 percent to $2.5 million….

The firm signaled last November that 2008 was a tough year, when it announced in an internal memo that it was cutting associate bonuses, and that the firm would not do as well as in 2006 and 2007. In 2007 Cravath’s profits per partner had been $3.3 million, according to our Am Law 100 survey, second only to Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz. In 2006, PPP was $3 million.

This means that Cravath has forfeited its traditional second-place spot on the PPP rankings (second only to Wachtell). It seems that a number of firms — including the historic #3, Sullivan & Cromwell — will surpass Cravath in profitability for 2008.

According to the American Lawyer’s reporting, S&C boasted 2008 profits per partner of $2.94 million. This will probably be good for third place in the next PPP ranking, since Wachtell apparently had a rather good year too (at least based on the relatively robust bonuses it paid its associates, plus all the crisis-related M&A work performed by Ed Herlihy & Co.).

Second place will likely go to Quinn Emanuel, with eye-popping PPP of $3.3 million. Also besting Cravath is Paul Weiss, with PPP of $2.65 million last year.

Now we know why the Cravath bonuses were so anemic. And it had nothing to do with the hookers — er, client entertainment expenditures.

Will disappointing bonuses and declining profits affect the institutional prestige of Cravath? Will the firm fall from its traditional #2 spot on the Vault 100? Stay tuned.

THE AM LAW 100: Cravath Profits Falls 24 Percent [Am Law Daily]

Time for a brief follow-up to our earlier post about Biglaw partner Robert Robbins, head of the corporate practice of Pillsbury Winthrop, and how he spoke — a little too loudly, on a crowded Acela train — about the firm’s planned layoffs. You may have already seen it in the comments, but in case it got lost in the shuffle, the firm has confirmed the gaffe (and the layoffs).

After getting its act together — the Pillsbury website was down for a while today, which some commenters attributed to web traffic resulting from the mini-scandal — the firm issued a statement to The Recorder (via Legal Pad):

It is an unfortunate fact in today’s economy that no business or law firm can rule out adjustments to their overall workforce levels. This includes Pillsbury, and, among other cost cutting measures, we will be implementing reductions to ensure that our resources are aligned with our business needs. We apologize for the unfortunate manner in which our deliberations about reductions have become public.

We reiterate our earlier advice: Pillsbury associates, start your engines laser printers, and crank out those résumés. It’s time to move on. Bob Robbins is coming for you.

We’ve collected selected links to coverage by other outlets — heck, it even made Gawker — of the “unfortunate” incident. Enjoy.

Update: And Instapundit, too.

Pillsbury Confirms Loudmouth’s Layoff Gaffe [Legal Pad / The Recorder]
Pillsbury Accidentally Announces Layoffs on Train [Am Law Daily]
Pillsbury Layoffs Leaked By Partner on Train [The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times]
Doughy Pillsbury Lawyer Demonstrates Why You Should Shut Up on Your Cell Phone [Gawker]
Message to Law Partners [Instapundit]

Earlier: A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to New York
(Or: Pillsbury associates, brace yourselves.)

* Akin Gump gets sued by the Hotel Del Coronado. Partner retreats at nice resorts: damned if you do, damned if you don’t. [AmLaw Daily]

* Antitrust humor from AAG designate Christine Varney: “Telling a liberal Democrat to go out and enforce Section 2 is a little bit like telling a Catholic ‘do not sin.’ Yeah, we want to do that.” [Law Dork]

* I have long maintained that the number of Facebook friends one has is VERY important in terms of prestige, status and overall bragging. Finally, someone agrees with me, and victory is at last secured. [TaxProf Blog]

* Fighting back against “cyber-bullying”: it’s not easy. [Law and More]

* We haven’t heard reports of law firm janitors getting laid off. That may be something to consider. [CNN]

* Who’s DeLaughing now? [New York Times]

* Non-accreditation: not just for University of Phoenix Online. [Rodi v. Southern New Eng. Sch. of Law]

Ed. note: This is a guest post by Keith Chapman, a lawyer with more knowledge of BitTorrent and all things tech than the regular crew on the ATL ship.

Avast ye hearties! Especially if you’re one of those hearties using a BitTorrent client to purloin copyrighted materials. Today marks the fourth day in the highly publicized trial against The Pirate Bay, a Swedish company that organizes and facilitates online file swapping. At the heart of the matter, Swedish prosecutors have charged The Pirate Bay’s three chief administrators, Hans Fredrik Neij, Gottfrid Svartholm Warg and Peter Sunde, as well as media savvy Swedish businessman Carl Lundström, with 33 instances of assisting in and preparing to commit copyright infringement. With potential jail time looming on the horizon, not to mention hefty fines and damages estimated north of $14 million, the Times of London has dubbed the case the “Internet piracy trial of the decade.”

If you are just tuning in, find out what you’ve missed — after the jump.

Dreams of a pleasant morning coding documents and browsing eHarmony turned into a nightmare for 66 assistants and paralegals at Day Pitney. Jim Sicilian, co-chair of the Executive Committee, told ATL via phone that 66 staff members were laid off across all firm offices. According to Jim, no associate layoffs are planned for the moment.

The news comes as somewhat of a relief because it initially appeared that the firm was mounting a black ops assault:

An assistant and paralegal in the hall near me were called down to a conference room and immediately let go. One was working on an assignment for me and left in the middle of it — never to return.

Or a government sting:

Head of HR is camped out in conference room and calling for people to come down. When they go back to their office, their computers are locked out, and they can’t even access to close out a document or grab personal files. Now, the office is paralyzed waiting for the phone to ring.

Town meetings are in store for attorneys and staff later today or tomorrow. It appears that some members of staff will be unable to attend.

Update: More coverage from the Connecticut Law Tribune.

Day Pitney Memo [PDF]
Layoffs Hit Connecticut [Connecticut Law Tribune]

If you’re not already familiar with Practical Law Company (PLC), now isn’t a bad time to get acquainted with their services. Given the grim economic climate, clients are demanding value and efficiency from their law firms — which PLC can help maximize.

Do you find yourself overwhelmed by the prospect of running a closing, afraid that some small but crucial task will fall through the cracks? Are you confused about no-shop provisions — and wasting hours on background research that doesn’t tell you the nuts and bolts of drafting one? PLC can help.

