The AmLaw 100
It’s time for another list! The AmLaw 100 is out and we finally get to see some financial numbers from the nation’s top law firms. The 2007 numbers have been totally obsolete since Lehman collapsed, so we’ve been waiting a long time for these numbers.
In terms of gross revenue, there is not much of a change within the top ten:
1. Skadden: $2,200,000,000
2. Baker & McKenzie: $2,188,000,000
3. Latham & Watkins: $1,923,000,000
4. Jones Day: $1,540,000,000
5. Sidley Austin: $1,489,500,000
6. White & Case: $1,467,000,000
7. Kirkland & Ellis: $1,400,000,000
8. Mayer Brown: $1,294,000,000
9. Weil: $1,231,000,000
10. Greenberg Traurig: $1,204,000,000
But we all know that gross revenue is a little uncivilized when it comes to prestige whoring among fellow practitioners. After the jump, let’s take a look at the top ten in terms of profits per partner.
The “WLRK Championship Belt” — given each year to the firm with the highest PPP — once again goes to Wachtell:
1. Wachtell: $4,010,000
2. Quinn Emanuel: $3,335,000
3. Boies, Schiller: $3,065,000
4. S&C: $2,940,000
5. Paul, Weiss: $2,655,000
6. Cravath: $2,520,000
7. Simpson Thacher: 2,475,000
8. Kirkland & Ellis: $2,470,000
9. Cleary: $2,400,000
10. Schulte Roth: $2,290,000
Most of the firms on this list took a hit to PPP in 2008. Bucking the trend and increasing PPP were Quinn (plus 10.8%), Paul Weiss (plus 2.3%), and Cleary (plus 11.6%).
Damn, it feels good to be a gangsta litigator. Or associated in any way with Cleary Gottlieb.
The biggest hit on this list was Cravath’s 23.6% drop in profits per partner. But we knew that already. And it’s not cool to kick a firm while its down. I think we should leave Cravath alone, just leave it alone.
Obviously, there are all kinds of interesting numbers available here. But overall, the AmLaw 100 confirms what most observers feared. Amy Winehouse had a better 2008 than most American lawyers.
Anyway, I hand it over to the Quinn Remains guy and the rest of the commenters.
The Am Law 100 2009 [AmLaw Daily]
Earlier: Partner Profit Watch: CravaTTTh?
(157) Comments
Comments
Comments hidden for your protection. Show them anyway!
PPP is TTT. What about RPL
also second
First..........
2 = fail
"3. Boise, Schiller: $3,065,000 "
lol
I'm just a 1L, but it seems that if law students relied on this list to their detriment when accepting job offers, there might be a claim for promissory estoppel because of AmLaw's representations. Restatement 90 is definitely applicable.
OCEANS RISE
CITIES FALL
QUINN REMAINS (even though Quinn Remains has been noticeably absent lately)
Their articles are very pessimistic:
"And, absent an economic surge, there will surely be more cuts...There will be blood -- 2008 was not the bottom, just the beginning."
http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202430284287
Lower Partner Profits in 2008 Driven by BigLaw’s Big Hiring
Anything but litigation is just uncivilized.
Man, now I really DO feel bad about what the economy has done to law firms. These guys are really hurting.
BRB, going to the food bank to get some cheese and Prozac.
-Laid off first year associate.
Comment removed by moderator.
best euphemism for illegal immigration ever:
"Health officials say a toddler visiting from Mexico died from the virus in Texas"
http://www.washingtonpost.com/
"The child, who was not immediately identified, had traveled by plane with his family from Mexico City to a town near the U.S. border on April 4. He then crossed into the United States to visit relatives"
Speaking of kicking Cravath while they're down, how about this little gem from AMLaw:
"Five firms joined The Am Law 100, including 12-year-old Boies, Schiller & Flexner and newly merged Husch Blackwell Sanders. For those keeping score, Boies Schiller joins with PPP of more than $3 million, roughly $500,000 ahead of Cravath, Swaine & Moore, the firm David Boies left in 1997."
delete 11 plz
Is XOXO down? Post 11's IP address and stop the violence.
10 - is that you Wurtzel? Get back to studying for the bar.
