David Lat is the founder and managing editor of Above the Law. His writing has also appeared in the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, New York magazine, Washingtonian magazine, and the New York Observer. Prior to ATL, he launched Underneath Their Robes, a blog about federal judges. Before entering the journalism world, he worked as a federal prosecutor in Newark, New Jersey; a litigation associate at Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz, in New York; and a law clerk to Judge Diarmuid F. O'Scannlain, of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. David graduated from Harvard College and Yale Law School, where he served as an editor of the Yale Law Journal. He has received several awards for his work on ATL, including recognition as one of the American Lawyer’s Top 50 Big Law Innovators of the Last 50 Years; one of the ABA Journal’s Legal Rebels, a group of pioneers within the legal profession; and one of the Fastcase 50, "the fifty most interesting, provocative, and courageous leaders in the world of law, scholarship, and legal technology." His first book, Supreme Ambitions: A Novel, will be published in 2015. You can connect with David on Twitter and Facebook.
Earlier today, a source advised us as follows, by email:
“Skadden has raised its clerkship bonuses: $50,000 for one clerkship, $70,000 for two years. Applicable to all offices”
Excluding anonymous commenters, we’ve heard this news from just this one source (although a source who claims to have heard the news from multiple offerees). We don’t like to treat such rumors as confirmed until we have direct confirmation, by email, from multiple sources.
(Of course, a single source will suffice if that source is a firm website or a firm spokesperson.)
We’ve emailed Skadden for comment, but we haven’t heard back from them yet. We also don’t see clerkship bonus info on their homepage.
If you can confirm this news, please email us (subject line: “Clerkship Bonus”). As always, we will keep you anonymous, unless you request otherwise. Thanks.
This appears to be the legal theory to be advanced by controversial former radio host Don Imus, through his “ferocious” litigator, the renowned Martin Garbus. Reports Fortune:
Imus has hired one of the nation’s premiere First Amendment attorneys, and the two sides are gearing up for a legal showdown that could turn on how language in his contract that encouraged the radio host to be irreverent and engage in character attacks is interpreted….
The language, according to this source, was part of a five-year contract that went into effect in 2006 and that paid Imus close to $10 million a year. It stipulates that Imus be given a warning before being fired for doing what he made a career out of – making off-color jokes. The source described it as a “dog-has-one-bite clause.” A lawsuit could be filed within a month, this person predicted.
We’re curious: What do ATL readers think about the Imus firing?
(The Pew Research Center also conducted a poll to gauge public attitudes towards Don Imus’s firing. It will be interesting to see how their poll results compare to the ATL poll results.)
P.S. We love Wikipedia. Check out their entry for HoHos:
HoHos are cylindrical, frosted, cream-filled cakes that are made by the Hostess company and are distributed in the United States and Egypt. The Interstate Bakeries Corporation owns the Hostess company. HoHos are similar to Yodels, which are made by Drake’s (also a brand of Interstate Bakeries Corporation), and Little Debbie Swiss Cake Rolls.
The sticklers among you object to our using the cute pun “Skaddenfreude” to refer to our compensation coverage. After all, there’s really no “taking malicious satisfaction in another person’s troubles” when reading this column (unless you take perverse pleasure in thinking about how hard Biglaw attorneys must work for their six-figure salaries).
If you’re one of these sticklers, then you may be gratified by this Miami Herald article on lawyer salaries, which truly DOES capture schadenfreude. Its full title: “In debt, young lawyers struggle to make it: Young prosecutors and assistant public defenders are struggling to pay for even the bare necessities.”
If you’re an associate at a large law firm, bitter because your firm pays a below-market bonus, stop whining. Things could be much worse. Consider these stories:
For Allison Haney, it’s a good thing Publix takes credit cards. By the end of the month, she often doesn’t have enough money left from her salary as a prosecutor to buy food.
Ayana Harris turns to Mom and Dad for help with the basics every month, and knows her parents will have to chip in even more when the brakes in her car go, or the dog needs to go to the vet. As an assistant public defender, she’s also strapped for cash each month.
