Remember Kiwi Camara? He’s the legal Doogie Howser who graduated from Harvard Law School at the tender age of 19, reportedly making him the youngest graduate in the school’s history. But K.A.D. Camara, as he’s also known, may be best known for a youthful indiscretion: referring to African Americans as “nigs,” in a class outline that was posted to an HLS website. (For more background on the controversy, see here.)
Well, everyone’s favorite Flip — present company excluded — is back in the news. From p2pnet news (via Slashdot):
I’ve just spoken with a jubilant Jammie Thomas, the woman Vivendi Universal, EMI, Warner Music and Sony Music’s RIAA tried to nail to the wall with a bill of almost a quarter of a million dollars.
She’s over the moon because only days after learning Brian Toder, her previous legal representative, had decided discretion was the better part of valour, leaving her fend for herself against the Big 4 music labels, another lawyer has come forward with an offer of pro bono help.
He’s K.A.D. Camara from Camara & Sibley in Houston, Texas, says Jammie. And, “He’s the youngest person in history to graduate from Harvard Law school with honors,” she points out.
Nor will her trial — or, rather, her retrial — be delayed, as was expected. It’ll now go forward on June 15, as slated. “I’m so happy!” Jammie said.
And so is Kiwi. We chatted over the phone with our fellow Filipino-American lawyer — about the Thomas case, how he plans to prepare for a trial less than a month away, and his new law firm, Camara & Sibley (which is hiring, by the way).
Read about our conversation, after the jump.
Continue reading “Kiwi Camara: He’s Baack”
Last week, Fish & Richardson laid off 120 people. It was the second round of layoffs from the firm this year.
But that wasn’t the end of Fish’s cost cutting measures. Yesterday, the firm effectively “cold offered” one-third of its incoming first year associate class. Another third of the class will start on time, and the rest have been deferred until October 2010. Above the Law has obtained this statement from the firm:
While approximately one-third of our 2009 associate class will start on time, we are deferring the majority of the class to October 2010. About half of those deferred will receive a stipend of $5,000 per month for twelve months, along with reimbursement for health insurance. We have informed the other half of those deferred that, given current economic conditions, it is unlikely that we will have a position for them next fall, and we have advised them to seek other opportunities. That group will receive a stipend of $5,000 per month for six months, along with reimbursement for health insurance, and we will revisit their situations in mid-2010.
Isn’t it a bit late for firms to cold offer incoming associates? It’s almost June, yet a third of the first year class just found out that there were essentially out of a job.
Tipsters weigh in, and an update on how the decision was made, after the jump.
Continue reading “Fish & Richardson Puts One-Third Of Its Incoming Associates On Ice”
People are already calling the class of 2009 the “lost generation.” We’ve detailed the difficult market facing the class of 2010. But yesterday we received some news out of Morris Manning, an Atlanta-based firm with approximately 175 lawyers, that suggests tough times are ahead for the classes of 2011 and beyond.
Morris Manning managing partner Bob Saudek sent around this firm-wide email:
FYI, the firm has decided not to interview on law school campuses this fall, which of course means that we do not plan to have a formal summer program next summer. This decision was made because we don’t know when the economy will pick up, we feel that our first obligation should be to making sure that our existing lawyers are productive rather than committing to bring in a whole class of additional associates, and we believe that when and as we need to hire additional lawyers there are very likely to be a lot of well-qualified experienced lawyers available as well as well-qualified third year law students, since so many firms have contracted significantly and reduced or eliminated their summer programs.
Is this a wise strategy? In a post late last year over at Adam Smith Esq., Bruce McEwen expressed doubts:
[Y]ou cannot introduce a gap into that supply chain. You need to be in the business of continually recruiting new talent, in order to feed the continually moving production line of senior to mid-level to junior staff needed to manage cases and transactions. You cannot, in other words, inflict on your own firm the equivalent of a “lost generation.”
So counter-intuitive as it may seem, I recommend continuing to feed the associate pipeline from the start, summer associates and first-year hires, even at the cost of some mid-year enforced “attrition.” Aside from what I believe to be sound long-term reasons to continue investing in the firm’s future in this way, there are as well both an abstract and a prudential argument for same.
