As expected, Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner easily won our October Couple of the Month poll. You can read all about Ivanka’s newlywed bliss here, here, and here (she’s already “gadding about the city ringless.”)

Now we plummet back to earth to turn the LEWW spotlight on more ordinary folk. This week’s contestant-couples:

1. Lisa Klein and Blake Sparrow

2. Sarah Goodstine and Laurie Levin

3. Rachel Moston and Garrett Ross

Get the scoop on these newlyweds, after the jump.

As we get back to the Vault rankings, we encounter more firms that have engaged in stealth layoffs. And a firm that conducts mass transit layoffs.

To refresh your memory, here’s the next group:

61. Cooley Godward
62. Pillsbury
63. Sonnenschein
64. Cahill
65. Holland & Knight
66. K&L Gates
67. Nixon Peabody
68. Foley & Lardner
69. Kaye Scholer
70. Steptoe & Johnson

The penalty for having a partner announce layoffs on a train was six spots according to Vault. There have been other Pillsbury cutbacks. But the Acela incident happened when associates had Vault surveys sitting on their desks.

After the jump, let’s take a look at some of the other firms in this group.

Summer programs at many firms are shorter this year than last year. That means the summer is over at a lot of places, and summer associates are starting to learn their fates.

So far, there is some surprising news. Summers are getting offers. Many people have reported that their firm has given full, 100% offers to 2009 summer associates. Summers at Sullivan & Cromwell and Davis Polk are just some of the people reporting good news:

Davis Polk & Wardwell and Sullivan & Cromwell have extended offers to all of their summer associates.

Update (12:35): Additional tipsters inform us that Davis Polk has only given 100% offers to the summers that have already left. That is about half of the summer associates. The rest of the SAs leave on Friday, so we’ll see.

We also have received word that Cravath is making 100% offers.

After the jump, let’s look at a few more firms that we believe are making full offers to this year’s summer associates.

Could the credit rating agencies who are now being sued for their alleged role in the financial meltdown have a valid First Amendment defense? Floyd Abrams, god of First Amendment law and longtime partner at Cahill Gordon & Reindel, thinks so.

Abrams is the subject of a lengthy, interesting article in Sunday’s New York Times, focused on his representation of Standard & Poor’s, the biggest of the rating agencies. From the NYT:

Dozens of investors have filed lawsuits seeking redress from the rating agencies, contending that the companies bear responsibility for investors’ losses, under a Whitman’s sampler of theories. The recession, in other words, is about to begin its litigation phase, and Mr. Abrams and a handful of partners at the law firm of Cahill Gordon & Reindel are readying defenses for more than 30 suits filed against S.& P. Up first, an oral argument on a motion to dismiss one case is set for July 31….

Mr. Abrams will contend that S.& P.’s ratings deserve exactly the sort of free-speech protections afforded to journalists, on the theory that a bond rating is like an editorial — an opinion based on an educated guess about the future. And for the same reason you can’t sue editorial writers, Mr. Abrams will argue that you can’t sue a bond rater because the economy went into a free fall that few saw coming.

Is this a valid comparison? Is trying to sue a ratings agency like trying to sue a newspaper editorial board? Or the weatherman?

Read more, and debate the issue, after the jump.

Things could be better over at Cahill Gordon. In May, the American Lawyer noted Cahill’s fall from the Am Law 100, the nation’s 100 largest law firms by revenue. Until its recent tumble, Cahill had been on the list for 24 consecutive years.

Back in January, we reported that Cahill Gordon laid off approximately 10 percent of its associates. At the time, we mentioned that first- and second-year associates were spared from the winter cuts.

Well, it appears that the wheel has come around. Multiple independent sources report that Cahill laid off a number of associates last week. Our sources report that junior attorneys were the focus of this round of cuts:

It seems without warning many 2nd years were let go [last Wednesday].

Another tipster reports:

Second years out the door [last week]. I guess the January reprieve was just temporary.

At least second years received some extra pay. The firm did not respond to our request for comment, but we understand that laid-off associates did get a severance package.

And the sacrifice of Cahill second years could preserve the salaries for all of the remaining Cahill associates. More details, plus a reader poll, after the jump.

Some of our friendly commenters frequently gripe about the high number of Rabbi-officiated weddings featured in this space. They’ll be delighted to know that only one of our three weddings this week is a straight-up Rabbi wedding. The others were jointly officiated by a Rabbi and a Mennonite minister and a Rabbi and a bankruptcy judge. Yay for diversity!

Here are this week’s lucky finalists:

1. Harper Fertig and James Robinson

2. Marion Ringel and Joshua Panas

3. Julie Hootkin and Benjamin Schneider

Read all about these couples, after the jump.

We are now ready to confirm some of the reports flying around the internet about layoffs at Cahill Gordon. We now have multiple tipsters who work at Cahill who can confirm that there were significant layoffs at the firm last Thursday.

Our tipsters don’t know the numbers of cuts — and the firm has rebuffed our repeated requests for comment on the story — but some tipsters report that as many as ten percent of associates were let go.