We realize this news broke last week. But we were on vacation — and it’s just too good to omit from these pages. From Metro.co.uk:
A father in Arkansas is looking for $20,000 in compensation for his teenage sons, after they found a book in a public library called The Whole Lesbian Sex Book.
According to Earl Adams, his sons – aged 14 and 16 – were ‘greatly disturbed’ by Felice Newman’s classic lesbian sex manual, described by its publishers as ‘the most comprehensive sex guide available for lesbians.’
And now he is demanding $10,000 from the city of Bentonville for each boy. The volume has already been withdrawn from the library shelves, and the director of the library has resigned – although she is adamant she left for personal reasons, not in response to the complaints.
So what’s the basis for the $20,000 damages claim? Per Overlawyered:
[This incident] happened, Adams said, while [his sons] were browsing for material on military academies (titter ye not!). The shock to their sensibilities from exposure to the “immoral” volume resulted in the boys being “greatly disturbed” and undergoing “many sleepless nights in our house.”
Simply ridiculous. Ask these boys in five years whether they still find lesbians “greatly disturb[ing].”
Also, The Whole Lesbian Sex Book has been critically acclaimed. Check out this review:
Cure for cancer? End to world hunger? What’s left to do after the publication of Felice Newman’s definitive guide to lesbian sex? Drawing on a wide range of published sources as well as her own notoriously graphic questionnaire circulated by e-mail… Newman has compiled an exhaustively thorough how-to guide for practices as exotic as play piercings and as pedestrian as oral sex.
The delightful site Overheard in New York, which collects humorous bits of overheard conversation, has a collection of law-related “overheards” up today. Here’s our favorite:
Ditzy Chinese chick: So, I went on this job interview with this law firm, right? And this lawyer who was interviewing me was really cute, ya know? So at the end of the interview he stood up, and I wasn’t sure what to say so I said, ‘Well, I don’t know whether you’re going to hire me or not, but I’d really like to f**k you.’
So he came to my apartment after work and f**ked me. Then I get a letter two days later telling me I didn’t get the f**king job! Do you think that’s sexual harassment?
1. YES. He should totally sue.
2. So she “didn’t get the f**king job.” Guess he didn’t like her “audition” for the position.
(Or maybe, just maybe, he thought she had bad judgment. What on earth would have given him that idea?)
3. She should stop complaining — at least she got something out of the interview process. Most of the time, all you have to show for a half-day of boredom is a bunch of business cards. And maybe a nice lunch, if you’re lucky.
The rest of the funny, legally-themed “overheards” — although none as good as this one — are available here. Enjoy! Wednesday One-Liners, Esq. [Overheard in New York]
The typical ATL “Lawyer of the Day” is a solo practitioner or small-firm lawyer. But today’s lawyer of the day hails from a large law firm, one that you’ve probably heard of — and one that gets the definite-article treatment in the New York Times wedding pages.
Meet Mark Fischer, from the Denver office of Faegre & Benson, the well-known Minneapolis law firm. Here’s what Fischer did to earn a place in the pages of ATL. From the Rocky Mountain News:
A prominent Denver law firm is being sued after one of its attorneys forged a federal judge’s signature on a legal document.
The forgery allowed one of Faegre & Benson’s clients to obtain a loan and pay the firm for work, according to the lawsuit filed Tuesday in U.S District Court in Colorado.
The attorney, Mark W. Fischer, admitted in a two-page letter that on April 25, 2005, that he “fabricated a false document which purported to be an order” signed by Judge Philip Figa to release a lien against his client’s property.
Fischer was suspended by the state supreme court on April 11. His ultimate fate will be decided at an upcoming disciplinary hearing.
One of the tipsters who brought this to our attention wrote: “I can’t believe it backfired; it seems like such a good idea to forged a federal judge’s signature. I’m guessing the firm’s collections department was really hounding that attorney about those unpaid fees.”
So what did the powers-that-be at Faegre & Benson think of all this?
“What Mr. Fischer described in his letter is inconsistent with the way Faegre & Benson has practiced law for over 100 years,” [partner Dave] Stark said.
Thanks for the clarification, Dave. We’re glad to jear that forging federal judges’ signatures isn’t usual policy or practice at Faegre & Benson.
