First to call 1 a loser

TURD

First to point out that #1 is apparently unaware that Sunday is the first day of the week.

Yes, let's all confirm in the public mind what a bunch of spoiled, entitlement-minded, wasteful idiots BigLaw associates are by going on the record in the NYT. Teaching in the Himalayas, way to balance out that liberal guilt while you read Lonely Planet guides.

Please moderate #8, as it is very racist.

5, you're mistaken, she's going to bring solar power to the Himalayas. That is change we can believe in.

Suck it, Somalians.

I am a big fan of Major Applewhite.

Ugh. People from Somalia are called Somali(s). Typos are a bitch. I am guessing that 8 has shit on Elie, so suck it, fool.

As a federal attorney I resent Skadden for giving 125 attorneys $80K to do nothing.

I would gladly take the $80K salary and work at Skadden for the experience alone.

This behavior, from a firm that had a big hand in the financial crisis, only serves to undermine the profession and discredit the judiciary. SHAME.

Jeeze, how fast are these comments moderated? I didn't even get a chance to read the racist tirade!

11 -- maybe you should SUE

9= racist
11= loser/troll
12=racist
13=awesome

Has anyone considered promissory estoppel?

11 - I'm sure Skadden would appreciate the experience you have gained as a federal attorney; they need more lawyers who know how to hide evidence from the opposing side and rushing cases to trial.

15, I have. I answer more questions in Contracts than anyone else in my section, and I defanitely think you could sue your firm for promissory estoppel if they cut back your summer or defer your start date. I know if I had a job this summer and they did that to me I would sue them for sure.

"15, I have. I answer more questions in Contracts than anyone else in my section, and I defanitely think you could sue your firm for promissory estoppel if they cut back your summer or defer your start date. I know if I had a job this summer and they did that to me I would sue them for sure."

Ha ha ha!

15, you should also sue them for antitrust violations, since all the employers are doing the same thing (deferrals, layoffs, matching salary cuts/freezes, etc.)
And it's really easy to file a lawsuit so you should save some money by not hiring a lawyer and just file the complaint pro se. Then put all the information you have on the Internet.
See the lawsuit by Yolanda Young (a brilliant and talented GULC graduate who just so happened to have a C average and failed the bar twice) as an example.

Promissory estoppel = racist

20 = racist
17 = terrible attempt at trolling; far too blatant
13 = awesome
14 = promissorily estopped from complaining about trolling and/or racism

FIRST?

I am way better than any of this.

Skadden 80K

I found all of my Easter eggs this weekend.

"I would gladly take the $80K salary and work at Skadden for the experience alone."

Then you are a moron.

I would take the 80K and steal 5 staplers.

awesome ideas are come from me

eww--Mofo?! Does anyone even think that firm is worth talking about anymore? It's not like I'd refer any business there from an in-house perspective--it's much too poorly run. This news will hurt them badly because no client would want to face a similar version of this situation.

#4 - Monday is the first business day of the week you foul blob of amphibian shit.

#2 - In that you are second to post, you are first loser.

This should end the associates are overpaid debate... http://finance.yahoo.com/banking-budgeting/article/106907/Crisis-Altering-Wall-St.-As-Stars-Begin-to-Scatter?sec=topStories&pos=8&asset=TBD&ccode=TBD

The salary is where it is for a reason. It is necessary to maintain the quantity of talented lawyers. Lower it and just like they taught us in basic economics, the supply of talented lawyers will decrease. The only question is how elastic the salary actually is and whether it is sufficiently elastic to support a salary decrease in this down economy. Despite that everyone thinks there are tons of unemployed, amazingly talented lawyers, it just ins't true. After all the bloodbaths, only 3500 (or 3.4% of V100 attorneys have been laid off). I also know quite a few laid off associates that have already found jobs (in-house or with another firm) or moved on to something else (non-legal) that they were planning on doing anyway. With all this, it seems likely that a salary decrease would cause the same Wall Street brain drain phenomenon.

28 - Considering the quality of the Wall Street and Biglaw brains that got us into this mess in the first place, a little draining isn't a bad thing.

Best and the brightest my ass.

Nobody ever says "wow, I had a shitty case and was probably in the wrong!" It's always "my lawyer screwed me!"

All the crap they list are rather petty complaints except for the alleged issues getting expert witnesses and discovery. IF there's any truth to that, which I doubt. I would think the firm would countersue for unpaid fees. Obviously the company is hoping to settle by canceling the rest of its liability for atty fees.

The only thing I'd say for the plaintiff is, if you really don't have a great case, the lawyer should've picked up on that and warned you before 4 million in fees go down the drain. For all I know, there's a report somewhere in the file saying exactly that.

But in litigation, just like in tech startup companies, you pays your money and you takes your chances.