Wednesday, we told you that the Association of Corporate Counsel was compiling a ranking of law firms based on evaluations from its members. We also told you that some law firm partners were very concerned about this list.

We have the list.

The ACC Value Index currently has responses for 448 law firms. Big and small, big city and secondary markets. Sadly, the vast majority of the firms have very few responses. Apparently corporate counsels have better things to do than ranking the quality of legal services they receive. Most firms — including some of the bigger names like Cravath and Sullivan & Cromwell — have three or fewer responses.

But some firms have generated more reviews.

After the jump, we look at the top ten and bottom ten Am Law 200 firms as ranked by corporate counsel.

* Thelen refugees claim that the firms that hired the firm’s ex-partners — Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe; DLA Piper; Nixon Peabody; Howrey; and Morgan Lewis & Bockius — owe them $18 million under the WARN Act. [Recorder]

* Galleon Group rascal Raj Rajaratnam dumps Gibson Dunn’s James Walden for Akin Gump’s John Dowd. [Bloomberg]

* … Dowd won’t have long to prepare. Judge Jed Rakoff wants to see Rajaratnam go to trial in 5 months. [Wall Street Journal]

* Estate lawyers, a lesson for you. [New York Times]

* Nationwide child prostitution crackdown results in the arrest of 690 people including 60 pimps, and the recovery of 52 children. [CNN]

We continue our slog push through the nation’s 100 top law firms, as ranked by our friends over at Vault. Here are the next ten firms, to be discussed in the comments to this post:

71. Reed Smith
72. Bryan Cave
73. Perkins Coie
74. Hunton & Williams
75. Patton Boggs
76. Arent Fox
77. Schulte Roth & Zabel
78. Howrey
79. Chadbourne & Parke
80. Crowell & Moring

Assorted observations about these firms, after the jump.

First years to 100K and an “apprenticeship”?

In the past two months, we’ve reported on three firms instituting an apprenticeship model for first year associates: Drinker Biddle, Howrey, and Frost Brown Todd. “Apprentices” start at the firm at a lower salary and are not billed out to clients, billed out at a lower rate than normal associates, or billed out for lower total hours. It sounds like an apprentice is a “paralegal plus.” Of course, that “plus” includes a J.D. and its accompanying law school debt.

Still, when we polled you last week, almost 70% of ATL readers who voted said they were in favor of Howrey’s $100K-plus-professional-training apprenticeship.

The National Law Journal (subscription) has an extensive piece on apprenticeships (noting two other firms that have instituted the practice — labor firm Ford & Harri­son and Dallas’s Strasburger & Price):

These firms are putting new recruits through additional apprenticeship programs that they say will better train their attorneys for life at a law firm and for handling clients. Think of it as the equivalent of a medical residency, only with suits instead of scrubs.

The latest — and so far largest — firm to move to an apprenticeship model, 659-lawyer Howrey, announced its program last week. Starting next year, first-years at the firm will get a pay cut — from $160,000 to $100,000 in base pay plus a $25,000 bonus to pay down law school loans — and they’ll spend a good portion of their time attending classes with partners and shadowing them on client matters. The apprenticeship period will last two years.

Are law students really like medical students, in need of on-the-job training in order to operate in the real world? If apprenticeships become widespread — which admittedly seems unlikely once the tough economic times are behind us — should the training at a firm mean one less year in law school? Firm salaries are going down, but law school tuition is going up. Maybe it’s time to rebalance.

A round-up of the salaries for BigLaw apprentices, and a poll on how law schools should be reacting to deflating salaries, after the jump.

Welcome to the future. Like Drinker Biddle did in May, Howrey is changing the nature of the first and second year associate experience. The firm is moving to more of an apprenticeship model. New Howrey associates will receive an emphasis on training and take a significant reduction in salary.

The memo from Howrey explains some of the top-line goals of the new program — called the “Tier 1 Associate Program.”