Interestingly enough, even though the firm is now being sued by the client for failure to “supervise” Fischer, it turns out that he was a PARTNER at the firm — not some wet-behind-the-ears associate. From his Martindale-Hubbell bio:
Mark W. Fischer (Partner) born Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1956; admitted to bar, 1991, Colorado. Education: Grinnell College (B.A. 1978); University of Colorado (J.D. 1991). Practice Areas: Commercial Litigation; Intellectual Property Litigation.
In case any of you were wondering, last Friday’s news about Weil Gotshal clerkship bonuses has been officially confirmed. Here’s a statement from a firm spokesperson:
“Weil will pay $50K for a one-year state or Federal clerkship and $70K (i.e., the current amount) for a two-year clerkship.”
So there you have it, from the horse’s mouth. And there’s the answer to this commenter’s question: “Is that flat, or does Weil still double for two years?”
Okay, so Weil won’t give you $100K for two years of clerking experience. But $70,000 is still, as far as we know, the top of the market for two clerkships or years of clerking. Three cheers for Weil — and Cravath, which also pays $70,000 for two clerkships.
Does anyone know what S&C, Simpson, Paul Weiss, and Cleary Gottlieb — the other members of the $50K Club — pay for multiple clerkships or years of clerking? If so, please email us. Thanks.
Check out this posting, currently on the “Missed Connections” section of Craigslist:
My words come to you by ‘Writ of Certiorari’ from my heart. I have an ‘Opinion’: You are without a doubt the most perfect girl on the Hill. I look forward to argument days just so I can see your smile and say hello as you pass me in the Courtroom hall.
Some days you are in your Clerk uniform tails and some days you are not, but you always look stunning. When I see you across the way during arguments it is hard to concentrate on keeping the record.
Now that this session of Oral arguments is over I am bummed because I never really had the chance to talk with you. So here on Craigslist I am bringing an ‘Appeal’ to take you out to coffee sometime?
On ‘habeas review’, my heart is doing time and you have been found guilty.:0)
But this CL poster is not in search of a Supreme Court law clerk, since the object of his desire wears a “Clerk uniform — tails.” The law clerks generally wear standard business attire.
So which SCOTUS employees show up to oral argument in tails? A knowledgeable source tells us:
The reference may be to the Marshal of the Court Pamela Talkin, who does wear tails to oral argument. See here (Talkin describing her uniform as “a formal morning suit with tails, pinstriped slacks, and a vest”).
The Clerk of the Court is William Suter. He also wears tails to oral argument.
But Bill Suter is a man. And our lovesick poster is an “m4w” (man seeking woman).
Oyez, oyez! Pam Talkin, it seems that you have a secret — and considerably younger (30) — admirer. And he’s very interested in “drawing near” and “giving attention” to you, at a neighborhood cafe. Update: One commenter wonders whether the woman in question might work in the Solicitor General’s office, since the morning coat is the official uniform of that office. But we’re not so sure, since (1) there are very few women in the SG’s office right now, and (2) our understanding is that female members of the SG’s office generally wear dark suits to oral argument (as opposed to the full-blown morning coat outfit of their male colleagues).
But look, we can’t rule out this possibility. Does anyone familiar with the current membership of the SG’s office have thoughts on this matter? Further Update: Check out this excellent comment:
Denise McNerney, the Merits Clerk, is often in the courtroom in tails. And she’s very attractive. It is highly unlikely that Deanne Maynard, Patricia Millett, or Lisa Blatt from the SG’s Office is the object of the Craigslist poster’s affection. None wears tails. All are married.
Attorney General Alberto Gonzales signed a highly confidential order in March 2006 delegating to two of his top aides — who have since resigned because of their central roles in the firings of eight U.S. attorneys — extraordinary authority over the hiring and firing of most non-civil-service employees of the Justice Department….
In the order, Gonzales delegated to his then-chief of staff, D. Kyle Sampson, and his White House liaison “the authority, with the approval of the Attorney General, to take final action in matters pertaining to the appointment, employment, pay, separation, and general administration” of virtually all non-civil-service employees of the Justice Department, including all of the department’s political appointees who do not require Senate confirmation. Monica Goodling became White House liaison in April 2006, the month after Gonzales signed the order.