Practical Law Company launched in 1990 in the U.K., where it has been operating successfully for almost 20 years. Now they’re crossing the pond, launching services aimed at the U.S. market. Here’s a good description of what the company does, from Am Law Daily:

[T]he company developed a set of Web-based tools meant to help transactional lawyers work more efficiently. PLC created — and continues to update — practice notes, document templates, standard clauses, deal checklists, and tools that lay out the basics of dealmaking for junior associates.

Initially midsize firms signed on. Today, 99 of the top 100 firms in the U.K. — including the Magic Circle firms — use PLC. The company’s pitch is that its tools not only help junior lawyers use their time more efficiently, they say their updates keep partners abreast with the latest regulations and market trends. PLC also provides U.K. law services to about 70 percent of The Am Law 100 firms with a London office….

We visited the PLC crew in their fabulous midtown offices — beautifully renovated, with amazing views, the former home of a hedge fund — to learn about their services.

Read more, after the jump.

Yesterday When I was a kid, I used to steal the Reese’s Peanut Butter cups from my younger sister’s Halloween bag, eat them, place the empty wrappers back in the bag and steal away into the night. My thinking was that at no time would my sister discover that the wrappers were empty, and if she did, well, the worst that my parents could do was take away my Nintendo.

Last night, attorneys at Morrison & Foerster opened up what they surely hoped would be their adult goody bag — an email from firm chair Keith Wetmore, titled “2008 Bonuses and 2009 Compensation ” — only discover that they, too, were faced with empty wrappers.

Naturally the email announced the usual bad news, including “simply unknowable” 2009 bonuses and salary freezes for 2009. The exception is for New York, where increases will be paid as bonuses if associates, among other things, are able to decipher the announcement itself:

In New York, however, where all major New York firms implemented step increases this year, the step increase will be paid as a Contribution Bonus in January 2010 in an amount equal to the step increase that would otherwise have applied for that class. The Contribution Bonus will be paid to those New York-based associates who progress with their class and record 1950 Efficient Legal Service Hours (see Compensation Brochure), subject to the usual prorations, and who are employed with the firm on the date the Contribution Bonus is paid.

But the email also contained a chart revising and lowering the already announced 2008 Evaluation Bonuses, which comprise the lion’s share of the total bonuses.

A tale of betrayal and woe, plus the MoFo compensation email, after the jump.

This morning Allen & Overy quit beating around the bush and sent a firm-wide email announcing that there’d be some changes around there — major changes. It was with a heavy heart that firm managing partner Wim Dejonghe and senior partner David Morley inflicted a world of pain on its personnel:

Since the beginning of December, the Board has been conducting a thorough review of our business in response to the unprecedented economic conditions in which we are now operating. The inescapable and reluctant conclusion of that review is that there is simply not enough work to keep all of our people busy, and we do not see that changing in the foreseeable future.

In the beginning, Allen & Overy said: let there be layoffs, half in London, the rest from the network:

• Partners - A global reduction in partner headcount of approximately 9% (47 partners) and around a further 7% (35 partners) subject to equity adjustments. Around half of those affected will be London partners. This process is at an advanced stage and will be completed by the end of this financial year on 30 April.

• Other fee earners - A proposed 9% reduction in numbers of other fee earners globally. Around half of these are proposed to be in London, where the redundancy programme we undertake is likely to result in approximately 100 other fee earners leaving the firm. This will be subject to local employment processes which will commence immediately.

• Support Staff - A proposed 9% reduction in support staff headcount. Again, around half of these people would be in London, where roughly 100 staff are likely to be affected. This will also be subject to local employment law and, where appropriate, consultations, which will commence as soon as possible.

And then the firm created a firmament in the salaries and billable hour rates:

• Pay - For 2009 pay will be frozen for all staff globally - fee earning and support staff alike, subject to local employment law, where applicable.

• Fee rates - Acknowledging the impact of the global financial crisis on the firm’s clients, our headline billing rates are to be frozen at 2008 levels until further notice.

A spinoff, the full email, and whether Deirdre Dare is causally related to this mess, after the jump.

Law firm partners need to watch more Gossip Girl. If they did, they’d learn the perils of talking about private matters in public places. In the age of BlackBerrys, texting, and cameraphones, it’s ridiculously easy for tipsters to leak details of overheard conversations and not-so-secret rendezvous to their favorite online gossip girl (or boy — XOXO, Lat).

Last year, we wrote about a Thelen partner who was overheard discussing her firm’s layoffs on the subway. Last night, we received this information, from a law student traveling from D.C. to New York:

This afternoon I boarded a train from Washington bound for Penn Station…. I, along with all of the other passengers, were sitting quietly when the man directly behind me decided to make a phone call using his bluetooth. He was talking so loudly that I think most people in the car were able to hear him.

His conversation, though he stressed how necessary it was to be kept secret (ah, the irony), detailed the current plans of Pillsbury to lay off somewhere in the range of 15-20 attorneys from four offices by the end of March, including a few senior associates with low billable hours and two or three first-year associates. I wouldn’t have believed it except for the fact that he identified himself to the call as Bob Robbins, who I learned is the leader of the firm’s Corporate & Securities practice section, and was talking to Rick Donaldson, who I learned was COO. What’s more, he was NAMING NAMES over the phone!

After we expressed skepticism over this wild story, including the tipster’s ability to catch the names of both Robbins and Donaldson, we received this response:

I agree it’s pretty wild. I wasn’t trying to overhear, but I had no choice because of the proximity. The name “Robbins” I remembered because he said it so damn loud. I went to their website, and the picture [at right] was an exact match. He was big enough to fit almost two chairs.

“Donaldson” I didn’t remember as clearly. I remembered that it began with a “Do” and thought it was “Dotson,” but there was no “Dotson” on the site — just “Donaldson.” Also, he called him “Rick” a few times.

Says our source, in explaining the decision to tip off ATL:

Before today, I have never even considered posting on this website, but I was so mortified by my experience…. I’ve heard of attorneys being reprimanded for discussing client matters in an elevator. Where does airing your own firm’s dirty laundry on an express train fit on the list? I don’t know if there is a way that you can independently verify this, but if so, please do.

Partial verification, after the jump.