Anyone have any idea what happened to Cravath? Hiring more SAs/first years doesn't account for the huge drop in PPP and RPL. These numbers dropped a *substantially* greater percentage than peer firms. Anyone know why this happened?
Um. Are those numbers in the BILLIONS? I had no freaking idea. . .
Can someone post the complete AmLaw 100 by PPP? Thanks.
Can someone post the both revenue and PPP for the top 100 firms? I don't feel like paying AmLaw
6 - maybe Quinn Remains has not "remained" at Quinn?
AmLaw registration is free, so you can get the info without paying.
Now that the recession is over and the Dow is back in the green we should see quite a pickup in business for the second half of 2009. The doom and gloom over at AmLaw is baseless pessimism. The new boom is here, get in the market while it's still a deal.
how do you know the quinn remains commenter is a guy?
WALL OF SHAME
(Firms that are both V100 and AmLaw 100, but have yet to announce start dates)
------------------------
Arnold & Porter LLP
Boies, Schiller & Flexner LLP
Covington & Burling LLP
Crowell & Moring LLP
Dickstein Shapiro LLP
Fish & Richardson P.C.
Howrey LLP
K&L Gates LLP
Kirkland & Ellis LLP
Patton Boggs LLP
Reed Smith LLP
Stroock & Stroock & Lavan LLP
Williams & Connolly LLP
These pretzels are making me firsty.
"But overall, the AmLaw 100 confirms what most observers feared. Amy Winehouse had a better 2008 than most American lawyers. "
Elie - I'm a fan, not a hater. But this statement appears right after a discussion of PPP. For the love of the lord, can we all agree that Partners are doing just fine.
Seriously, very few law firms are suffering. The big one are extremely profitable. What's driving salary cuts and layoffs right now is the insatiable drive toward more and more money in the worst economy we've seen in many, many years.
Law firms say you're not profitable if they don't make more money than last year (at least that's what mine communicates to Associates). The Partners will not tolerate reductions in their enormous take home pay.
I'm growing weary of the notion that Partners (which is what is implied here) are somehow struggling.
Patton Boggs start date is October 19, 2009.
Wachtell's drop in PPP was huge. They are still number one, but why didn't you post the % drop in PPP? It was like 20%
22- the info on there is premium content which does require a subscription.
Anyone with a premium account want to post the numbers for the top 100 for both profits and revenue?
Comment removed by moderator.
27 is dead on
25 -
Crowell sent out letters for start dates--any Monday in Sept.--a couple months back.
And, absent an economic surge, there will surely be more cuts.
To test that theory, we ran a couple of simple calculations. Many observers predict a 10 percent drop in gross revenues in 2009. If that's true, and all lawyer head counts were to remain flat, PPP in 2009 would fall by about $360,000, to $925,000. Alternatively, if you assume a 10 percent drop in gross, you can hold PPP steady, on average, by cutting a little more than 10 percent of the lawyers, 84 out of the average-size firm of 820. The cuts don't have to be confined to a single category: lopping off 66 associates and 18 equity partners will hold the line for the survivors.
There will be blood -- 2008 was not the bottom, just the beginning.
What is Kasowitz's average PPP? Anyone know?
remove 31.
Gotta get 31 deleted permanently.
Can someone post the full PPP list?
31 makes me cry.
revised WALL OF SHAME
(Firms that are both V100 and AmLaw 100, but have yet to announce)
------------------------
Arnold & Porter LLP
Boies, Schiller & Flexner LLP
Covington & Burling LLP
Dickstein Shapiro LLP
Fish & Richardson P.C.
Howrey LLP
K&L Gates LLP
Kirkland & Ellis LLP
Reed Smith LLP
Stroock & Stroock & Lavan LLP
Williams & Connolly LLP
31 - although i disagree with your message, I am glad you are doing it. Hopefully this forces everyone onto a registered commenter account. Registered commenters generally make for better boards.
31 is probably clicking refresh every 5 seconds to see if anyone reacts to his post. Kind of sad.
First time in like 10 years that Cadwalader doesn't make the top 10 for PPP. But at least they saw it coming:
"Are we going to have difficulty sustaining this?" [Link] asked. "No, short of some cataclysmic event that hits everyone else too."
30
The profits info outside of the top ten isn't available even for premium subscribers.