Remarkable. And assuming this story checks out, it certainly explains why Gonzales seemed so clueless about the U.S. Attorney firings. It seems that Gonzales had taken himself completely out of the loop of all DOJ political appointee hiring. He had delegated that role completely to two 30-somethings, Kyle Sampson and Monica Goodling; his only role was a formality, required just so that OLC would find the practice constitutional.
We take issue with Professor Kerr’s dismissive reference to the Magnificent Monica Goodling as a mere “30-something.” And now that she has been granted immunity, we can’t wait for Goodling to testify before the House Judiciary Committee.
All mysteries will be revealed, and this entire U.S. Attorney mess will be straightened out, after Monica Goodling appears before the House Judiciary Committee in all her radiance. She will dazzle the Committee, as well as the American people, with her command performance, the likes of which have never been seen on Capitol Hill.
Goodling’s crisp and cogent answers to even the most challenging queries from legislators will cause jaws to drop. Her command of both the facts and the law concerning the U.S. Attorney firings will amaze the nation. It will be just like the final courtroom scene in “Legally Blonde,” in which another plucky, underestimated blonde triumphed against all odds.
At the end of her testimony, Rep. John Conyers will publicly apologize to Monica Goodling for dragging her good name through the mud. Faith in the U.S. Department of Justice will be restored. Truth, justice, and the American way will be vindicated.
And then President Bush will dispatch Monica Goodling to Iraq, as head of a special mission designed to fix the debacle over there. There is nothing that our Monica can’t do!!! Secret Order By Gonzales Delegated Extraordinary Powers To Aides [National Journal] Did Sampson and Goodling Have Total Control of DOJ Political Hiring? [Volokh Conspiracy]
Average law school debt for graduates of private universities hovered around $122,000 last year. With only 57% of new attorneys actually obtaining real lawyer jobs, recent graduates have a lot to consider when it comes to managing their student loan payments. Thanks to our friends at SoFi, today’s infographic takes a look at student loan debt, including the possible benefits of refinancing for JDs…
Kinney Recruiting’sEvan Jowers is currently in Hong Kong for client meetings and still has a few slots available through October 22. Evan will also be in Hong Kong November 14 to December 15. Further, Robert Kinney has been in Frankfurt and Munich this week and is available for meetings with our Germany based readers.
One of our key law firm clients has referred us to one of their important clients in the US, Europe and China – a leading global technology supplier for the auto industry – in order to handle their search for a new Asia General Counsel and Asia Chief Compliance Officer.
Kinney is exclusively handling this in-house search.
This position will have a lot of responsibility and include supervision of eight attorneys underneath them in the Asia in-house team. The new hire will report directly to the global general counsel and global chief compliance officer, who is based in the US. The new hire’s ability to make judgement calls is going to be as important as their technical skill set background.
The position is based in Shanghai and will deal with the company’s operations all over Asia and also in India, including frequent acquisitions in the region.
It is expected that the new hire will come from a top US firm’s Shanghai, Beijing or Hong Kong offices, currently in a top flight corporate practice at the senior associate, counsel or partner level. Of course, the candidate can be currently in a relevant in-house role.
The JOBS Act created new tools for companies to publicly advertise securities deals online. As a result, thousands of new deals have hit the market and hundreds of millions in capital has been raised, spurring a wealth of new business development opportunities for attorneys.
Fund deals, startup capital raises, PIPE deals and loan syndicates are just a handful of the transactions benefiting from the JOBS Act. InvestorID FirmTM is a platform designed to help attorneys equip their clients with the workflow, marketing and compliance tools to publicly solicit a securities offering online. By providing clients with the tools to painlessly navigate the regulatory landscape of general solicitation, InvestorID FirmTM helps attorneys add value above just legal services.
The Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act (JOBS Act) went into effect in 2013 and permits Regulation D offerings of securities to be advertised publicly. This means that funds and companies can now use social media, emails and web sites to market transactions to new “accredited” investors.
However, with these new powers come new pain points. InvestorID FirmTM provides a secure, fully hosted, cloud-based platform with a breadth of tools for your clients, including: