You can still call yourself prestigious if you work at the firms that make up today’s fall recruiting open thread. But once you are outside of the Vault top 20, people start talking about “firm culture” at least as much as they talk about prestige.

Here’s the next batch:

21. Shearman & Sterling
22. O’Melveny & Myers
23. Quinn Emanuel
24. Ropes & Gray
25. Hogan & Hartson
26. Clifford Chance
27. Morrison & Foerster
28. Mayer Brown
29. Linklaters
30. Boies Schiller & Flexner

The slide continues for Shearman & Sterling. The firm was ranked #19 last year, and is down two spots this year. Is there any specific reason for the fall?

After the jump, let’s look at the firms rising up through the rankings.

Yesterday, the New York Times published a story about New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand’s ties to “big tobacco.” As an associate at Davis Polk & Wardwell, Gillibrand — who replaced Hillary Clinton as New York’s junior Senator — represented Phillip Morris.

For most people who understand how law is practiced at the top firms in the country, the interesting part of the NYT article pretty much ends there. As an associate, especially a “superstar” associate as Gillibrand appears to have been, you work for the partners and represent the clients they tell you to represent. It’s really not that complicated.

But since Gillibrand is now a Senator and tobacco is “evil,” neither the Times nor Gillibrand could just leave well enough alone. The Times takes the first shot:

But a review of thousands of documents and interviews with dozens of lawyers and industry experts indicate that Ms. Gillibrand was involved in some of the most sensitive matters related to the defense of the tobacco giant as it confronted pivotal legal battles beginning in the mid-1990s.

Gillibrand was at DPW from 1991 to 2000. And she was really good at it. Wouldn’t one expect that a superstar mid-level would be involved in “sensitive matters” relating to a huge firm client? But hey, the Times reports that Gillibrand is a “former smoker.” Ah-ha. She clearly wants to hand out free cigarettes in elementary school.

But Gillibrand does slightly overplay her hand. We’ll get into it after I take a smoke break.

We’ve been hearing talk of interesting developments at Boies, Schiller & Flexner, the litigation powerhouse founded by the legendary David Boies, which seems to be doing well despite the downturn (see their bonuses). If you have info to share, please feel free to email us.

Here is some news that we can confirm. The BSF office in New Jersey — located in the upscale community of Short Hills, home to the fabulous, high-end shopping mall — is breaking off from the mother ship. Partners David Stone and Robert Magnanini are hanging up their own shingle, at Stone & Magnanini. (The official press release is available here.)

As one might expect of Boies Schiller partners, Stone and Magnanini are highly experienced and impressively credentialed. David Stone (above right) — a graduate of Harvard Law School, where he worked with such heavyweights as Alan Dershowitz and Laurence Tribe — has developed a robust practice in complex civil and criminal litigation. He has been particularly successful in handling False Claims Act cases, where he has scored some major victories (including a $163 million settlement in the Medco case).

Bob Magnanini (at right), a graduate of Columbia Law School, has similarly extensive experience in complex civil and criminal cases, especially False Claims Act matters. He’s also a Lieutenant Colonel in the New York Army National Guard, serving as the senior division staff officer from the 42nd Infantry Division at the World Trade Center for the two weeks following the 9/11 attacks

They’ll be joined by Eric Jaso, as counsel. Jaso, a graduate of the University of Chicago Law School, is a former Justice Department official and federal prosecutor, who also worked at Latham & Watkins and Cravath. (Disclosure: Jaso is a friend and former colleague of your above-signed scribe, from the U.S. Attorney’s Office in New Jersey.)

We chatted on the phone with David Stone — no relation to Eli — about the new firm. Read more, after the jump.

Update (4/7/09): As of now, the firm is hiring. Details here.

Last week, John B. Quinn, managing partner of Quinn Emanuel, gave his “state of the firm” address. Quinn’s address made some associates feel better and more secure. Other associates were angry. But if you are interested in how partners really think, the address was pretty interesting.

Quinn takes questions during this annual address, and this year the questions quickly turned to Quinn Emanuel’s bonus structure. Quinn paid Cravath-level bonuses for associates that hit 2100 hours (while giving more money to associates who far exceeded that target).

But Quinn also showed a significant surge in profits per partner, up 11 percent from last year. So associates wondered why more of that money didn’t trickle down to the associate level. According to tipsters, John Quinn told the gathering:

He said that we could have afforded to pay the higher bonuses, and we could afford to increase everyone’s salary by 10 to 15 thousand a year, but that doing so just doesn’t make strong business sense.

When we contacted Mr. Quinn, he reiterated his position that the market, not profit numbers, sets the level for associate bonuses:

i also said that the amount of associate bonuses—for all firms, not just ours—is driven by the market, which is very efficient. and of course it’s a business decision. firms don’t base bonuses, or salaries for that matter, on “what can we afford”, but on the market. we are no different.

Of course, Quinn Emanuel isn’t the only game in town. After the jump, we learn that Mr. Quinn won’t hold it against you if you feel you can get a better deal than what his firm is offering.