Of course, there is always a counterargument. Let’s get into it, plus take a reader poll, after the jump.
Continue reading “Open Thread: Is This the Beginning of the End for Summer Associate Programs?”
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), follow her on Twitter, or find her on Facebook.
This column is a continuation of last week’s column, which you can read here.
After the departure of Elisa — who, I now have it on information and belief, is a bitch — I have the distinct sense that I have been sent to my room. “Go to your room!” I imagine her screaming at a petulant child, “and don’t come out until you’ve reviewed 68,000 documents!”
I want to ask one of my new colleagues for some guidance — an insider’s view of what to expect, and how things work in this strange ecosystem — but I am reasonably certain that my inquiry will be futile, since none of them can hear me: they are all wearing headphones. Even the carpal tunnel guy has retreated to the auditory solace of his own world, and is bobbing his head gently while he applies something pungent to his visibly swollen joints. I watch him pull a tattered plastic shopping bag out from under his desk and rifle through a collection of tubes, bottles, and jars, one of which he finally selects and opens, filling the room with the smell of menthol. I wonder if he is going to apply it directly to his forehead.
I start to flip through the review protocol, which seems inordinately complicated. The document tags appear to have been created by several different people who were not in the same room at the same time. Like anything produced by multiple lawyers (with multiple egos), it looks like the product of a stubborn refusal to compromise. Perhaps it will make more sense once I start reviewing actual documents, I think, opening the database. I am hoping that the fine points of the “review tool” will come back to me quickly.
Instead, looking at the screen in front of me, I am flooded with the memory of a case I worked on a few months before I was laid off. For a moment I am back at my desk in my old office, talking to the client on the phone about what we need to identify in the documents. I want to laugh at the absurdity of revisiting the nuances of Kroll Ontrack the way some people remember the details of an old relationship. In this scenario, Kroll would be the ex-boyfriend, which, I suppose, is not so far-fetched given how much time I spent with it.
Kroll would be a bad ex, I muse. Remember that restaurant we didn’t go to? The time we didn’t go for a walk together? Remember when I marked that document “privileged,” and then someone else marked it “non-responsive”? Remember how hard we didn’t laugh? I’m sorry we had to break up, Kroll, but you never wanted to do anything but talk shop and stay in on weekends. Yes, I remember when you said I’d be back, and I guess you were right. But I want you to know that I saw other documents — lots of other documents — while we were apart.
More after the jump.
Continue reading “Notes from the Breadline: Comes a Time (Part III)”
May 2009 must be a month of mixed emotions for Andrew Giuliani, son of former New York mayor (and unsuccessful presidential candidate) Rudy Giuliani. Giuliani the younger sued Duke University for kicking him off the golf team.
On the positive side, he graduated from Duke this month (even if he did miss the graduation ceremony). On the negative side, he lost he’s one step closer to losing his breach of contract case against Duke — and now, thanks to the humorous opinion by a little-known North Carolina judge, he’s being subjected to a quadruple bogey of humiliation.
CORRECTION: Giuliani hasn’t lost his lawsuit yet. The magistrate judge has merely recommended dismissal to the district judge.
Magistrate Judge Wallace Dixon dismissed recommended dismissal of Giuliani’s suit, with golf references playing through the whole 12-page opinion.
Here’s a sampling of leads from various news sources:
ESPN: Suffice it to say that in U.S. Magistrate Judge Wallace Dixon’s opinion, ousted Duke University golfer Andrew Giuliani’s lawsuit against the school did not make par.
New York Daily News: Andrew Giuliani’s bid to sue Duke University for kicking him off its golf team ended in the rough this week.
New York Times: A federal magistrate judge with a taste for sports metaphors has found that Andrew Giuliani’s lawsuit against Duke University for letting a coach push him off the university’s golf team is “a swing and a miss.”
San Jose Mercury News: A judge treated Andrew Giuliani’s lawsuit with all the gravitas it deserved — which is to say, there’s a legal document in North Carolina that was inspired by “Caddyshack.”
The News and Observer: The son of former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani tried to make a federal case against Duke University for kicking him off the golf team. But a federal magistrate says Andrew Giuliani’s case belongs in the drink.
The News & Observer wins the contest for wonkiest golf metaphor. Excerpts from the opinion, after the jump.