The days following Valentine’s Day are always a good time time to check back in with ex-flames, long lost friends and alleged abusers. On that note, what has our old friend U.S. District Judge Samuel Kent been up to?

This Tuesday, Senior U.S. District Judge Roger Vinson of Florida, who is presiding over Kent’s federal sex crimes and obstruction of justice case, denied Kent’s request that the obstruction of justice charge be dropped or moved into a separate trial.

From the Houston Chronicle:

Kent’s lawyer, Dick DeGuerin, originally argued on paper that Kent should have two trials because he must take the stand in a trial of the sexual cases to say he believed his relationships were consensual but that he would not testify on his own behalf in the obstruction case. DeGuerin said on Tuesday that Kent will only likely not testify about the obstruction.

Just how did Kent obstruct justice, you ask?

In the obstruction charge, Kent is accused of lying about sexual contact with an employee to prominent federal judges who investigated a misconduct complaint against him.

But fans of Kent, worry not, for Kent’s explanation for the lie is beyond reproach.

Kent’s amazing excuse and notes on etiquette, after the jump.

The song “Cleveland Rocks” always seemed like a bit of a stretch to me, and yesterday’s events did nothing to dissuade. We’ve received several reports that 400-attorney Midwestern firm Thompson Hine has been conducting layoffs in its Ohio offices, including its Cleveland one:

12 lawyers, 5 paralegals, and 29 secretaries.

Another tipster reports that the layoffs number “at least 50.” Apparently three first year associates were among the carnage.

If this post sounds like run-of the mill layoff story about a small firm in a distant kingdom, you’re absolutely right. Except for the part where Thompson Hine takes away its 2007 salary bump and employs the second most terrifying economic deflection tactic we’ve seen yet:

word is that the firm has cut every associates’ salary by $20,000/year.

The firm has not responded to our request for comment, but if true, Thompson’s use of the Salary Cut marks the second appearance of this dastardly weapon since the economy tanked. Recall that last week, WolfBlock chopped associate salaries by 10%.

While the threat of the Salary Cut is contained at this time, let us pray that this spawn of an unholy alliance between the Reverse Perk and the Salary Freeze does not become epidemic.

Update: The firm has confirmed the pay cut and layoffs, to Am Law Daily:

Earlier this week Cleveland’s Thompson Hine told its associates and other non-partner lawyers that it will impose an across-the-board $17,500 base salary reduction. Those lawyers will, however, be able to earn back some or all of that sum as a bonus if they bill at least 1,750 hours this year….

The firm also announced layoffs this week, eliminating the jobs of 12 associates, five paralegals, and 29 secretaries. Furthermore, it has pushed back the starting date for its incoming first-year class to January 2010.

Thompson Hine M.P.: Associate Pay Cut Expected to Save Jobs [Am Law Daily]

[This article was prepared by Tricia McGrath, a director in Lateral Link’s NY office. For questions please contact Tricia at tmcgrath@laterallink.com.]

This is an interesting time in the legal industry. In the past few months, we have watched the lay-offs of many strong associates and counsel. If you are one of the gainfully-employed associates, what can you do to secure your position at the firm? How can you prevent becoming a casualty in the future? By embracing the changes in the market and increasing your value to your firm!

When I was a junior associate, no one ever contemplated getting business or preparing to do so. Perhaps naively, we didn’t consider that law firms were businesses. We thought that, if we did great work, there would be a place for us at the firm. We all wouldn’t make partner, but we’d get fabulous experience and then move into an in-house position or a law firm outside of the top 20 who would cherish us for our legal skills and training. Although that was only ten years ago, it might as well be one hundred given the changes in the legal market. Today, associates at all levels need to demonstrate value and the skills that will sustain the firm’s business in the future.

Business development is about building relationships. You want to get to know people and have them know you. It is all about building a network of contacts that you can leverage in the future. No one expects a junior or mid-level associate to go out and land a Fortune 100 client - that’s not how it works. At your level, you should be building contacts and legal expertise, both of which you’ll need in the future. You should demonstrate to your firm that you have a potentially bright future in rainmaking.

More after the jump.

* U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder gets fierce during a speech for Black History month at the Department of Justice. “Nation of cowards” kind of rubs people the wrong way. [CNN]

* Want to be Facebook’s James Madison? After its defensive contract writing debacle, Facebook is asking users to help it write a Bill of Rights. [Washington Post]

* A whole article on bonus rollbacks but no mention of the half-Skadden. [New York Times]

* UBS cries uncle in its match with the DOJ. The Swiss bank will pay $780 million and reveal the names of a few hundred of its many tax-evading clients. [Bloomberg]

* Lawyers for Minnesota Senator-wannabe Norm Coleman are growing desperate. They accused the judges of creating a “legal quagmire.” “It’s kind of like criticizing the official … during the middle of a game,” said Guy-Uriel Charles, a constitutional law professor at Duke University. [The Star Tribune]

* Nationwide Law School Dean Hiring Watch: University of Iowa. [The University of Iowa News Services]

* An MSM shout-out for ATL’s very own Hope Winters. [CNN]

* Mickey Rourke’s beloved chihuahua, Loki, crossed over the Rainbow Bridge this past Monday. Here’s to hoping that Mickey’s covered. [Wall Street Journal (subscription)]

* The Tax Workshop for Strippers & Sex Workers will be “speci​fical​ly helpful to those​ who work as indep​enden​t contr​actor​s,​ wheth​er in a club or doing​ priva​te work.​” Nice try federal investigators, but they’ve already pulled this stunt on To Catch a Predator. [The Faculty Lounge via TaxProf Blog]

* If Michael Jackson songs are prohibited on American Idol, I strongly recommend canceling the show. [Popsquire]

* When I first heard the term “waterboarding,” I thought it sounded like a delightful sport. [Brad DeLong: Notes]

* Now I lay me down to sleep,
I pray the Lord my soul to keep,
And if I die before I wake,
I pray the Lord my toys to break.
So none of the other kids can use ‘em…
Amen. [Overlawyered]

Layoffs, layoffs everywhere. And not a one doesn’t stink.

The latest bummer comes from Kramer Levin, where attorney layoffs were conducted last Thursday. Staff layoffs took place today to the reaction of “shocked” personnel (in the words of a tipster). The firm confirmed the bad news to us via phone:

We confirm that in connection with our year end review process, 18 attorneys and 21 staff members were let go by the firm. Terminations were based on both economic and performance considerations.