31 is a strange case... why is he/she (although I'm guessing it's a he) afraid to type out the n-word while he types out the other defamatory epithets in full?
Where is Latham in PPP?
Law students are obsolete
From the WSJ:
The top 10 in revenue-per-lawyer: 1. Wachtell - $2.46 million; 2. Sullivan & Cromwell - $1.48m; 3. Cravath - $1.21m; 3. (tie) Davis Polk - $1.21m; 5. Debevoise - $1.205m; 6. Boies Schiller - $1.18m; 7. Simpson Thacher - $1.13m; 8. Quinn Emanuel - $1.105m; 8. (tie) Skadden - $1.105m; 10. Milbank Tweed - $1.07m; 10. (tie) Paul Weiss - $1.07m.
41 - I take your comments to mean that your given name is "guest", huh? Or does hypocritical irony make for better boards, too?
27 W&L grad?
ATL should reverse engineer 31's submission [your ISP can do that, by the way], trace his address, then report him to relevant state bar authorities, so that (i) if he has been admitted, his admission is revoked, or (ii) if he is a student, he never is admitted, on 'character and fitness' grounds. One less 'lawyer' to worry about.
-V10 partner
Hey 31 - if you are too stupid not to understand there is no reliable anonymity in cyberspace, you are too stupid to get a job. Have fun working as a janitor.
@31 - I find your style hilarious, intoxicating, and highly erotic.
Jackie Chiles
31 = CLS 2L Stud
someone post the top 100...
do it.
Please delete 31.
Hey #51, an a$$Lob$Ter says what?
How does DPW come in 4th for RPL but not make the top 10 for PPP?
Does it have more partners? Higher costs? Fewer staff lawyers?
Organizational behavior and product management skills plus strategic business thinking are important competencies for lawyers at firms handling today's giant matters, said the deans. But they said the current criteria for law school admission -- college grades and LSAT scores -- do not assess these competencies.
http://www.law.com/jsp/law/careercenter/lawArticleCareerCenter.jsp?id=1202430270716
Elie, if you can remove your mouth from Cleary's dick for a moment. Its also gangsta to be in anything at Paul Weiss. Its amazing how this blog never gives props to what is probably the best firm in the country right now, or at least New York (Wachtell doesn't count because people usually don't last more than 1 year there)
Elie, if you can remove your mouth from Cleary's dick for a moment. Its also gangsta to be in anything at Paul Weiss. Its amazing how this blog never gives props to what is probably the best firm in the country right now, or at least New York (Wachtell doesn't count because people usually don't last more than 1 year there)
27 - You're right to be annoyed, but your comment simplifies a complex issue. The crux of the issue is that a partner's compensation is comprised of 2 elements, namely, their own work and their return on their equity interest in the partnership. These 2 items are so intertwined that they're impossible to separate, but they both flow through to PPP. In a normal business, the calculation would be easy. The partners would be earning wages for their legal work and whatever was left after those wages were paid would be the profit or loss, which would be distributed to the equity owners or retained by the business. Just because they doesn't happen with law firms doesn't mean we can't call firms "profitable" or "unprofitable". If the equity portion of the enterprise is reducing partner profits below what they would be in a different kind of system, it's fair (in my mind) to call the business unprofitable. This is what partners are doing when they talk about profitability. They're guesstimating it, of course, but there is a rationale behind their guesstimate.
But yeah, overall, it's the height of absurdity for any BigLaw partner to complain about comp, particularly when they don't waste any time complaining about the compensation of the associates who make a fraction of their salaries and have 6 figures of debt and little to no job security.
49 - when in Rome . . .
Guest is easier and I have a shtick, albeit a shitty one that I don't use anymore. I was Ray.
If everyone was forced to register and put a name, not necessarily their real name, it would make the board a lot easier to read and probably get rid of the million promissory estoppel / ass lobster / first!!!!1111!!!lol comments.
The swift justice of the Paul Hastings coat hanger will descend upon thee. Female associates take heed and cover yer asses.
arrrrgggghh
59-60, Nailed it.
#51 - your point/question is ?
43 - They'll be back.
LONG LIVE CADWALADER
51 - you cannot reverse engineer an IP address unless you seek this information from the internet service provider, which i doubt they are going to do just by asking.
