[Ed. note: This is the farewell post of FROLIC & DETOUR, who was recently eliminated from ATL Idol, the "reality blogging" competition that picked ATL's new editor. It is marked with F&D's avatar (at right).]
I’ve speculated about whether Sophist and I know each other. Well, we do. We wrote the HLS Parody together. Now I know that Shawn Johnson wasn’t BSing when she said she was thrilled that her team finished 1-2 in the all-around. I got the silver, but they’re playing my
Shortly after Elie won his job, I accepted an offer I’d been hoping for. As soon as I wind things up at the firm, I’ll be starting a new job in the law school world. Gold on beam! I think this worked out the right way for everyone. Thanks for the ride.
Love,
Frolic
frolicdetour
Posts by frolicdetour
We know that attorneys at top firms like WilmerHale can charge stunning rates — up to $750 an hour for litigation chair Howard Shapiro.
But if you ask them, that’s a bargain.
Wilmer moved for an award of attorneys’ fees after winning a $90 million verdict in a False Claims Act case. The usual lodestar method of calculating fees, logically enough, is to multiply the attorneys’ standard billing rates by the number of hours they spent on the case. But Wilmer argued that its standard billing rates grossly undervalue the superhuman skills of its legal team. It asked the court to perform the lodestar calculation and then award twice the result in attorneys’ fees. In other words, according to Wilmer, its clients who pay by the hour get a 50% discount off the true value of the work.
Chief Judge Royce C. Lamberth of the district court in D.C. didn’t buy the idea that Wilmer’s entire litigation practice is a pro bono program in disguise. The judge kicked Wilmer around for 169 pages before putting the fee petition to rest. He wondered why, if the attorneys had such extraordinary abilities, it took so many of them to get the job done:
Assigning eleven different attorneys to work on one deposition, however crucial the witness, can hardly be characterized as efficient. . . . WilmerHale [used] fifty-two lawyers and thirty paralegals in this case.
Judge Lamberth further ruled that Wilmer’s record-keeping was too vague and sloppy to support awarding even the lodestar amount. Plaintiff’s counsel in the McAfee v. WilmerHale overbilling case must be kicking themselves for not filing in Washington.
Judge Lamberth did note that the members of the Wilmer team were “graduates of prestigious law schools and/or former judicial clerks.” But apparently even members of the Elect — including Mike Gottlieb (OT 2004 / Stevens), Jonathan Cedarbaum (OT 1998 / Souter), and Robert Bell (OT 1981 / White) — aren’t worth $1000+ an hour.
Wilmer’s going to be OK; they’ll get about $7 million of the $20 million they asked for. But we should feel some sympathy all the same. It must be tough to hear that you’re only worth 100% of what the market will bear.
[Ed. note: This post is by FROLIC & DETOUR, one of the finalists in ATL Idol, the "reality blogging" competition that will determine ATL's next editor. It is marked with Frolic & Detour's avatar (at right).]
[Ed. note: This post is by FROLIC & DETOUR, one of the finalists in ATL Idol, the "reality blogging" competition that will determine ATL's next editor. It is marked with Frolic & Detour's avatar (at right).]
A man claiming to be a police detective entered a Longmont, Colo. adult store and demanded to see the X-rated videos for free.
The ponytailed man claimed he was an officer in the “age verification unit,” and he had to ensure that the performers in the porn videos weren’t underage.
“It was inventive on his part, I’ll give him that,” said the real police officer investigating the case.
Somehow, the video clerks weren’t convinced by the man’s business card, which had no name on it. Since the scheme didn’t work the first time, the man tried it a second and then a third time…at the same store. Unfortunately, Randal wasn’t there that day, and the clerks called the cops.
The man may drive a red Dodge neon, which explains why he isn’t getting laid.
[Ed. note: This post is by FROLIC & DETOUR, one of the finalists in ATL Idol, the "reality blogging" competition that will determine ATL's next editor. It is marked with Frolic & Detour's avatar (at right).]
Many thanks to those who wrote in about their creepy, sadistic, and otherwise entertaining legal bosses.
Our first nominee, Judge Suzanne B. Conlon, earned her place in bossal history by firing a clerk for complying with an evacuation order on Sep. 11, 2001.
Read about her competition, courtesy of some long-suffering ATL readers, after the jump.
[Ed. note: This post is by FROLIC & DETOUR, one of the finalists in ATL Idol, the "reality blogging" competition that will determine ATL's next editor. It is marked with Frolic & Detour's avatar (at right).]
Last year, ATL brought you the story of Ernie Chambers, the Nebraska state legislator who sued God for terrorizing millions of Earth’s inhabitants with earthquakes and floods.
This week, Sen. Chambers appeared before Judge Marlon Polk to argue that the suit should move forward despite his failure to serve notice on God:
“Despite my most sincere, zealous efforts, I could not find a location to serve the defendant,” Chambers said. But Chambers asked Polk to take official notice of God, and the Almighty’s omniscience and omnipresence.