The timing of last week’s cuts seemed to rankle some of our sources. On Wednesday, Cahill announced Half-Skadden bonuses. But on Thursday associates were called in for their “annual review” and told that they were being let go … and that they would not be receiving the 2008 bonuses the firm announced the day before.

As we understand it, first and second years were spared. But everybody else was fair game.

Working all of 2008 and still not getting a 2008 bonus has to sting. But the firm did give a 3 month severance package.

Still, the firm apparently doesn’t want to talk very much about their decision to fire people without giving them their bonuses. Tipsters weigh in after the jump.

If the photos of this week’s contestants look a little stiff, please understand that it’s because the NYT didn’t run pictures of any lawyer weddings this week, forcing us to Photoshop them from the attorneys’ firm bios. You’re welcome. And Happy Thanksgiving!

Here are this week’s Legal Eagle Wedding Watch finalists:

1. Elizabeth Raizes and Kayvan Sadeghi

2. Amy Stutius and Adam Slutsky

3. Sara Rubenstein and Yariv Ben-Ari

Read our assessment of these couples, after the jump.

Judging from our traffic, readers are enjoying this rundown of the Vault 100. We do aim to please here at ATL. We appreciate those who have offered insights about firms in the comments.

Moving on to the next group (with prestige scores in parentheses):

61. Cahill Gordon & Reindel LLP (5.608)
62. Sonnenschein Nath & Rosenthal LLP (5.583)
63. Bingham McCutchen LLP (5.583)
64. Greenberg Traurig, LLP (5.478)
65. Holland & Knight LLP (5.416)
66. Heller Ehrman LLP (5.346)
67. Foley & Lardner LLP (5.266)
68. Steptoe & Johnson LLP (5.252)
69. K&L Gates LLP (5.242)
70. Kaye Scholer LLP (5.230)

As we move down the Vault list, “notable perks” are becoming less elaborate. This group is dominated by tales of free food, from endless soda at Greenberg Traurig to weekend doughnuts and muffins at Foley. And it appears that Pillsbury lacks a monopoly on cookie benefits; over at Cahill, lawyers are plied with “twice daily cookie trays.”

We note this food-related perk at Bingham: “If any lawyer takes out a more junior lawyer for drinks/dinner, he/she can submit the expense to the mentoring budget AND the senior person can get creditable hours.” Can you expense the roofies?

We invite you to compare and contrast these firms’ work, lifestyle, benefits… and cookies, in the comments.

Earlier: Vault 100 Open Threads - 2009

Adam Liptak is the national legal reporter for New York Times, though he’ll soon be taking over the Supreme Court beat from Linda Greenhouse.

Liptak’s answering questions from readers this week, so the NYTimes has a feature on him:

He first joined The Times as a copyboy in 1984, after graduation from Yale University, where he was an editor of The Yale Daily News Magazine, with a degree in English. In addition to clerical work and fetching coffee, he assisted the reporter M.A. Farber in covering the trial of a libel suit brought by Gen. William Westmoreland against CBS.

Mr. Liptak returned to Yale for a law degree, graduating in 1988. During law school, he worked as a summer clerk in the The New York Times Company’s legal department. After graduating, he spent four years at Cahill Gordon & Reindel, a New York City law firm, as a litigation associate specializing in First Amendment matters.

In 1992, he returned to The Times’s legal department, spending a decade advising The Times and the company’s other newspapers, television stations and new media properties on defamation, privacy, newsgathering and related issues, and he frequently litigated media and commercial cases.

In 2002, Liptak gave into the writing itch and joined the news staff. For those of you aspiring to make the jump from law to journalism, you can draw inspiration from Liptak’s interesting career path.

The Times readers have lots of serious questions for Liptak, about the SCOTUS voter id ruling, the death penalty, the question of balance, etc. No gossipy questions about Biglaw vs Bigmedia salaries, or filling Linda Greenhouse’s heels. Oh well, there are two days of questions left…

Talk to the Newsroom: Adam Liptak, National Legal Reporter [New York Times]

Cahill Gordon & Reindel has matched, but won’t pay until January 2008. From the memo:

MEMORANDUM TO COUNSEL, SENIOR ATTORNEYS AND ASSOCIATES

November 2, 2007

We are pleased to announce that our regular and special merit bonuses for 2007
for associates in good standing at December 31, 2007 will be as follows:

Class Regular Bonus Special Merit Bonus

Class of 2007 - $35,000 (pro -rated) —

Class of 2006 - $35,000 $10,000

Class of 2005 - $40,000 $15,000

Class of 2004 - $45,000 $20,000

Class of 2003 - $50,000 $30,000

Class of 2002 - $55,000 $40,000

Class of 2001 - $60,000 $50,000

Class of 2000 - $65,000 $50,000

Class of 1999 - $65,000 $50,000

Class of 1998 - $65,000 $50,000

Bonuses for Counsel, Senior Attorneys and other associates will be determined on
an individual basis. Bonuses will be paid by January 11, 2008. Counsel, Senior Attorneys and
Associates who were on unpaid leave or worked part-time during any part of this year and those
who started during this year will be eligible for pro-rated bonuses.