AmLaw Daily is reporting that Boies Schiller is planning to match their 2007 bonus in 2008. According to the report:

[T]he firm today will be paying associates bonuses commensurate with last year’s largesse. “We haven’t changed our bonus system based on the economic situation,” says partner Philip Korologos

Boies Schiller did not release their actual bonus structure to AmLaw. But historically the firm has paid bonuses based on hours instead of class year: And that’s the simple version. Check out last year’s post on Boies Schiller’s bonuses for a more full discussion of how strange things are over there.

Unlike most big firms, the litigation-oriented Boies Schiller does not award fixed bonuses for each class. The firm calculates the extra pay individually for each of its associates, depending on the hours she billed. Korologos notes that under this system some second and third years will get bigger bonuses than the most senior associates at firms like Cravath.

So, now Boies and Skadden first years can enjoy a bigger bonus than the most senior associates at Cravath.

What an excellent system Half-Skadden has wrought. We still wait for and wonder if other Biglaw firms are going to shame Cravath.

EXCLUSIVE: Big Bonuses at Boies Schiller [AmLaw Daily]

Earlier: Prior ATL coverage of associate bonuses.

Generally, it is not cool to make fun of people who don’t pass the New York Bar Exam.

Generally.

However, Elizabeth Wurtzel puts us in a difficult position. A) She’s a public figure, B) She really doesn’t seem to care. When the New York Observer approached her with the news that Gawker alerted the world that she failed the bar, Wurtzel responded:

“Wow, really? I had no idea. I didn’t even see that. That’s interesting,” Ms. Wurtzel said of the report, with an awkward half-smile.

Well, what was she supposed to say?

I’m so ashamed and embarrassed, and Gawker has compounded my misery. I wish I could cry but I have no more tears left. I wish the public would just leave me alone so I can hang myself in the privacy of my own bathroom.

Why give the haters any opening? Going quietly into the night is a fine option.

So, why isn’t ATL just leaving her alone? After the jump.

[Ed. note: Happy Columbus Day. And to the Canadians, happy Thanksgiving. Our publisher Breaking Media has encouraged us to embrace the holiday spirit on this second Monday of October, so we will not be publishing today. We’ll see you tomorrow.]

* “Experts call 5 ongoing probes of federal jurists unprecedented.” [Houston Chronicle]

* Arizona bar exam results are out. [Supreme Court of Arizona (PDF)]

*Citigroup may have gracefully walked away from the battle with Wells Fargo over Wachovia, but it’s not walking away from its lawsuit for $60 billion in damages. [New York Law Journal]

* Sidley and Austin: breeding ground for terrorists? [Talking Points Memo]

* The Troopergate report was released on Friday. Sarah Palin found to have abused executive power. [Washington Post]

* Elizabeth Wurtzel in the house at Boies Schiller. [WSJ Law Blog]

We’re back with another installment in our series of open threads on the Vault 100. This is an opportunity for insiders to sound off on their firms for the benefit of wannabe potential first-year and lateral associates.

Here are the next ten on the Vault list, with prestige scores in parentheses:

41. Baker Botts LLP (6.096)
42. King & Spalding LLP (6.066)
43. DLA Piper (6.039)
44. Baker & McKenzie (5.982)
45. Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati (5.976)
46. Boies, Schiller & Flexner LLP (5.974)
47. Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP (5.941)
48. Dewey & LeBoeuf (5.924)
49. Fulbright & Jaworski LLP (5.906)
50. McDermott, Will & Emery (5.892)

The most interesting set of “notable perks” in this bunch can be found at Boies Schiller. On the upside, there is an annual trip to Jamaica for attorneys and their families — in December, no less — but on the downside, it’s a “sweatshop run by a genius.” This makes us think of David Boies as the legal profession’s Santa Claus — who likes to take the elves to Montego Bay.

We invite the curious to ask questions about these firms, and for those in-the-know to take pity.

Earlier: Vault 100 Open Threads - 2009

It’s nearly August, and we still haven’t crowned ATL’s Legal Eagle Couple of the Month for June. Time to vote!

As we did last month, we’ve added a third couple to round out the choices. We thought that Mary Fan and Dean Kawamoto were the month’s strongest runners-up, so we’ve included them for your consideration. Last month, the “bonus couple” waltzed away with the title; let’s see if Mary and Dean can pull off a similar upset.

If you’re ready to vote, here’s the poll. To read more about the couples, click on the link below.

As promised, we’re back with our second installment of LEWW this week. We think you’ll agree that this one features some of our finest contestants of the season. A SCOTUS clerkship (finally!), a Rhodes, more YLS grads — enjoy this special Independence Day edition of the Legal Eagle Wedding Watch!

Here are the names:

1. Stephanie Denton and Zeno Baucus

2. Mary Fan and Dean Kawamoto

3. Emma Terrell and Trevor Leitch

4. Courtenay Van Sciver and Peter Washkowitz

5. Maria Glover and Derek Ho

Click on the “continue reading” link below to see these couples’ photos and sparkly credentials.