Oh, and, I doubt you are a V-10 partner.
59-60 completely missed the fact that "gangsta litigator" is a reference to Paul Weiss and as such should probably be relegated to doc review there.
Kasowitz Benson PPP? Anyone know? Anyone?
40-
The previous post on start dates says "Covington & Burling - Any Monday after the bar exam."
@56 - What?
25/40 - Howrey is starting everyone by 12/1/09 (though supposedly, some will start sooner)
Please remove all post requesting removal of posts. They offend me.
K&L is starting in Jan 2010
25/40 - Covington has announced that first years can start on any Monday after the bar exam.
I wish someone would moderate me, I have been very bad.
Naughty at Nixon
revised WALL OF SHAME
(Firms that are both V100 and AmLaw 100, but have yet to announce)
------------------------
Arnold & Porter LLP
Boies, Schiller & Flexner LLP
Dickstein Shapiro LLP
Fish & Richardson P.C.
K&L Gates LLP
Kirkland & Ellis LLP
Reed Smith LLP
Stroock & Stroock & Lavan LLP
Williams & Connolly LLP
Revenue Per Lawyer (RPL) is calculated by dividing gross revenue by the number of lawyers.
Milbank posted a gross revenue drop of 3.3% and an RPL drop of 10.8%. I'm wondering how this is possible.. I doubt they went on a hiring spree.
Why is RPL a better measurement than PPP?
***Where have you gone Cahill Gordon?***
Boies Schiller to $190k!
That place sounds more and more appealing every day. Higher starting salary, no summer program cuts, no bonus decrease, profits like a mother f**ker. Sign me up.
The firms that had layoffs to keep PPP up are assholes. I mean seriously 2 mil plus per partner is outragous.
This PPP shit is simply obscene. BigLaw is in a race to the bottom to see how much each can cut out from underneath before the partners take any real hit. Firm A cuts positions or salaries or pushes back start dates before Firm B blinks, then Firm B does the same etc etc...
A memo I'd love to see from a managing partner would be solely to the partners and along the lines of...
"Ladies and gentleman, we are in a bad economic phase now and the time has come as responsible owners for us to tighten our belts. We have borne great fruits not only as the result of our own hard work but of the tireless attorneys and staff members who work for us. We should thus be equally prepared to bear the brunt of the burden as the economy has now soured.
"When you signed on, you signed on as an owner. Even if you lose a few hundred thousand dollars in compensation this year as a result, you will still be making several hundred thousand dollars to take home, and will not be hurting nearly as much as attorneys and staff would hurt if we just indiscriminately let them go. You agreed to the 'privatization of profit' - to enjoy the greatest fruits of our firrm's profitiability as it grew and continued to grow not only on the basis of your sweat equity but of that of everyone who works for us. Morally and ethically, this far from makes the case for a 'socialization of loss', to spread the pain to everyone in the firm to a point where many of our much less well compensated colleagues will be left adrift.
"Accordingly, as an owner of the firm, please accept that loss must be privatized in difficult times as profit is in boom times -- you assumed this great mantle of responsibility when you agreed to be an equity partner. Do not shirk from this responsibility now. Be the leader you were meant to be and set the example you were meant to set."
Also curious about why DPW does well per lawyer but not per partner. I assume it means there are fewer associates per partner than at the other firms. Curious to know if the thinking is that they have too few associates or too many partners.
Cravath is an awful firm, and everyone knows it. The people are weird paranoid losers, and now they can't hang their hat as being the most prestigious, highest profits, pinnacle of the white-shoe market. Quinn and Boies out of nowhere have shown the power of new ideas replacing the stodgy old Cravath method.
What the fuck kinda pinko shit is that, 83?
The partners shouldn't pay for labor they don't need/don't wish to afford given their changed financial situations any more than laid off associates should be expected to continue paying for models/bottles/hair dressers/trainers/maids/massages they don't need/don't wish to afford given their changed financial situations. Or do you owe it to your bartender to keep on ordering the top-shelf booze and tipping 70%?
Big defections from Cahill explain it.
31: what I don't get... is why, if you're going to post offensive racist, homophibic and sexist comments, do you use an asterisk in only one of them? Embarased by your own comments?
78 - By quadrupling billing rate of paralegals
Where is Kasowitz?
