Biglaw

Charney v. Sullivan & Cromwell: Lambda LDEF Won’t Touch It With a Ten-Foot Pole

By

H Rodgin Cohen Chairman Aaron B Charney Aaron Brett Charney Sullivan Cromwell Above the Law Above the Law Above the Law ATL legal tabloid legal blog.JPG(Because, you know, they have better things to do with their ten-foot poles.)
The New York Observer’s Anna Schneider-Mayerson has penned an interesting article on Charney v. Sullivan & Cromwell. Here’s the link.
Random aside: When ATL holds its “Legal Journalist Hotties Contest,” expect Anna Schneider-Mayerson — a Harvard-educated blonde beauty — to give Jan Crawford Greenburg a run for her money.
Much of Schneider-Mayerson’s article will be familiar to regular readers of Above the Law (since we’ve been “covering the crap” out of this case, as promised). But the piece does contain some new information. Like this:

Mr. Charney said he called Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund, a legal advocacy organization that represents gay clients on civil-rights-related issues, to aid in his case.

“I called the hotline, spoke to the representative who answered, and was told I would hear back from them,” he wrote in an e-mail. “Days later they returned my call and informed me that they were not interested in pursuing my matter against S&C.”

(A representative at Lambda contacted by The Observer said it does not comment on these matters.)

The Lambda diss is the juiciest tidbit. But the NYO piece contains a few other highlights, which we reprint after the jump.

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Charney v. Sullivan & Cromwell: Lambda LDEF Won’t Touch It With a Ten-Foot Pole”

13 Comments

Charney v. Sullivan & Cromwell: S&C Rallies Its Allies

By

Aaron Charney headshot Aaron B Charney Aaron Brett Charney Above the Law Above the Law Above the Law ATL.JPGThis morning brings some fresh news coverage of Charney v. Sullivan & Cromwell. ABC News, for example, has this story.
Most of the piece consists of background info, which ATL readers are already familiar with. But there is some new material concerning S&C and gay attorneys in general:

[T]he firm has a good reputation among gay lawyers. Among the 25 top law firms in New York surveyed in 2003, Sullivan & Cromwell had the highest percentage of gay, lesbian and transgender partners — almost 7 percent, although it ranked much lower — at 17th — for associates, which constitutes 1.48 percent of the total.

“Sullivan Cromwell is far from prejudiced in any way,” says John Scheich, the first vice president of the Lesbian and Gay Law Association of New York, adding that the firm often buys a table at his group’s annual fundraising dinner dance. “I don’t know Aaron Charney or the details of his case, but if I had to line up on one side or the other, I would have to line up with David H. Braff [an openly gay partner at the firm] and Sullivan Cromwell.”

Watch out, Aaron. The gay legal mafiosos are circling their wagons. Tables at those gay fundraisers cost small fortunes — and S&C is calling in its chits.
Sullivan & Cromwell itself will probably be tight-lipped about the case, since it would be unseemly for such a white-shoe law firm to engage in an aggressive public relations effort. But they will surely work behind the scenes to get friendly gay leaders, such as John Scheich, to speak out in their defense. (Cf. Hillary Clinton’s media strategy, in which she doesn’t criticize enemies herself, leaving such dirty work to Howard Wolfson and other minions.)
The ABC article also contains some interesting info about the plight of gay lawyers in the profession more generally. Some excerpts, after the jump.

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Charney v. Sullivan & Cromwell: S&C Rallies Its Allies”

26 Comments

Charney v. Sullivan & Cromwell: An Interesting Headhunter Offering

By

Aaron Charney replacement Aaron B Charney Aaron Brett Charney headhunter legal recruiter.JPGThis email was forwarded to us earlier today, prefaced with a single question: “Could this be related to a certain M&A associate?”

From: [xxxx]
To: [xxxx]
Subject: M&A
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2007 16:29:48 -0500

There seems to be an opportunity available for someone with M&A experience, in a temp to permanent capacity, with a New York firm.

Ajilon Legal is staffing this particular position and Kristen Johnson is the responsible recruiter. Perhaps one of our colleagues may find this interesting….? Please feel free to let everyone know about this.

Best,
[xxxx]

We contacted Ajilon this afternoon, but they have not yet responded to our request for comment.
If you might have some firsthand knowledge about this opportunity, perhaps from speaking with the recruiter in question, we’d love to hear from you.
Earlier: Prior ATL coverage of Charney v. Sullivan & Cromwell (scroll down)

1 Comment

Biglaw Boys Up To No Good

By

Stephan Addison Stephan W Addison Benjamin Butler Benjamin C Butler.JPGA reader brought our attention to this disturbing story out of the Midwest, which we hadn’t heard about previously. From the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:

Nobody but the two Chicago men and the woman from Berlin knows for certain exactly what happened at the private boat landing on Green Lake in early morning of Aug. 7, 2005.

The 29-year-old woman says the two men — then both attorneys at prominent Chicago law firms — held her down on the hood of her car and cheered each other on as they repeatedly raped her.