But don’t take our transcribed word for it. An email sent by the firm’s managing partner at 4:20 p.m. today, after the jump.

When the economy was better, we had a career alternatives for lawyers series, for those in Biglaw looking to dabble in something new. Since idle job searches have given way to desperate ones, we’re running a new series: “Can’t find work?” It’s aimed at offering options to those shut out — or forced out — of Biglaw. If you have suggestions for the series, email us with “Can’t Find Work” as the subject.

So far, we’ve suggested volunteering or starting your own firm. One ATL reader has a novel idea: “writing the Alberta Bar.” He pointed us to Where’s a Lawyer When You Need One?. The MacLeans article suggests that Canada has a shortage of lawyers due to a dearth of law schools:

People call her family law practice in Edmonton all day long, trying to find a lawyer to hire, but there aren’t any available. “We can’t even call them all back. We’re too busy,” says Miller, a collaborative family lawyer and mediator. “It’s really problematic. Even if someone has an emerging situation, or court pending, sometimes you just have to say, ‘Good luck, sorry. We’re not taking any more clients.’ “

Miller’s office isn’t the only one fielding desperate calls. In Edmonton and Calgary, family lawyers are refusing to take on new cases, keeping closed client lists just as a family doctor would, says David Percy, dean of the University of Alberta law faculty. “We send out emails seeing if other lawyers are taking clients,” Miller says, but even if there are some available, “within two weeks, they’re booked up.” While Alberta’s boom has aggravated the situation, other parts of the country report they’re facing a lawyer shortage, too, especially rural areas.

Unemployed ones, here’s what you need to get started. No visa required!

Caveat: family law may be booming in Canada, but we have heard news of layoffs at firms in the Great White North. The Legal Post reports that “layoffs in the Canadian legal community are picking up steam,” but that it’s not as bad as in the US of A:

[Canada won’t] see the same scale of layoffs as in the U.S. legal community. There, law firms can fire lawyers without severance and they tend to ramp up and use more juniors to leverage firm profitability. Canadian firms don’t do that to the same extent, so when the market slows, they’re not as lawyer-heavy.

A tipster weighs in on Canadian stealth layoffs, after the jump.

We continue to refine our list of firms that have instituted salary freezes for 2009. We received word that Katten Muchin Rosenman announced a Slurpee freeze last month and that Florida’s Akerman Senterfitt announced a Solid Ice freeze today. The frozen list is now 39 40 firms long. Check it out, along with Katten’s memo, after the jump.

And yes, yes, yes, before you ask, there is a list of firms that have NOT frozen. You can find that here: Open Thread: Business as Usual, or The Firms That Have Not Frozen Salaries.

An associate at Patton Boggs who wrote in with a correction to our frozen list tells us that our Slurpee terminology is catching on:

Patton Boggs did a Slurpee Freeze, not a solid freeze as is currently reported on ATL. The managing partner even referred to it as a “Slurpee Freeze” during his state of the firm address a couple of weeks ago. Hours bonuses and merit bonuses will still be paid, though only about 50% of associates will receive merit bonuses according to the meeting. Last year 75% of associates got a merit bonus.

February is winding down. Many of the firms on the Slurpee list said they would be revisiting the freeze after the first quarter. Keep us updated on developments next month at tips@abovethelaw.com. We’re happy to remove firms from the Slurpee list.

If you’re sick and tired of paternity tests on every episode of Maury Povich, join the club — the baby mamas club, that is. In a decision by the Wisconsin Court of Appeals, the court ruled that the trial court’s use of the term “baby mama,” along with other comments about the African-American defendant’s habits, could lead to the reasonable perception that the defendant’s sentence was impermissibly influenced by race.

A quick review of the exchange between the trial court and the defendant reveals that the trial court judge (the Honorable Joseph Wall) is a jerk. But damned if he isn’t a hilarious one:

THE COURT: Where are you working now?
THE DEFENDANT: I’m unemployed right now.
THE COURT: You’re unemployed still?
THE DEFENDANT: Yes.
THE COURT: Have you gotten a job since January?
THE DEFENDANT: No, sir.
THE COURT: You’re kidding.
THE DEFENDANT: No.
THE COURT: What do you do all day?
THE DEFENDANT: I just stay at home with my daughter and that’s it.
THE COURT: Where is her mother?
THE DEFENDANT: At work.
THE COURT: So the mother works and you sit at home, right?
THE DEFENDANT: Yeah.
THE COURT: And watch the child?
THE DEFENDANT: I got all types of things goin’. My personal family.
THE COURT: Where does the baby’s mama work?
THE DEFENDANT: Metro Market.
THE COURT: Did she finish school?
THE DEFENDANT: Yes.
THE COURT: Is she going to college, too?
THE DEFENDANT: Yes.
THE COURT: Where do you guys find these women, really, seriously. I’d say about every fourth man who comes in here unemployed, no education, is with a woman who is working full-time, going to school. Where do you find these women? Is there a club?
THE DEFENDANT: No.

Wait, it gets better… after the jump.

Sometimes when the balance sheets don’t, well, balance, somebody has to pay.

This week it’s the attorneys in Deloitte’s Miami office who find themselves with a negative cash flow. We received reports of “multiple firings,” and that such firings occurred in Deloitte’s tax department. (Yes, some attorneys do go work for accounting firms; for more on that career option, see our earlier post.)

The extent of the firings, and whether they affected other offices, is unclear. However, Deloitte’s statement to ATL, which bears similarity to the refined prose of Jane Austen Fraternity Lothario, indicates that the firings are not limited to just a few poor souls or to Miami:

In a move to align its workforce to better reflect business and client needs, Deloitte is taking a number of steps to reduce costs in some of its businesses affected by the overall slowdown in the economy, including adjustments to our workforce levels in the US.

Severance details and coping techniques, after the jump.

ATL -

I was an associate at Morgan & Finnegan and got laid off. It looks like I will not be getting my WARN Act payments, and I don’t know if I want to join a suit trying to claim those payments. I was thinking about suing the firm, but my concern is hurting my reputation in the legal community by suing a former employer. Could you please give me some advice on this?