Quite possibly. From the American Lawyer (via NYLawyer.com (subscription)):

[David] Boies, the founder of Boies, Schiller & Flexner, loves the thrill of placing bets both at the casino and on big contingency cases.

In November one of those bets paid off when Visa Inc. agreed to pay his client American Express Co. as much as $2.25 billion to settle an antitrust suit. The payday for Boies and his partners should be huge. For associates who worked on the case… their share of that fee depends on how each decided to roll the dice.

A thumbnail sketch of the compensation scheme:

The associates who worked on the American Express matter were offered a choice each year at bonus time. They could take the conservative route and have their annual bonus include the hours they devoted to this case. That way they’d be assured of getting some credit for those hours. The downside was that those hours aren’t counted toward the contingency fee. One lawyer familiar with the matter says the firm offered this bonus option to appease associates worried that the case might lead nowhere.

Plan B allowed associates to roll their hours over to the next year. If the case paid off, they would receive a share of the contingency fee proportionate to those hours. Ka-ching!

According to Boies, somewhere between a quarter and a half of the associates opted for the more risky approach. In hindsight, it was the right choice:

A young lawyer who placed her bets on the contingency fee could be richly rewarded. According to one former lawyer at the firm, an associate’s share of such a fee is tied to hours billed. The firm takes the percentage of hours the associate contributed to the case, divides by five and applies that fraction to the fee premium. Boies confirmed that this formula is “basically right,” although other factors could increase the associate’s share. A hypothetical example: If an associate contributed 5 percent of the overall hours to this case and the premium fee (the amount above normal billing rates) were $100 million, the associate would get 1 percent of $100 million — which is $1 million.

Now that’s what we call a bonus. Seven figures makes even Wachtell bonuses look paltry.

As noted in Susan Beck’s article, the case was filed in 2004, so it was kicking around for several years. But even if you spread $1 million out over four bonus cycles, it still comes out to a nice chunk of change. And presumably some of the BSF associates who worked on the AmEx matter also worked on other cases, making the AmEx bonus just a part of their total compensation.

Gamble Pays Off for Some Boies Schiller Associates [The American Lawyer via NYLawyer.com (subscription)]

So yes, it’s true. The rumor that Boies, Schiller & Flexner has raised starting salaries to $168,000, which has surfaced here and there in the comments, has been confirmed for us by a knowledgeable source. The news was announced last weekend at the firm meeting in Jamaica.

As for the rest of the scale, second-years make $180,000, and then there are $21,000 jumps each year thereafter (i.e., $201,000, $222,000, etc.). Additional changes to the old Boies compensation system — primarily relating to contigency cases, which the firm does a fair amount of (and earns major moolah from) — are being considered, but have not yet been finalized.

Now, as you may recall from this earlier post, BSF is perhaps sui generis when it comes to associate compensation matters. Associate compensation is actually directly tied to the revenue that each associate generates for the firm. So their move to $168K is not as exciting as if, say, a firm with a more traditional compensation structure — a Cravath or Sullivan or Simpson — made such a move.

But hey, it’s still good news; the new base rates are indeed a raise over what Boies associates previously earned. But recall that, at least in the major (New York / Westchester / D.C.) offices, base salary is just an advance on total compensation, and bonus is the difference. And in the major offices, it’s really all about the bonus.

Anyway, stay tuned. If you’re at Boies and can provide us with more detail, please feel free to email us. Thanks.

P.S. Sorry for the radio silence. The new servers that we’re expecting in 2008 are needed now (as we’ve repeatedly told our bosses).

Earlier: Associate Bonus Watch: Associate Compensation Overhaul at Boies Schiller?

This coming weekend, while the rest of us will be getting used to the winter snow and cold, the attorneys of Boies, Schiller & Flexner will be partying down at a resort in Jamaica. The firm is picking up the tab for its lawyers and their spouses (for the weekend; if you stay for longer, you pay for the extra nights in the hotel).

But it won’t be all pleasure and no business. On Sunday, December 9, while they’re in Jamaica, the BSF lawyers will hold their firm meeting — where they will consider changes to the firm’s current associate compensation model. Compensation is currently governed by a somewhat complicated formula; the quick and dirty version, as explained in the firm’s Vault guide write-up, is that you get “30 percent of all revenue you bring to the firm as salary plus bonus as well as some credit for pro bono.”

An email from David Boies about the possible changes was previously posted in the comments. We’ve now confirmed its authenticity; it appears after the jump.

Continue reading "Legal Eagle Wedding Watch 10.14 and 10.21: Plantation, All I Ever Wanted"

(24) Comments

• Recommend This!
• Email
• Link To
• 
• 
• 
• 

Posted in: 11th Circuit, ACLU, Boies, Schiller & Flexner, Columbia Law School, Harvard, Harvard Law School, New York Times, Peter Lattman, Racism, Reader Polls, WSJ Law Blog, Wachtell Lipton, Weddings, Yale Law School