Despite Sen. Chambers’s argument that the defendant had constructive notice of the suit, God failed to make a special appearance. Under Nebraska law, if God did not make himself available, one of His many registered agents could have accepted service of process.
In his original complaint, Sen. Chambers did not address the manageability problems inherent in a class action suit with approximately 6.7 billion potential plaintiffs.
God declined to comment for this story, citing an ongoing investigation into the fate of Sen. Chambers’s soul.
[Ed. note: This post is by FROLIC & DETOUR, one of the finalists in ATL Idol, the "reality blogging" competition that will determine ATL's next editor. It is marked with Frolic & Detour's avatar (at right).]
Demanding bosses come with the territory in our line of work. Several less-than-loving legal employers have been profiled here on ATL, and you’ve shared some fine examples of bossal abuse. But until today, we’ve never undertaken a search for the worst boss in the legal profession.
This week, we want to find the ultimate briefcase-hurling, insult-spewing master of the legal boss’s art. ATL will get the ball rolling by offering the first nominee:
Senior Judge Suzanne B. Conlon, a living legend of the Northern District of Illinois, is a true judicial diva. She even fired a staff member who refused to carry the judge’s lunch up 17 flights of stairs on a day when the elevators weren’t working. But those in the know tell us that Judge Conlon didn’t reach the pinnacle of her achievements in bossery until September 11, 2001.
Judge Conlon is famous for her punctuality and for her ruthless enforcement of deadlines. So when federal marshals evacuated the Dirksen courthouse that sunny morning, she stayed put in her chambers. One clerk began to make made preparations to leave, per the instructions of the guys with guns. Judge Conlon decreed [paraphrasing]: “It is a TUESDAY, you are here till SIX, and if you leave, don’t come back.”
So he left and didn’t come back.
Can you top this, readers? We bet you can. Tell us why your boss (or former boss) deserves the Worst Legal Boss honor at frolicndetour.atl.idol@gmail.com or in the comments. We’ll select the most outstanding candidates and post the full list of nominees on Thursday.
[Ed. note: This post is by FROLIC & DETOUR, one of the finalists in ATL Idol, the "reality blogging" competition that will determine ATL's next editor. It is marked with Frolic & Detour's avatar (at right).]
Sadly, some of the juiciest summer scandals in Biglaw history occurred prior to the advent of Above the Law. Though some of us at ATL may be loathe to admit it, many of them occurred when this year’s 2Ls were still in high school. So far, this year’s pink-cheeked and diligent class is failing in its duty to generate entertainment for the rest of us. So let’s all step into the Wayback Machine and visit the glory days of summer scandal.
Picture it: summer, 2000. First-year salaries recently hit $125,000…the dot com boom is a boom, not a bubble…offers will follow summers as day follows night. And a Boston tech firm called Testa Hurwitz had not yet gone to the Great Courtroom in the Sky.
The marquee event of Testa’s lavish summer program is a Duck Boat tour of Boston and the Charles River. Summers, associates, and partners alike enjoy some fine beverages and then set out for some amphibious sightseeing.
Under the influence of free champagne, a Harvard summer (naturally) decides that it would be hilarious to drop trou and moon his friend in the neighboring boat. Once his pants are down, however, he experiences some confusion about where he is, just as Nature begins to sing her siren song. Is that a life preserver in front of him, or a urinal? In front of the entire firm, the summer leans against the railing and takes a piss in the Charles.
It wasn’t easy to do in those days, but… no offer.
[Ed. note: This post is by FROLIC & DETOUR, one of the finalists in ATL Idol, the "reality blogging" competition that will determine ATL's next editor. It is marked with Frolic & Detour's avatar (at right).]
Why was ATL so fascinated by Shinyung Oh? Partly because it was juicy drama, and partly because she’s practically the only lawyer who’s given the world a straight story about a big-firm layoff. Partners and associates alike accept severance packages that keep them quiet, and while you can’t blame them for taking the cash, no one else can learn from their experience. We all figure that firms’ PR departments are feeding us BS when they claim that layoffs have always been part of the annual review process, but we haven’t had any eyewitness testimony on that point.
Today, ATL breaks the silence with an exclusive insider’s view of partner layoffs. Out of the dozens (hundreds?) of AmLaw 100 equity partners who’ve lost their jobs in this recession, we found a small number who were willing to talk to ATL about their experiences. According to their co-workers, our sources were well liked and doing good work when the axe dropped … they just didn’t have clients of their own. The picture they painted for ATL includes one piece of good news: well-informed young lawyers (i.e., ATL readers) have a pretty good understanding of how partners have become vulnerable to layoffs. On the other hand, it’s no cause for celebration that we were right about how dismal the picture has become.
Read more, after the jump.