Continue reading “Opinion of the Day: Giuliani v. Duke University”
* President Obama will talk about his plans to close Guantanamo in a national address in order to rally support from the public after getting shut down by members of Congress. [CNN]
* After quietly accepting charges from several states, Craiglist is fighting back. The company sued South Carolina’s attorney general for violating free speech and the Commerce Clause with his prosecution threats. [San Francisco Chronicle]
* A “flamboyant” high profile defense attorney in New Jersey who was famous for saying “no witness, no case” has been charged with having key witnesses murdered. [New York Times]
* “Manhattan prosecutors have charged a New York personal injury lawyer with stealing $650,000 in client settlement money. [ABA Journal]
* Despite his liberal tendencies, David Souter treated the business community well. Will Obama’s successor do the same? [Wall Street Journal]
* The pitfalls and benefits of power of attorney. [New York Times]
Yesterday, we reported on an associate at Quinn Emanuel who had strong views about the firm’s recent victory in the Pro Football v. Harjo case, in which the D.C. Circuit upheld the Washington Redskins trademark in the moniker “Redskins.” We, along with many readers, speculated about whether the first-year associate would be able to hold onto his job after yesterday’s publicity.
We are now able to report that the Quinn associate was let go from the firm yesterday — but not because of the various “reply-all” emails.
Instead, the associate was let go because he failed the California bar exam. For a second time.
(Thus, as noted in the comments, any email indiscretions by him essentially amounted to harmless error.)
The firm declined to comment about individual personnel matters, but multiple sources report that it is the standing policy of Quinn Emanuel to part ways with associates who fail the bar multiple times.
But we shouldn’t necessarily look at the emails as an attempt to go out in a “blaze of glory.” As we understand it, the associate sent the first reply-all email — the one that was not meant to “rouse some rabble or down some debbies or outcrunch some crunchies” — before he found out that he failed the bar for a second time.
As for the rest of the emails, that might be a different story. More details, and a colorful “no comment” from the associate himself, after the jump.
Continue reading “Second Bar Failure Is Proximate Cause for Quinn Associate’s Ouster”
* Lost in yesterday’s Quinn controversy is the fact that the name “Washington Redskins” still pisses a lot of people off. But really, “Redskins” was never the best example of this issue. Not when Chief Wahoo is sitting right there. [Washington Post]
* The CEO of Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, John Roos, is set to be named the next ambassador to Japan. That’s what I call a positive performance review. [Bloomberg]
* Ponytails are one of the most boring things to ever happen. Not as boring as the pant suit, but pretty damn boring. [Corporette]
* Now more than ever, being a law clerk seems like the only reasonable choice for intelligent people. [Law Clerk Addict]
* Because really, even if you have a law firm job, the people you work for are desperate for you to get a clerkship and spend some time on the government’s dime. [Faculty Lounge]
* The last time somebody mentioned Martindale-Hubbell to me, I thought they were talking about a new mission for the space telescope. [What About Clients?]
* You know what, I don’t want a jury of my peers. I want a jury of my betters. [Obscure Store]
* Why delay the results of the bar exam when you can just make it much, much harder to turn off the spigot of new lawyers? Oh wait, that would require lawyers to have a professional organization of some kind that looked out for the selfish interests of its current members. [Litination]
When students at New York Law School can’t find work, sometimes they resort to tearing the clothes off of 1Ls. So we applaud Lev Ekster, an NYLS alumnus, for his non-violent approach to the economic crisis:
Recent law school grad Lev Ekster is going from court to cupcakes. When the New York Law School student realized he wouldn’t land a law firm job this year, he turned to entrepreneurship. Inspiration struck after a disappointing trip to Magnolia Bakery, where he waited in an excruciatingly long line for what he deemed a “dry and tasteless” cupcake. “The experience reminded me of my parents’ stories of waiting in line for bread,” says the native Ukrainian.
Yes, this story reminded us of breadlines too.
The mobile cupcake service is called Cupcake Stop, and it should be rumbling by a street corner near you. If you’re interested — not just in cupcakes, but possible employment — take note:
[A]ccording to their recent Twitter post, they’re hiring:
Now hiring, part-time and full-time employees in NYC. Food prep license is preferred, not required. Fun job! email jobs@cupcakestop.com
Why shouldn’t every NYLS student get in on the entrepreneurial act? We have additional details, after the jump.
Continue reading “Comfort Food for the Economy”
Ed. note: Have a question for next week? Send it in to advice@abovethelaw.com.
Dear ATL -
I enjoyed last week’s column! Here’s another question for you. Bar class starts next week (I am in NY). Do I really have to study every day until the bar exam or is that just an urban legend?
School’s Out For Summer
Dear School’s Out For Summer,
Law students who believed that you have to study every day until the bar exam are the same people who spent their entire first semester of law school holed up in the library, clutching oily copies of One L and fearing failure: Nerds. They’re a delicious candy, but they’re completely ridiculous. Why study a little bit every day of law school and thereby ruin every day when you can save the studying and only ruin the last two weeks before exams? Similarly, why ruin May, June and July studying for the bar when you can just ruin July?
So no, you don’t have to start studying on the first day of bar class, but there will be nerds who do. The classic nerd strategy is studying + intimidation, seen in its purest form at SAT testing sites, where students roll up to the testing center carrying Princeton Review pencils and wearing Harvard sweatpants. At bar review class, this translates to students loudly complaining about carrying around 13 pounds of homemade index cards and taking every practice exam released since the blessed Council of Nicaea. You’ll have to ignore their transparent bragging as the panic rises within you and have faith in the procrastination process.
I didn’t start studying till after July 4th weekend and I passed the bar by four points a comfortable margin. It did involve me making a sizable donation to Temple Beth El in South Orange, NJ for prayers to be said in perpetuity for no commercial credit essays, but it was a small price to pay for what might have been a lifetime of “retaker” ignominy. But then again maybe you should start studying early; with Prof. Charles Whitbread sadly no longer with us, the people in Tapeland will have to pick up the slack.
Your friend,
Marin
Elie makes a wager about his bar score, after the jump.
Continue reading “Pls Hndle Thx: Smokey the Bear Says: Help Prevent Bar Exam Fires”
Some law students might be considering suing their schools now that a bright future in Biglaw seems like such a dim possibility. We can imagine lawsuits alleging false promises of golden handcuffs sweeping the land.
But the only suit against a school we’ve seen recently is reported by the National Law Journal (via the Minn Lawyer Blog). And the cause for the ADA suit against the New England School of Law is flunking the student without regard for his brain damage:
According to court papers, the plaintiff, Seva Brodsky, was expelled after failing two courses in the spring of 2005, and later learned from medical testing that his “memory and organizational deficits” likely stemmed from an accident in the early 1980s.
The plaintiff claimed he presented medical evidence to the school at a readmission hearing in November 2005 and was told that academic success in a relevant program would boost his chances for readmission.
Despite lots of chatter around the Web, there are some things that are unclear to us:
How did Brodsky get his “long-term brain damage”?
Why would someone with “memory and organizational deficits” want to be a lawyer?
Will this lawsuit hurt the fourth tier New England School of Law in the U.S. News rankings?
Would having brain-damaged students send New England School of Law into a fifth tier?
We invite your answers in the comments.
Expelled Student’s ADA Claim Against Law School Can Proceed [National Law Journal]
Law school sued under ADA for failing to accommodate student [Lawyers USA]
Law student flunks out, sues school for violating the ADA [Minn Lawyer Blog]
Another Flunking Law Student Sues School [Blogonaut]
Since December, Reed Smith has fired 215 people. So the latest news from the firm won’t be all that surprising. This morning, Reed Smith managing partner Greg Jordan sent the following message to the firm’s associates:
Over the past several months, Reed Smith has adopted many changes to our business in response to global economic conditions, changing client demands, and the competitive landscape in the legal industry. Among other things, this has meant lower compensation levels for partners. Today, we are announcing another change which we believe is appropriate to further sound business operations. Effective July 1, 2009, we will reduce associate salaries in the U.S. by 10% across the board.
What is marginally more surprising is the news about Reed Smith’s incoming first-year associates:
We will set the salaries for our incoming class of U.S. associates at a later date, but the new salaries will be at least 10% lower than current first year levels.
As The Dude might say, “That’s a real bummer, man.”
Our informal numbers tell us that fewer than twenty AmLaw 200 firms have cut associate salaries outright (this does not include the numerous firms that have frozen associate salaries). That’s not the best news, but we haven’t reached epidemic levels. Not yet.
Read the full Reed Smith memo after the jump.
Continue reading “Nationwide Salary Cut Watch: Reed Smith Cuts Current (and Incoming) Associate Salaries”
Conservatives won’t be happy with President Obama’s pick to succeed Justice David Souter on the U.S. Supreme Court. But some nominees are more noxious than others. Of the names surfacing on SCOTUS short-lists, who can conservatives live with — and who would drive them up the wall?
We reached out to Curt Levey, Executive Director of the Committee for Justice, and solicited his thoughts on the Obama shortlisters. More specifically, we asked him to rank the possible nominees from most problematic to least.
Levey kindly obliged. Assuming the nominee will be a woman, an assumption that is almost universally shared, he grouped the most commonly mentioned names into three groups.
In the first tier — consisting of the most problematic nominees, with “judicial activism guaranteed” — Levey listed three: Judge Sonia Sotomayor, of the Second Circuit; Judge Diane Wood, of the Seventh Circuit; and Kathleen Sullivan, former dean of Stanford Law School (and one of the most famous failers of the California bar exam, along with this guy).
For the second tier — containing nominees who are still “very liberal,” but might have some respect for the rule of law, “if only because they haven’t proved otherwise yet” — Levey mentioned three: Solicitor General Elena Kagan; Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm; and Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano.
Finally, in the third tier, Levey mentioned two names: Justice Leah Ward Sears, of the Georgia Supreme Court, and Judge Kim McLane Wardlaw, of the Ninth Circuit. He described Justice Sears and Judge Wardlaw as jurists who have at least “shown some respect for the rule of law.”
The bad news for conservatives: the nominee will probably come from Levey’s top two tiers.
Read more, after the jump.
Continue reading “Pick Your Poison: A Conservative Ranks SCOTUS Possibilities”
Lost in yesterday’s Quinn kerfuffle was the fact that Skadden has officially deferred its class of 2010 associates to 2011. That move will help stem the influx of fresh talent into Skadden,
But what about the all of the talent leaving Skadden? Friday, we learned that David Fox and Daniel Wolf were leaving Skadden for Kirkland & Ellis. Today, the word is that restructuring partner D.J. (Jan) Baker is leaving Skadden for Latham & Watkins. AmLaw reports:
The lateral move comes on the heels of two lateral departures from Skadden’s M&A practice reported on Friday — partners David Fox and Daniel Wolf have joined Kirkland & Ellis.
But Skadden executive partner Eric Friedman sees no connection between Baker’s lateral move and that of Fox and Wolf. When asked whether the three departures allude to any larger issues at Skadden, Friedman simply responds, “none whatsoever.”
Anybody in the mood for some positive spin? Let’s take a look at some after the jump.
Continue reading “Musical Chairs: Another Partner Leaves Skadden”
Last week, we reported that DLA Piper cut associate salaries. But on Monday, we followed up that report with news that DLA had made salary cuts of up to 20% for associates who were not on pace to make their hours. Tipsters reported serious frustration with a 20% salary cut based on only a few months of accrued hours.
Well, last night there was a change in policy from DLA Piper. The firm is going to make a 10% cut across the board to all associates, regardless of hours:
We have had many conversations with partners and associates since making the adjustment, and it is clear that there are numerous anomalies in individual associate situations such that people who were typically strong performers would receive the additional compensation reduction. That is not the result we want to achieve, and we are therefore removing the additional adjustment based on year-to-date performance and maintaining a straight adjustment of 10% for all associates. We will continue to reward associates for exceptional performance in 2009 through our bonus program, taking into consideration both the associate’s performance and that of the firm.
It is an objectively good thing when a law firm responds to associate concerns. It seems that in this case, a wrong has been righted.
But, of course, not everyone is happy.
Additional complaints, after the jump.