Check’s In The Mail

Dear Check’s In The Mail -

For those of you just joining us, during the first hour of I Love Money 2, Morgan & Finnegan dissolved, laid off all its attorneys and allegedly cut them bad checks for severance/WARN payments (perhaps from a frozen account). If it’s a class action and you’re not the named plaintiff — sue until your heart’s content. But I’d be wary of filing suit if it’s just you, Dave, Dave from floor 17 and real estate Mike banding together to sue.

Let’s tackle the legal argument first in this latter scenario, seeing as this is a law blog. Are employees of bankrupt organization senior creditors? I have no idea; they told me not to bother studying commercial credit because it rarely appears on the bar exam. But practically speaking, nobody ever gets their money when places go bankrupt. Any episode of 20/20 featuring John Stossel could tell you that.

Are you prepared to sink a ton of time and money into pursuing this claim? If not, abandon ship now. There was a reason M & F billed you out at $300+, and that’s because their rates were intended to scare away all but those who had giant bags of money to spare. And apparently M&F scared them away, too.

Finally, if you, Dave, Dave and Mike sue, your complaint will inevitably appear on Above the Law. We’ll analyze it, we’ll criticize it, we’ll link to the PDF. But the collective scrutiny of Elie, Lat, Kash and myself is child’s play compared to the wrath of guest. Are you ready for the commenters?

Since Elie’s not here, after the jump I play the role of Elie and argue with myself for several paragraphs. Immediately thereafter, I check into Bellevue.

We received over 1,400 responses to last Wednesday’s ATL / Lateral Link survey on layoffs, which is slightly more than the number of attorneys actually laid off in last week’s Valentine’s Day Massacre.

Even so, roughly 70% of the respondents who hadn’t already been laid off said that they were at least a little bit afraid of joining their colleagues on the breadline.

And very few respondents thought their law firms were doing much to help avoid a layoff:

* About 19% of respondents said their firms were letting associates in slow practices keep their hours up by doing some work supporting the busier practices.
* But only 9% thought their firm would actually let them transfer from a slow practice to a busy one.
* And only 2% thought their firm would let them relocate to another office to find work.
* Similarly, only 2% said their firm was letting associates go part-time.

As lack of work gives way to lack of a job, firms’ support mechanisms for the downsized are looking a bit slim:

* Only 16% of respondents said their firm was providing ample notice to terminated associates, so they could find a new job.
* Only 15% said their firm was leaving laid off associates’ bios on the firm website while they looked for work.
* Only 4% of respondents said their firm was helping associates find positions with clients or with non-profits.
* Roughly 5% of respondents said individual partners at their firm were calling around to try to help associates find new jobs.
* 9% said their firm was making a career consultant available to the downsized.

More than a quarter of respondents, 26%, said their firm wasn’t doing anything to help associates deal with, or avoid, a layoff, and 35% of respondents said they didn’t know.

A few thoughts from the commentariat, after the jump.

When firms catch a case of the economy, their illnesses often follow similar courses. They may freeze salaries. They may conduct layoffs. And the latest trendy symptom: they may push back associate start dates, the idea being that saving a couple months’ worth of associate pay will somehow shore up the firms’ balance sheets, steel them against the battering winds of the economy, and position them to be the greatest and most billingest places known to mankind, now or in the future.

Last week, Hogan & Hartson succumbed to push-back fever and joined Sonnenschein, WolfBlock, Nixon Peabody and others in the start date infirmary. Reports a tipster:

Hogan & Hartson announced on Friday that it was delaying the start date of all incoming associates to November 30. In the past, incoming associates could choose any Monday on which to start.

The firm has not yet responded to our request for comment on the start date change, but if they do, we’ll let you know.

Details of Hogan’s war against the economy and a concluding rhetorical question, after the jump.

* Illinois Sen. Roland Burris is under fire for more extensive contact with the Blagojeviches than previously admitted. He says he wasn’t trying to pay for the seat, but he did offer to throw a few fundraisers. Luckily, he’s not a good fundraiser. [New York Times]

* Status update from Facebook, “We messed up.” [CNet]

* Privacy advocates got Facebook to back down. But they lost against The Google. The Borings of Pennsylvania lost their invasion of privacy case against Google Street View. [CNet]

* Jones Day is not a fan of hyperlinking. [On Point News]

* Courtroom police officers are furious at Philadelphia Judge Craig M. Washington for removing photos of a slain officer from his courtroom. We hope he is not in need of protection in the courtroom any time soon. [Philadelphia Inquirer]

* We haven’t heard from Don Johnson since his attempt to play a lawyer in the failed WB show Just Legal. Johnson is returning to the real life world of law this week, suing for tens of millions in profits from 1990s “Nash Bridges.” [Reuters]

* America can call off its search for Lance Armstrong’s stolen bike. I think we’ve found the culprit. [TaxProf Blog]

* For the avoidance of doubt, please see enclosed link (“Enclosure A”). [Courtoons]

* Jim Newell, blogger, thinks that lawyers in D.C. are not losing their jobs fast enough. Jim Newell may soon learn the downside to publishing under his real name. [NBC Washington]

* Residents of Miami high rise condo Buckley Towers won a $20 million verdict against an insurance company for damage sustained during Hurricane Wilma. With that kind of money in the mattresses, next week’s canasta tournament promises to be a nail biter. [South Florida Business Journal]

* Profits per partner are… wait for it… wait for it… DOWN at Simpson Thacher and Paul Hastings. And yet they still make more money than you. ZING. [The Lawyer]

* More on Michael Mukasey’s move. [Am Law Daily]

Many moons ago, when I was a law student, I took Divorce Law based solely on the fact that the professor, who was a New York practitioner, brought in one of his celebrity clients to answer questions on the last day of class. My year, the professor rolled up with James Gandolfini, who, when asked how he could possibly justify going from The Sopranos to Surviving Christmas, intimated that a man had to pay his bills and that — sneaking a glance at the professor, corpulent and clad in horn-rimmed glasses, suspenders and an exquisitely form-fitting monogrammed Bill Lumbergh shirt — divorce is costly.