K&L Gates announced their start date back in February, and ATL reported on it (though for some reason the firm doesn't appear on their start date list). The date is 1/4/2010.
http://abovethelaw.com/2009/02/kl_gates_recession_measures.php
Didn't see 31's comment before it was removed, but I agree with 41. Give people total anonymity on the Internet and you see some pretty ugly stuff. OTOH, requiring real identities on a board (sorry, "blog") like this would probably end discussion entirely.
The compromise solution is to require registered screennames. It makes it so much easier to sort out the posters who should just be ignored and those who contribute something. Moreover, people aren't nearly as prone to be total assholes even if all you can ID them by is a screenname because even on a board like this, reputation will matter to people.
I guess it all depends on what kind of "community" you want to have. ATL, for some reason I can't fathom, chooses to allow what could be an interesting discussion among educated people with something in common to descend in to nearly unreadable drivel.
(btw - I'm perfectly happy to put my money where my mouth is and register, but as far as I can tell, that's frowned on here unless it's for the purpose of perpetuating the same unfunny schtick - see: Partner Emeritus - in response to every post.)
25,
Not looking to pick a fight, but Patton Boggs has no place on wall of shame. PB has a completely ordinary, non-deferred start date.
Reed Smith announced a while ago... January 2010, at least here in philly.
DPW prepaid some '09 expenses last year, which is unusual for them. This may explain part of their RPL/PPP gap.
People on here discuss law firms like normal people discuss sports teams. Go Skadden! Boo Cravath. Let's go Quinn!
Get a life, people.
"Bucking the trend and increasing PPP were Quinn (plus 10.8%), Paul Weiss (plus 2.3%), and Cleary (plus 11.6%)."
these guys know what i'm talking about.
87,
What big defections?
What's up with Howrey's almost 30% jump in PPP?
And why would they be "asking" for capital from non-equity partners if they were as flush as the survey implies?
Something's fishy.
@92 - shut up. No one really takes the offensive comments seriously. Please go back to Utah.
100 - 92 is among that group of people that take everything (especially themselves) too seriously. If you went to law school, you know exactly who I'm talking about.
62 - I admit the promissory estoppel shtick will get old at some point, but we're not there yet. And people (not me, I swear) adapting it to every new post no matter how unrelated makes it even more preposterous and, hence, makes me laugh harder. It's the new frat stud.
95 is right. DPW's revenues are normal (hence the #3 RPL) but they prepaid some set costs for 09 and 10, lowering profits for the short term. They'll get the benefit of their prepayments in the next couple of years.
27,61---One factor impacting partner concerns, often overlooked, is that retirement arrangements at many if not most firms are largely unfunded, i.e., making partners' retirement benefits dependent on future firm profitability and viability. That's a concern likely to be felt more keenly by older members of the firm, who also tend to be disproportionately represented among the key decisionmakers.
68- Paul Weiss also has gangsta transactional attorneys (still doing work!) and gangsta bankruptcy practices. Paul Weiss does more than litigation and they do it as well as anyone.
105- You are correct, I am glad someone is finally speaking up about it.
how does a top firm like jones day have such low PPP #s?
106=105
For the promissory estoppel folks, suggest you start talking about fact patterns and other "exceptions" to the at will employment rules---fraud in the inducement, negligent misrepresentation, implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. Probably inapplicable to most situations referenced on this site, but possibly relevant to some laid off or deferred individuals, in certain jurisdictions. Make it interesting, or move on to other points.
87 - is that meant to be sarcasm? As far as I know, only one partner has left Cahill in the past year. It is extremely rare for a partner to leave Cahill.
it's funny as 90% of the posters here are law students or junior associates but somehow, they manage to know which firm paid which expenses in advance in 2008 and the like. do i smell 3Ls talking out of their asses and trying to cope with their anxiety? i smell shit, that's for sure anyway.
OCEANS RISE
CITIES FALL
QUINN REMAINS (at Quinn too, LOL)
111,
I smell shit as well. But it is likely the result of pooping my pants.
The fact that even the most numbskulled share partner at Kirkland (and there are many) made, on average, $2.4 million last year defies credulity. That's grand larceny, plain and simple.
yay schulte!