Thank you for your dedication, hard work and continued contribution to the success
of the Firm.

Executive Committee

Sadly, the music-loving law firm of Nixon Peabody is not on this afternoon’s list of five Vault 100 firms to talk about. And don’t hold your breath — we won’t reach NP until we hit the 70’s.

Here are the firms that are on the table:

51. Jenner & Block LLP (5.940)
52. LeBoeuf, Lamb, Greene & MacRae LLP (5.925)
53. Allen & Overy LLP (5.922)
54. DLA Piper (5.913)
55. Cahill Gordon & Reindel LLP (5.913)

We note the presence of Cahill Gordon on this list. Even though Cahill routinely lands near the top of the profits per partner rankings of the American Lawyer — in 2006, they were #6, with PPP of $2.575 million — the firm’s prestige seems to lag behind its profits. Any thoughts on why?

Please chatter away about these five firms in the comments. Thanks.

The Vault Top 100 Law Firms [Vault]

Earlier: Vault 1-5; Vault 6-10; Vault 11-15; Vault 16-20; Vault 21-25; Vault 26-30; Vault 31-35; Vault 36-40; Vault 41-45; Vault 46-50

Okay, commenters, break it up. There’s no need to come to blows over the propriety of discussing clerkship bonuses in a salary post.

Here at ATL, there’s enough cyberspace for everyone. We’re putting an end to the turf wars, by giving you a new, dedicated thread for talking about clerkship bonuses.

We’ll kick things off with some news. First, a reader alerted us to a change made to Cahill Gordon’s website:

Sign-on Bonuses: The firm pays sign-on bonuses of $50,000 to judicial clerks and $15,000 to LL.M. (tax) graduates when they start at the firm.

Second, from a law clerk tipster, about Paul Weiss:

I’m clerking for two years. Paul Weiss just notified me, by phone, that they will be giving $70K bonuses to all two-year clerks. Hurray!

Congratulations, law clerks! Your Memorial Day holiday weekend is off to a good start.

Compensation & Benefits [Cahill Gordon & Reindel]

Earlier this week, we reported on the unexpected early promotions of four corporate associates at Cahill Gordon. According to various comments, the four soon-to-be partners, whose promotions will take effect in July, are Doug Horowitz, Corey Wright, Bill Miller, and Jonathan Frankel.

As some speculated, this quartet was promoted early to prevent them from leaving for greener pastures. Here are more details:

The way it apparently went down is that all 7th and 8th year litigators were sat down individually by a partner and told, a week or so ago, that 7th and 8th year corporate associates — corporate associates only — were going to be voted on this summer. The given reason was to prevent these people from leaving to go to i-banks.

Litigators were apparently told that they should not consider this to be a negative commentary on their value to the firm, and that they would be considered in the normal course, either end of this year (8th years) or end of next (7th years). Their chances of making it were described as “the same as they were yesterday.”

It’s my understanding that there is a growing rift between corporate and litigation at the firm. Each group — partners included — increasingly resenting the other. Corpies think litigators are lazy, don’t have to work nearly as hard for the same amount of money. Litigators resent being treated as second-class citizens.

Very interesting. Some food for thought:

1. Several top law firms have struggled to deal with the problem of star associates leaving for investment banks, hedge funds, and other opportunities in the world of finance. Will other Biglaw shops start employing this strategy of early promotion to retain their best associates? Could we be witnessing the start of a trend?

2. According to conventional wisdom, corporate lawyers generally have “better” — or at least more lucrative — exit opportunities than litigators. As a result, law firms face more outside competition for them. Could we eventually see a system in which partnership tracks are shorter for corporate associates than for litigation colleagues, in reflection of the different markets for the two practice areas?

Please feel free to discuss in the comments.

Earlier: Some Premature Promotions at Cahill Gordon?

With apologies for the lack of details — if you have more to share, please email us — we’ve learned of some interesting news at Cahill, Gordon & Reindel:

1. The firm, which usually announces partnership decisions in January, just announced the promotion of four lawyers to the partnership.

2. All four are in the corporate department.

3. Two of the four new partners are seventh-years, which makes their promotions very early — a year and a half ahead of schedule. The firm historically has had an eight-year partnership track.

ATL congratulates this quartet of soon-to-be millionaires. A Cahill Gordon partnership is quite a nice prize. According to the recently released AmLaw 100 rankings, Cahill is the sixth most profitable law firm in the country, with profits per partner (PPP) of $2,575,000.

As noted above, if you have more info — e.g., the names of the new partners, why Cahill promoted them ahead of time, etc. — please email us (subject line: “Cahill Gordon”). Thanks!

Update: More information is available here.

Cahill Gordon & Reindel has raised base salaries for its associates. The memo — posted on Infirmation, verified to us by one source at the firm, and emailed to us by another — appears after the jump.

Cahill Gordon & Reindel gets with the program, per Infirmation / Greedy NY.

Was there a memo? If so, can someone please email it to us?

We’d like to add it to our growing collection of banal, boilerplate bonus memos. Thanks.

CGR just matched [Infirmation / Greedy NY]

Earlier: Prior ATL coverage of bonuses (scroll down)