Indeed it is, Washingtonian reports:

A well-handled divorce is likely to cost each party at least $10,000, and depending on the size and complexity of marital assets and on child-custody issues, it’s not unusual for the figure to reach $50,000. A trial requiring a full complement of private detectives, computer experts, and psychological, psychiatric, and custody witnesses can cost each side well over $100,000.

Alright, sounds vaguely normal, minus the shady “computer experts.” But Washingtonian tells us that like checks at any fine dining establishment, divorce bills sometimes arrive prix fixe, with the gratuity already included:

Some divorce lawyers include a clause in the payment agreement allowing them to ask for a voluntary gratuity in the event of a very good result. When the case is over, the lawyer may remind you of this…

We’re going to need to you to go ahead and click on the jump. MMmmkay?

The revolving door between government and private practice is in full swing. This morning brought the news that Judith Kaye, former chief judge of New York State, has joined Skadden Arps as counsel.

And this afternoon brings more news: Michael Mukasey, fresh off his stint as U.S. Attorney General, will be joining the partnership of Debevoise & Plimpton. Before his service as AG, Mukasey was a partner at Patterson Belknap (and was a Patterson associate before becoming a federal judge in the S.D.N.Y.).

Why didn’t Mukasey return to Patterson? Perhaps Debevoise offered more dough. Fueled by a series of large internal investigations, including the international Siemens matter, the firm has seen its partner profits skyrocket in recent years. In 2007, profits per partner at Debevoise hit $2.3 million.

Says a Debevoise tipster: “Now I get to find out if waterboarding is torture.”

Update (3:05 PM): The Debevoise press release is now available here.

Update (4 PM): Mukasey gave a short interview to the WSJ Law Blog, in which he explained his decision to join Debevoise: “It’s particularly strong in litigation and in conducting major corporate investigations and preparing reports to boards. Also, it has many former government lawyers, including Mary Jo [White].”

Update (5:30 PM): More praise from Mukasey for Debevoise, over at Am Law Daily.

Michael B. Mukasey to Join Debevoise & Plimpton (press release)
A Law Blog Q&A With Former Attorney General Michael Mukasey [WSJ Law Blog]
Chief Judge Judith S. Kaye Joins Skadden, Arps (press release)
Former NYS Chief Judge Judith Kaye Joins Skadden [Am Law Daily]

Ed. note: Welcome to the latest installment of “Notes from the Breadline,” a new column by a laid-off lawyer in New York. Prior columns are collected here. You can reach Roxana St. Thomas by email, at roxanastthomas@gmail.com, or find her on Facebook.

There are moments in life that portend tectonic change. It is possible, even before you can tell whether you are facing a perennial shift or simply a fleeting adjustment, to know that something — or perhaps everything — is different. In movies and on television, these moments are usually accompanied by musical cues, dramatic camera angles, or the distinctive drumline of the song that will narrate the aftermath of such a transformation. In reality, nothing quite so obvious happens. Your dog dies, your relationship fails, you graduate from law school, pass the bar, get married, win a jury trial, fall in love… and you find yourself wondering why events of this magnitude don’t leave a visible mark, if only to spare you the banal task of describing something that feels so profound. Unless you are unfortunate enough to lose an eye or grow a horn, you’ve got some ‘splainin’ to do.

As it turns out, being “terminated” abruptly on a bright winter morning is just such a moment. When it comes to getting laid off, there is a distinct “before” and “after” — and standing outside your office chain-smoking delays, but does not prevent, your arrival in the after.

After far too many cigarettes, I wander back upstairs, suddenly aware that everyone around me looks busy. They are on their way to make phone calls, or attend meetings, or engage in whatever it is that I am no longer needed for. I get off the elevator and go straight to the restroom, where I confirm that a bright red letter (perhaps an “L,” for “loser,” or maybe a “C,” for “canned”) has not appeared on my bosom. I look fired, I think, knowing as I do that firing probably does not leave a visible aura. Still, I feel like an impostor, or someone dressed in a particularly lame Halloween costume, and I am mildly surprised when my card key still unlocks the door. I am already a ghost in this office: rendered irrelevant, but bound to roam the halls alongside the functioning members of its tiny, carpeted world.

Before I can make it back to my desk, I am accosted by my friend Dave, a paralegal. He waves me into his office, where he is sitting anxiously on the edge of his seat, and tells me to close the door behind me. “I can’t fucking believe this,” he says, staring at his computer screen. I am certain that he is about to tell me that he has been “let go” as well, and my stomach clenches. Not Dave, too, I think. I happen to know that he has just finished purchasing a kegerator and a home entertainment center, and I have a terrible vision of both being hauled away by the repo man while Dave stands on his front stoop with an empty beer stein, sobbing.

My fear is short-lived; he is about to consummate a transaction on Hotwire, and if his research is accurate, he has scored a room in a “fucking amazing” four-star hotel for $192 a night. If he is wrong, he has just treated himself to three nights and four days in a “fucking shithole.” He grabs my arm nervously before he hits enter, holding his breath. It works; he will be staying in the hotel he wanted. He springs up and throws his arms in the air, as if he has just nailed a landing from the uneven bars, and I find myself caught in a surreal flurry of high-fiving and fist-pumping. Overwhelmed with relief, he regales me with a detailed account of his booking coup d’etat, promising to send me a link to a website he used. I feel myself slipping away as he talks, unable to comprehend the idea of a vacation. I wonder if we can talk about particle colliders or tulip bulbs; both would seem less strange right now.

When the conversation finally turns to work, however, I find myself unable to respond. “Did you get any assignments?” Dave asks, aware that I have had very little to do recently. “No,” I say slowly. “I think I’m going to get fired.”

Read more, after the jump.

Yesterday, we asked you to take a poll about your happiness with the decision to become an attorney. Of the over 4000 poll takers (as of the time of this posting), approximately 60% said they were satisfied with the decision, but about 17% responded with “I hate my life.” On that note, did you know that lawyers lapse into serious psychic distress at a rate about double that of the general population?

The Cleveland Bar Association mentions this fact (among others) in its campaign to raise awareness about lots of disturbing trends among lawyers: depression, alcohol and drug abuse, sexual neuroses… (Okay, not that last one, but based on ATL comments, it may be a problem for some of our readers.)