The fact that even the most numbskulled share partner at Kirkland (and there are many) made, on average, $2.4 million last year defies credulity. That's grand larceny, plain and simple.
The fact that even the most numbskulled share partner at Kirkland (and there are many) made, on average, $2.4 million last year defies credulity. That's grand larceny, plain and simple.
100, 101 - you misunderstand. It's not like I'm offended, it's that the offensive/useless/irrelevant comments on ATL so outnumber the useful comments as to make a conversation about developments in the legal world completely impossible.
Like I said, it depends on what kind of forum you want to have. If you think the utter crap that comprises 90% of the posts here makes for entertaining or interesting discussion, then good for you. Personally, I can only laugh at the same lame jokes so many times.
It's not about taking things seriously - it's about having a forum that's actually interesting and/or funny. The repetitive shit on ATL is just boring.
-92
Something stinks. Stinks like lobster sex.
118 -- I guess my mental filter is better than yours. I am still able to come away with plenty of useful information while at the same time laughing at lame posts and any other random shenanigans.
Life is serious enough friendo, relax.
N. Wacker Stud
ps. Do you like fish sticks?
120 - Do you put fish sticks in your mouth?
17, while it is clear that Cravath would have taken a hit regardless in this market... the hit that they did take has been overstated, and has to do with deal timing. If you looked at their M&A activity last year, you would see a mismatch between announced deals and completed deals (the number of completed deals was down ALOT), and it is when a deal completes that you get the big bonus bucks.
However, if you look at Cravath's M&A for just this last quarter in 2009 (check out Thomson Reuters league tables) you will see that in JUST ONE QUARTER, Cravath completed deals whose value exceed what they completed in ALL of 2008. There was a clear disconnect in terms of when deals were finishing, and apparently a lot of deal in the pipeline closed after the 2008 financial numbers were in.
So there you go, an overrexaggerated reduction in 2008, with a big pickup in 1Q 2009. Who knows what will happen the rest of the year but it is clear that Cravath's decline in 2008 was misrepresented and would likely be about average without timing issues.
I agree with 105
--108
McDermott Will & Emery is a terrible firm.
Locke Lord is the asshole of Houston.
BOIES SCHILLER DROPS OFF THIS LIST IF YOU COUNT-- COMPENSATION-- ALL PARTNERS, which includes all those other partnership classes firms like to use to screw with numbers... so there
81: where is that 190 info coming from?
S&C to V2!
Cravath's pretty much been the most elite firm in the country for the past 50 years. One bad year, and bad is a relative term considering they are still doing better than all but a few other firms, isn't going to do shit to them.
NYC to 190??
McDermott Will & Emery is the butt of Chicago.
#125 - A little bitter you didn't a call back from Locke Lord?
Maybe being top 15% at a T 90 school wasn't enough.
UT3L
I'm sorry 131, but you are a little mistaken. Kirkland is the butt of Chicago. McDermott is just a nipple or maybe an armpit.
N. Wacker Stud
107 --
That was either a ridiculously poor attempt at a flame or you can't do math (they have like 775 partners... more than even Baker McKenzie).
@72 - Not exactly correct. There are a small number of incoming associates at Howrey. The majority are starting 12/1/09 - the others are starting between September and November.
12 is dumb.
87: The only real partner loss in the past couple of years was a corporate partner to DLA Piper, who probably wishes he were back.
Cleary continues to pwn
http://amlawdaily.typepad.com/amlawdaily/2009/04/cleary-advising-chrysler-labor-deal.html
A&O redundancy programme ends with 247 layoffs
29 April 2009 |
Allen & Overy has completed a redundancy programme which has seen at least 247 partners and staff lose their jobs globally and cost the firm £44m.
The consultation process, which was launched in February with the firm citing global market conditions as the cause, was designed to cut nine per cent of partners, fee-earners and support staff.
All those affected will have left by tomorrow, 30 April 2009. The firm declined to comment on the total involved, but a spokesperson said that once additional voluntary redundancies are included, the total number of job cuts would be slightly higher than the total of 247 that was initially envisaged.