The two men say what happened was consensual sex.

The undisputed facts after that night, from the bail amounts and the plea bargains to the minimal sentences and the district attorney’s resignation, have some locals in this small tourist town 30 miles west of Fond du Lac wondering if justice was served or if two big-city attorneys got a “good-ole-boy” break.

“Something doesn’t look right,” said Jaime Brotz, a 10-year resident of the Berlin area. “I think they got away with a lot more than they should have.”

Find out which firms these defendants worked for, after the jump.

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Biglaw Boys Up To No Good”

9 Comments

Musical Chairs: 01.17.07

By

musical chairs 2 Above the Law legal blog above the law legal tabloid above the law legal gossip site.GIFOn the Way Out:
* The U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of California (San Francisco), Kevin Ryan, is stepping down. He cited “personal and professional reasons” for his departure.

(Does this mean that ATL favorite Eumi Choi might be placed in charge of the office for a while, even if only in an acting capacity? We hope so.)

Judicial Promotion:
* In New York, Brooklyn Civil Term Administrative Justice Theodore T. Jones Jr. has been nominated by Attorney General Governor Eliot Spitzer to the Court of Appeals, the state’s highest court.

Lateral Moves:
* Over in London, Camille Abousleiman and Louise Roman Bernstein, described by the WSJ Law Blog as “capital-markets stars,” are leaving the troubled Dewey Ballantine for LeBoeuf, Lamb, Greene & MacRae.
* Litigator Kristan Peters, to Dorsey & Whitney, from Fulbright & Jaworski.

New Partners:
* Akin Gump: Eighteen new partners. Names here.
* Dow Lohnes: M&A and corporate lawyer Matthew Block (described to us as “a hard worker” and “a great guy”).

Spitzer Names Jones to Court of Appeals [New York Law Journal via Law.com]
NY Lawyers Switching Firms [NYLawyer.com]
Dow Lohnes Announces New Partner Matthew Block [Dow Lohnes]
Ryan Will Leave His Job In San Francisco [WSJ Law Blog]
Dewey Defections Across the Pond [WSJ Law Blog]

2 Comments

Charney v. Sullivan & Cromwell: 125 Broad Street Is a Gay Paradise!

By

David Braff David H Braff Sullivan Cromwell.jpgMove over, Fire Island. See ya later, Provincetown. Rehoboth Beach, you’re all washed up.
The gay destination of choice for summer 2007? This may come as a surprise to you, but it’s 125 Broad Street, New York, New York — home of the estimable law firm of Sullivan & Cromwell (plus the ACLU’s LGBT Rights Project).
From Aaron Charney, the plaintiff in Charney v. Sullivan & Cromwell:

I am informed by numerous sources that David Braff (at right), on behalf of certain gay S&C partners, circulated a memorandum stating that such partners are pleased with the work environment at S&C.

Big Gay Al South Park Comedy Central.jpgWhat exactly makes Sullivan such a fabulous workplace for gays? Is it the subsidized gym? The proximity to S&C client Goldman Sachs, home to countless cute banker boys with seven-figure incomes? The complimentary cosmos served in the firm cafeteria?
If you have a copy of this memo, please send it our way, by email.
We’re looking forward to seeing it. But Charney seems less than impressed:

Braff’s memo directly misses the point. My complaint concerns the discrimination and retaliation perpetrated by S&C against me. S&C clearly has no defense against the allegations enumerated in my Complaint and instead seeks to muddy the waters by trying to divert people’s attention away from the issue at hand. S&C’s campaign of diversion is the latest example of S&C’s unwilling[ness] to enforce the firm office manual’s anti-discrimination policy and confirms why I was left with no choice but to pursue this legal matter.

Charney’s willingness to speak freely about the case — or to try it in the court of public opinion, as his critics claim — may explain why he seems to be winning the PR war, at least at the current time. In our reader poll, which is still ongoing, about two-thirds of respondents support him over S&C.
(But that is down somewhat from the 75 percent support that Charney enjoyed earlier in the afternoon. Could an anti-Aaron backlash be developing?)
Update: One of you has posted what appears to be the gay partners’ memo in the comments. Thanks!
Earlier: Prior ATL coverage of Charney v. Sullivan & Cromwell (scroll down)

16 Comments

The Dewy Orifice: A Post-Mortem

By

When Harry Met Sally 3 Above the Law Orgasm.JPGAfter the much ballyhooed merger between Dewey Ballantine and Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe fell apart, many theories were bandied about as to why the deal disintegrated. See, e.g., here.
Now, from a British legal publication, The Lawyer, we get this fascinating report:

Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe chairman Ralph Baxter demanded a guaranteed $25m (£12.92m) payout over five years, had the proposed merger with Dewey Ballantine gone through, The Lawyer can reveal.

Orrick’s management drafted an employment agreement for Baxter and Dewey chairman Mort Pierce to sign, which would have committed both partners to the newly merged firm for five years.