Some of the ways in which you are all f***ed up, from the Cleveland Plain Dealer:

With cancer cured and AIDS no longer a threat, America can finally turns its attention toward that final frontier of western civilization: iPhone fart applications. For those of you unfamilar with fart applications, they are downloadable programs that make “hilarious” farting noises on command, thereby rendering real farts completely obsolete.

But where there’s gas, there’s a fire, and last Friday, the creators of iFart Mobile asked a Colorado federal court to rule that the phrase “pull my finger” was common parlance and therefore not protectible under trademark law.

By way of background, iFart previously published a press release announcing that Apple had at long last agreed to carry the “innovative” application. The release stated, somewhat disparagingly, that for many months, iPhone users were denied this critical application, as prudish Apple did not want apps asking people to “pull my finger.” However, when the creators of Pull My Finger, another iPhone fart application, got, er, wind of this press release, they threatened suit for trademark infringement.

There is perhaps no better use of the court’s time, or your time, for that matter, than reading iFart’s bag of hot air complaint. Highlights and the completely ludicrous document, after the jump.

Hello, job seekers. There will soon be an opening at the University of Chicago Law School. Dean Saul Levmore circulated an e-mail to the school yesterday announcing his decision to step down. Here’s an excerpt from the e-mail (which is reprinted in full, after the jump):

I have long said that eight years is about the longest a dean should serve, and I am now in that eighth year. Consequently, President Zimmer will soon ask a faculty committee at the Law School to begin the search process for a new Dean.

Chicago joins a host of law schools currently searching for deans, as we noted recently in our post on Dean Harold Koh possibly leaving Yale. Dean Levmore says he plans to “resume life as a full-time member of the faculty” (of which his wife, Julie Roin, is a part).

Dean Levmore’s departure is completely voluntary, according to one Chicago source with a favorable view of Levmore’s tenure. As for his successor, a few U of C alums we spoke with are hoping for a prominent conservative from the outside with strong Chicago ties (e.g., prior service on the faculty).

Since we can’t predict the future, let’s take a moment to look back on some of Levmore’s past appearances on Above The Law:

What else do you consider to be part of the Levmore legacy at the University of Chicago? Feel free to discuss in the comments.

Lexis employees who Shepardize “Lexis salaries” may now find a red stop sign attached to their search results. Last Tuesday, the powers that be at Lexis sent around a company-wide email announcing that 2009 salaries would be frozen at 2008 levels for all employees:

In order to address what is shaping up to be a more challenging 2009, the senior LexisNexis management team, which includes the leaders of all business and functional units, has had to make some difficult decisions. These decisions include freezing salaries at 2008 levels across all of LexisNexis Group…Except for a promotion or when an increase is required by local law, no one in LexisNexis Group will receive an increase in 2009.

Salary freezes these day are as common as HPV, but a tipster reports that Lexis’ freeze is actually surprising given an earlier announcement:

This is after they announced on a company-wide call in December that there would be a 2% pool for raises.

What’s Locke Lord Bisell got to do with it, after the jump.

[Ed. note: This post is authored by Evan Jowers and Robert Kinney of Kinney Recruiting—sponsor of the Asia Chronicles. Kinney has made more placements of U.S. associates and partners in Asia than any other firm in the past two years. You can reach them by email: asia at kinneyrecruiting dot com.]

Evan here. Today’s post covers (in a very basic way) a) the current poor state of the short-term lateral hiring market in Asia and the Middle East; and b) the strong possibility remains that qualified US associate candidates, who are focused on settling down in Asia, can still land there at top firms in the next 3 to 18 months (it is more unpredictable in Middle East, but also possible). As always, please feel free to comment and I will reply to all (please note, however, that these posts are not memos and I am simply too busy to spend more than thirty minutes or so writing them, so no need to point out spelling and grammar errors).

Before we get started, here are two unique and interesting urgent needs we have:

PE / M&A senior associate in Dubai at major US firm - UK qualified is strongly preferred

Mid-level to senior corporate associate in Eastern Europe at major US firm - specific type of corporate experience not required, Russian language fluency preferred, willingness to work and live in less than fully modernized city required (ok, it is not Asia, but we work Eastern Europe and Russia markets too, thanks to efforts of my colleague, Yuliya Vinokurova.

As mentioned in prior posts and / or comments, the global downturn, while affecting US market lateral hiring since late ‘07, started to affect lateral hiring in Asia significantly in late ‘08. In the first three quarters of ‘08, lateral hiring in Asia was down from the record breaking ‘07, but not nearly as significantly so as in the US markets. However, starting in October ‘08, we started to notice a more severe drop off in lateral hiring in Asia. In the Middle East, we have noticed a drop off in lateral hiring since late summer of ‘08 and, unlike in HK / China (but similar to Japan), there has been only a very small amount of US associate hiring since then (HK / China lateral hiring is substantially down, but not as much as Dubai, for example).

More after the jump…

Last night, we briefly (and accidentally) posted a story regarding the rumored dissolution of Milwaukee-based law firm, Michael Best. The post was not intended to be published at that time; it was a draft that we were holding pending comment from the firm itself.

This morning, we heard from the firm’s MP, David Krutz, who described rumors of dissolution as “absolutely false.” Krutz stated that he had sent a firm-wide email to Michael Best personnel denying ATL’s story. On the phone, he noted that the firm was poised for a strong year in 2009.

Greetings! Marin here.

Some of you may know me as Elie’s foil from the Pls Hndle Thx advice column. Others may know me from the ATL Idol competition. Still others may know me from Miss Michelle’s Dance Studio in New Jersey, where I excelled in jazz and tap dancing as a child.

I’m a lawyer and a freelance writer. And while Elie’s on vacation, I’ll be your guest editor for the week. Elie’s a tough act to follow, but I’m up for the challenge and hope to deliver the same high quality material that you’ve come to expect here. As always, tip your editors at tips@abovethelaw.com.

We now return to our regularly scheduled programming.