As well as cutting 47 partners, 100 fee-earners and 100 members of support staff, Allen & Overy de-equitised a further 35 partners. At the end of the last financial year the firm had a total of 2,686 fee-earners, 474 partners and 4,949 staff. Particularly badly hit was the firm’s former flagship leveraged finance practice (9 March)
The process was officially launched with a partner conference call with senior partner David Morley in which he outlined eight principles by which it would be conducted.
They were: that the process should be market-led, comprehensive, in line with the firm’s culture and ethos and its global strategic focus, that it should be fair, put the firm in the best possible shape to get through the recession, quick and allow for alternativesincluding voluntary redundancies, reduced hours, reduced pay, sabbaticals, secondments and deferrals of start dates for new trainees.
As part of the restructuring, the firm de-merged its private client practice, which will become an independent firm, Maurice, Turnor Gardner with effect from 1 May 2009
Add Steptoe to the wall of shame of firms that haven't announced start dates
122:
Thanks for the explanation.
-17
Hi I am a harvard 1L, my plan is to just going to work at Skadden then transfer to White & Case or Boies, Schiller and become partner...is a good idea?
thanks in advance
#5, I am in pre-law in junior college and I agree. It is definitely applicable
First year at biglaw shop here.
if i get a pay reduction ill be pissed!!!
145?!?! what is this?? communism?
105: Paul Weiss has swine flu so shut up
McDermott Will & Emery sucks.
NATIONALIZE ALL LAW FIRMS !! THE PEOPLE WILL ALL BE PARTNERS !!
FYI: Boies 2008 PPP was exclusively the result of a payout on a 6 year old case, they have no high profile, large-scale litigation this past year! All the cases in the AmLawyer article are old and wrapped up. Whoever got paid for that puff piece hasn't a clue, that ship has been sinking for a while now. Quinn has surpassed them years ago and is conversely still viable and has a future.
where is schulte getting all the cash? I thought they were just a sub of cerberus.
LOL, is 81 a Boies PR flack? Their recruiting program is a disaster, they take any and all comers from the top 8 or 10 law schools, including 1L's yet most just pocket the cash and bail to someplace more viable long term. They've been shedding attorneys this past year, including partners though most at that place are non-equity which helps inflate the PPP number.
148 -- Probably spot-on with respect to BSF (with Boies due to die from a heart attack while nailing wife number 6 at any moment now), but the commentary about Quinn is just self-indulgent and stupid. I've never understood all the Quinn love here -- didn't they get completely PWned just last summer in the Parmalat litigation? Trial lawyers who not only lose their case-in-chief but get a huge counterclaim award against them aren't, well. . . very impressive.
The Cravaths, Paul Weisses, Wachtells, Williamses and other real players will continue to win the most important cases for the most important clients. Quinn will remain mediocre. At least BSF can win at trial or leverage the occasional big settlement in their contingency cases.
KIRKLAND! KIRKLAND!
Look for Wachtell to lose its title in 2009.
SullCrom, you'd better step the fuck up with this spring bonus shit. Skadden isn't even ON the fucking list, and you're number 2.
153, you're lucky to get any paycheck at all, much less your year end bonus. S&C is highly profitable mostly because of the partners' skill, experience and reputations--your pathetic 2600 hours of bullshit billing had almost nothing to do with it.
So why should they share any of the pie with you? If they don't you'll what, stop working those hours? Stop caring about whether something is done right? Give positive reviews to TTT staff that the firm would be better off without so they stay and gum up the works? Tell the summers that they have better options and explain why? Make sure you take on and become really relied on in multiple matters right before you bail for the first solid normal job you can find?
BIG LAW FIRM PARTNERS MAKE MILLIONS, FIRE THOUSANDS.
and a bonus
ATL SUFFERS TOTAL AMNESIA, SAYS "NOT COOL TO KICK A FIRM WHILE IT'S DOWN"
quinn associate here. no pride in being number two on the ppp list--at least not for associates. it is essentially the best indicator of how relentlessly a firm rides its associates like donkeys. it is only "prestigious" if you are a partner taking a $100k monthly draw. if the economy were better, i would advise all law students to run like hell from any firm on the ppp leaderboard. on the other hand, in this economy those firms are going to attract the rainmakers and have work while others may not. so, for now, i'll let jbq strap a saddle on me and ride out this recession.
Nobody has any comment on Howrey's ridiculous so-called 30% jump in PPP?