Pierce is understood to have refused to sign, prompted by the dissatisfaction of a number of Dewey partners with the terms of the agreement.

The significant remuneration for a non-fee-earning chairman is thought to have contributed to Dewey’s decision to walk away from the merger with Orrick.

Pierce is known to be the highest earner at Dewey, earning an extra $3m (£1.54m) in one year in bonuses alone. But he is also the highest biller, averaging more than 3,000 chargeable hours a year.

Balking at Ralph Baxter’s rich demand is understandable. But in hindsight, one can’t help wonder whether Dewey shouldn’t have just bent over and grabbed its proverbial socks. The DB partners who have walked out the door in the past few weeks probably took with them books of business totalling well over Baxter’s concededly greedy demand.
But the $25 million wasn’t the end of it. Check this out:

For Dewey, the combination of Baxter’s personal demands, which also included unlimited first-class air travel for himself and at least one family member, and the perceived imbalance in terms of post-merger management were the final straw in scuppering a deal that could have produced a $1bn (£514.5m)-turnover firm, which could have been in the global top 10.

Quips an amused tipster: “I laughed when I saw Baxter’s personal demand of unlimited first class travel for him + 1.
Seriously, does he think he’s Gnarls Barkley or what?”
Revealed: Baxter killed Dewey-Orrick merger [TheLawyer.com]

7 Comments

ATL Reader Poll: Charney v. Sullivan & Cromwell

By

As the Times of London noted, reactions of Above the Law commenters to Charney v. Sullivan & Cromwell have been all over the map, “var[ying] from encouragement to contempt.” Some of you have hailed Charney as a hero, while others have attacked him vociferously (using terms we won’t repeat here).
But commenters aren’t necessarily representative of the larger readership. So we’d like to obtain a more accurate sampling of public opinion about this high-profile lawsuit. (If you need to read up on the case first, click here to access our past coverage.)
Disclaimers: We are not social scientists. This poll is highly unscientific. The question is vague. Few of the facts about the case are known, and many are in dispute. Discovery has not yet commenced (and won’t start for a while).
But for what it’s worth, and based on what you currently know (or think you know), please take our reader poll:


P.S. Speaking of reader polls, please cast your vote for ATL’s December 2006 Couple of the Month, if you haven’t done so already. Thanks!
Sullivan & Cromwell hit with gay bias suit [Times (U.K.)]
Earlier: Prior ATL coverage of Charney v. Sullivan & Cromwell (scroll down)

2 Comments

Charney v. Sullivan & Cromwell: Charney’s Response to the S&C Statement

By

H Rodgin Cohen Chairman Aaron B Charney Aaron Brett Charney Sullivan Cromwell Above the Law Above the Law Above the Law ATL legal tabloid legal blog.JPGIt will take a while for Charney v. Sullivan & Cromwell to pick up speed as a legal case. New York Supreme Court isn’t exactly a rocket docket. When we were in private practice, we worked on a New York Supreme Court case with a 1973 index number. That’s before we were born.
But on the public relations front, battle has been joined. Yesterday Sullivan & Cromwell sent us this statement, via S&C partner Theodore O. Rogers, Jr., in which the firm “categorically denie[d] Mr. Charney’s allegations of discrimination and retaliation.”
We contacted Aaron Charney, by email, to seek his response to the statement. What he wrote to us, plus a statement of his current employment status at the firm, after the jump.

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Charney v. Sullivan & Cromwell: Charney’s Response to the S&C Statement”

7 Comments

Charney v. Sullivan & Cromwell: Aaron Charney Has Left the Building

By

H Rodgin Cohen Chairman Aaron B Charney Aaron Brett Charney Sullivan Cromwell Above the Law Above the Law Above the Law ATL legal tabloid legal blog.JPGThe lawsuit filed by an openly gay associate against his prestigious law firm, Charney v. Sullivan & Cromwell, has been picked up by the mainstream media — big-time.
We expect that, after this rash of articles, the MSM will move on from this story. Rest assured, dear reader, that ATL will not.
We intend to cover the crap out of this case. If you have any information whatsoever about Aaron Charney, Sullivan & Cromwell’s treatment of gay lawyers, or related subjects, please email us. No detail is too small to escape our interest. If you shared your apple juice with Aaron Charney in kindergarten, we want to hear about it.
Okay. We have carefully read this morning’s coverage of the lawsuit by the New York Times, the New York Law Journal, and the Times of London — so you don’t have to. We’ve located the highlights, the juiciest details, and the money quotes.
The most notable news, as reported in the NYT and the NYLJ, is that Charney has been barred from the Sullivan & Cromwell offices while an internal investigation is underway. Considering the weirdness and tension that would have resulted otherwise, both Charney and the S&C partners are probably happy about his absence.
Excerpts and links to the full articles, after the jump (i.e., click on the “Continue reading” link below).

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Charney v. Sullivan & Cromwell: Aaron Charney Has Left the Building”

22 Comments
Page 327 of 3491...323324325326327328329330331...349