* Facebook owns you. Or at least all of your content, even after you close your account due to a recent change in its Terms of Use. But what’s the legality of Facebook’s stealth changes to its consumer contracts? [Litigation & Trial via Wall Street Journal]

* The Pennsylvania judges who sent lots of little kiddies to juvenile detention for minor offenses in exchange for $2.6 million in kickbacks from privately run detention centers are now facing class action suits from hundreds of children and parents. [Courthouse News Service]

* These days, there is more in the news about the misdeeds of the prosecutors in the corruption case of Alaskan Senator Ted Stevens than the defendant. The problems are so serious that the government apparently worked on a holiday. The Justice Department filed a notice with the court yesterday announcing the replacement of the original team of attorneys (from the Department’s Public Integrity Section) due to “litigation relating to allegations of misconduct in this matter.” [Anchorage Daily News]

* President Obama has promised that the government will be more open under his watch, but the Justice Department is not entirely on board with that policy. [Associated Press]

* As we reported in January, Linklaters is saying “See you later” to 100 of its attorneys in London. Legal Week has more details on the practice groups that will be shrinking. [Legal Week]

* The Supreme Court case of Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal is like a John Grisham novel come to life, says USA Today. It’s also “Exhibit A in the debate over how high-dollar state judicial elections can raise questions about the fairness of some rulings.” [USA Today]

This just in, from the AP:

A South Carolina sheriff said Monday he was not going to charge swimmer Michael Phelps after a photo of the 14-time gold medalist showed him smoking from a marijuana pipe.

Richland County Sheriff Leon Lott said he couldn’t ignore the photo but defended his investigation. “Michael Phelps is truly an American hero … but even with his star status, he is still obligated to obey the laws of our state,” Lott said.

The photo showed Phelps smoking from a marijuana pipe at a party in November when he visited the University of South Carolina.

Earlier this month, through a spokesperson, Sheriff Lott sang a different tune:

“The bottom line is, if he broke the law, and he did it in Richland County, he’s going to be charged,” [spokesman Chris] Cowan said. “And there’s no difference between Michael Phelps and several other people that we arrest for the same type of a charge everyday.”

Perhaps Sheriff Lott was deterred by talk that going after Phelps would have constituted a selective prosecution?

A reader poll and the opportunity to comment, after the jump.

The American Bar Foundation has been tracking the careers of almost 5,000 law grads for a project called After The JD. The $1.8 million study keeps the lab rats law grads from the class of 2000 under a microscope for 12 years after graduation to track the development of their careers, relationships, and basic ability to run the maze that is life in the law.

The ABA Journal reports that a survey of the group found that a whopping 76% were “either extremely or moderately satisfied with their decision to become an attorney.”

That’s a good amount of satisfaction. But does it mean that one in four is miserable about having become an attorney? And the ABA Journal says the interviews for the survey were conducted in 2007. With the recent turmoil in the industry, we wonder if those results hold up. How’s your satisfaction these days?

More intel on the class of 2000 (and the migration away from Biglaw), after the jump.

Happy Presidents’ Day! Or Washington and Lincoln Day. Or George Washington Day for Virginians. Or Washington and Jefferson Day if you’re in Alabama. Whatever you call it, we hope you have it off; we do. In honor of the executive branch, ATL will be on a reduced publication schedule today.

* Adam Cohen asks, “Is the Supreme Court About to Kill Off the Exclusionary Rule?” [New York Times]

* A Facebook status update for Quinn Emmanuel might say “Whoops.” A firm PR newsletter bragged about the $65 million that its client ConnectU got out of Facebook… in a confidential settlement. [Los Angeles Times]

* Good news for those looking for work: U.S. Attorneys’ offices in New York have vacancies. Bad news: they may not have the money to fill the empty spots. [Newsday]

* Open-government advocates want PACER to be as easy to use as Google, and free. [New York Times]

* Lawsuit of the Day: iFart Mobile vs. Pull My Finger. [VentureBeat]

Earlier today, associates at K&L Gates attended a town hall meeting with Peter Kalis, chairman and global managing partner. Kalis provided an overview of where the firm stands and announced steps that will be taken to deal with the recession (in addition to skimping on toilet paper).

Several sources sent us reports of the proceedings. Here are highlights:

Possible layoffs: No associate layoffs — yet. At the end of February, management will evaluate how things stand at that point, and there may be a reduction in headcount after that.

Salary freeze: Salaries will be frozen for all associates. This decision will be reviewed at the July Management Committee meeting (so think “slurpee freeze”). According to Kalis, clients were asking him why K&L Gates hadn’t frozen salaries, in response to the freezes of other firms.

Delayed start dates: Incoming first-year associates will have their start date deferred to January 4, 2010. They will get health care prior to that. But Kalis did not say anything about a stipend (a point several sources noticed). The First-Year Academy (training for new associates) and the Associates Symposium have been canceled.

Billing rates: The firm will be raising billing rates (interesting, in light of the salary freeze — pay associates the same, but charge clients more for their services). According to Kalis, rates at K&L Gates are currently lower than those of peer firms, so this is a chance to catch up.

Firm finances: K&L Gates is one of only two Am Law 100 firms with no debt, per Kalis.

That’s the hard news. Colorful quotes and fun stuff, after the jump.

TO: ATL Readers, Commenters, Tipsters
CC: The General Public, The Grammar Police, NYPD, LVPD

FROM: Elie Mystal

SUBJECT: Whereabouts and Other Sundries

I will be out of the office from right about now until Monday, February 23rd.

I have not been fired (so far as I am aware). My performance is not under review. I’m not having a heart attack. Nobody took my stapler. I’m not stuck at “the Sizzler” waiting for the jaws of life to pry me out of the door. I’m just taking a little vacation.

Above the Law won’t miss a beat. Lat and Kash will both be around as always, breaking news, providing insight, and keeping all of the readers in the loop.

But, for extra help during these crazy times, we’re bringing in a guest editor.

You know her, you love her, many of you voted for her six months ago: Marin will be girl-in-the-know next week on Above the Law. I trust that everybody will treat her with the same kindness and respect that I’ve come to so thoroughly enjoy.

I’ll not be checking email or voice mail, nor will I be scanning the sky for smoke signals. Carrier pigeons and other messenger fowl will be shot on sight.

Please send all of your tips, questions, concerns, hot documents, and non-sequitur ideas to tips@abovethelaw.com, so that Lat, Kash, and Marin know what you want to read about.

And if you happen to be in Vegas this weekend, feel free to stop by and say hi. I’ll be the loudest guy at Venetian, the broke guy in the Bellagio poker room, or the mentally unstable, homeless-looking person taking money from people with no understanding of European history at Excalibur.