Continue reading “DLA Piper Gives Back 10% of the Salary Cut”
* Donald Trump argues that calling him anything less than a God is defamatory. Okay, that’s not true. But make sure you call him a billionaire. Or you’re fired. [Popsquire]
* The market will provide … incentives for Somali pirates to keep you alive. [The Volokh Conspiracy]
* Crispin is selling its intern on Ebay. Could this be a new model for first year associates? [AdAge]
* Professor Bainbridge on SOX. [ProfessorBainbridge]
* Red State v. Blue State on American Idol tonight. If only the contestants themselves would play along. [Althouse]
* Seriously, Beyond Thunderdome should be required viewing for this summer’s associates. [Legal Writing Prof Blog]
Lawyers tend to do well on reality TV shows. Siblings Victor and Tammy Jih, both California lawyers, just won a million dollars on The Amazing Race. Back in 2006, another Asian attorney, Yul Kwon, snagged a seven-figure prize on Survivor: Cook Islands.
(By the way, May is Asian/Pacific American Heritage Month. Yay Asians! Two of your ATL editors, yours truly and Elie Ying Mystal, are Asian American.)
Not surprisingly, lawyers tend to excel on reality TV shows involving skill and strategy. Alas, fluency in legalese might not be helpful when you’re trying to speak the language of love. From a tipster:
No story on the lawyer on the season premiere of The Bachelorette? The guy was a total douche, but he redeemed himself with his closing line. As he had just failed to make the first cut of guys that the Bachelorette was interested in, he told the camera, “Maybe she’s just not into awesome guys.”
Another reader wrote, about eliminated contestant Stephen (above right; he looks a bit like Bob Saget):
This guy is 30, apparently just graduated law school, is a lawyer in NYC, and when he got kicked off the show said that the B’ette didn’t understand what happens in cities, prefers hicks, etc. He was utterly douchey…. If you were to do a post, I’m sure you’d find out more about this dude…
If you know more about New York lawyer Stephen, feel free to share in the comments. It looks like he won’t be threatening the record of Texas lawyer Jeremy Anderson, who currently holds the title of the longest-lasting attorney contestant on The Bachelorette.
Commentary on The Cougar, after the jump.
Continue reading “Lawyers Losing at Love: Bounced from The Bachelorette, Cut from The Cougar”
Have you ever been passed over for a promotion and decided: “screw you guys, I’m going home.” That may be what is happening at Mayer Brown. The National Law Journal reports:
Mayer Brown Vice Chairman Paul Maher, who had been on sabbatical at the law firm as of last month when he was passed over for one of the firm’s new management posts, has provided his official resignation from the firm.
Mayer Brown Chairman Jim Holzhauer told all of the firm’s lawyers in a May 15 memo that Maher would be leaving on “a date to be agreed upon.” Maher, a London partner who was slated to give up his post next month, didn’t respond to an e-mailed request for comment. The firm declined to comment beyond noting that Maher currently is still at the firm.
This is just the latest big management change from Mayer Brown. More details, after the jump.
Continue reading “Musical Chairs: Paul Maher Officially Leaves Mayer Brown”
Is it possible to be on the short list to fill Justice Souter’s place on the Supreme Court and not even know it? Newsday reports:
Much to her surprise, the dean of Hofstra University Law School woke Sunday morning to find she had just been thrust into the national political conversation as a possible contender for a seat on the United States Supreme Court.
National Public Radio speculated that Dean Nora V. Demleitner, 42, of Port Washington, was among those being considered by President Barack Obama for a job on the nation’s highest court.
“I was very surprised in that NPR mentioned me,” Demleitner said in an interview Monday. “It’s an incredible honor to be mentioned.”
Does anybody know how the rumor got started? Even Long Island court watchers seem surprised:
Brian Griffin, former president of the Criminal Courts Bar Association of Nassau County, said he read about Demleitner’s potential candidacy in the newspaper….
Demleitner said she was baffled about how her name got mentioned.
“Like everybody else, I know a lot of people who have connections, but I could not begin to imagine who would have done it,” Demleitner said of a possible nomination.
If the dean of Hofstra Law School was actually appointed to the Supreme Court, would she hire clerks from Hofstra? If so, would Justice Scalia’s head simply explode?
The possibilities are tantalizing.
Hofstra law dean honored to be mentioned for Supreme Court [Newsday]
Earlier: Supreme Speculation: And Then There Were Six