Participants in Howrey’s Tier 1 Program will spend only one-third of their time during the first year on client billable work to permit them to devote the remainder of their time to pro bono representations and a wide range of training programs, including the firm’s signature professional development experience - the Howrey Academies. In Year One, associates will work with Howrey’s full-time, in-house writing instructor, be assigned to trial teams, and take advantage of other programs offered by Howrey’s award-winning professional development team. They will dedicate approximately one-third of their time to pro bono and public interest matters, which will afford them the opportunity to develop the advocacy skills and in court experience that are central to Howrey’s practice. The emphasis on training will continue into Year Two, with client secondments, judicial externships, and other advanced development opportunities added to the curriculum. Billable hours in the second year will be capped at roughly half of total hours.

That is the good, here is the salary information:

The Tier 1 program will be limited to a select number of associates each year. Compensation during the first two years will be adjusted to reflect the nature of the program and the dramatically reduced billable hours expectations. In addition to an annual salary of $100,000, first year participants will receive $25,000 upon acceptance of their job offer to help defray their law school loans or third year law school expenses. In their second year at the firm, participants will receive an annual salary of $125,000 and a $25,000 bonus upon successful completion of the program and entry into Tier 2 of Howrey’s associate development program. Higher compensation may be offered to candidates with special qualifications, such as advanced technical degrees or clerkships.

At least Howrey is trying. More details and the full memo and a reader poll after the jump.

One would think that the current global economic crisis would be taking a toll on women’s issues. Work-life balance? Please, any associate not on track with their hours is a candidate for a layoff. Retention of women? Whatever, welcome to the world of forced attrition.

But is the prevailing view accurate? Patricia Gillette, an Orrick partner and founder of The Opt In Project, doesn’t think so. Today on AmLaw Daily, Gillette makes the argument that now is the perfect time for firms to address issues traditionally important to women:

There is another school of thought, the one that I subscribe to. It is this—the economic crisis provides law firms with opportunities they never before had. Those include: to step away from the salary and bonus programs that destroyed collegiality and prevented flexibility; to make structural and organizational changes long overdue; to kill the billable hour once and for all; to get ahead of the sea change that is coming to the legal profession.

Now is the time to take advantage of the immobility of partners and associates and the weakening bargaining position of law students, to make changes that may not be popular with everyone, but are long overdue. And these changes, in the long run, will benefit women and will answer the cries of all Gen Y lawyers for a kinder and gentler law firm life.

It seems to me that moving away from lockstep compensation necessarily leads to more subjective forms of salary advancement. The billable hour might be the bane of a lawyer’s existence, but it is at least based on objective criteria. Will putting salary decisions in the hands of intra-firm politics and relationship building really lead to a “kinder and gentler” law firm? Or will it lead to an “eat-what-you-kill” approach that many partners complain about when it comes to their compensation structure?

After the jump, Gillette outlines three big moves that could help women in law firms.

In November, Howrey picked up 40 lawyers from Thelen, including former Thelen chairman Stephen O’Neal. Today, tipsters report that non-equity partners at Howrey are being asked to make capital contributions to the firm:

At Howrey the non-equity partners have been told they must make a … 10% capital contribution to the firm. This is a suggested minimum, the partners are being encouraged to contribute more.

We mentioned yesterday that firms that picked up Thelen lawyers have had a couple of bumps.

A Howrey spokesperson clarified our tipster’s report. But non-equity partners will be required to make their contribution by June 1st. A Howrey spokesperson characterized the new program as follows:

However, beginning June 1, 2009, Non-Equity partners will be asked to contribute capital, at a percentage far less than equity partners. Additionally, all partners, Equity and Non-Equity, will now able to contribute voluntary capital and several have already agreed to do so. All these are signs of their commitment and dedication to the Firm and its plans for growth.

This is reminiscent of the DLA Piper situation. Back in November, DLA asked its non-equity partners to kick in a capital contribution, in exchange for turning the contributing non-equity partners into equity partners. But it does look like Howrey is maintaining the distinction between non-equity and equity partners.

While Howrey contemplates the structure of its partnership, the structure of its staff is being downsized. Additional details after the jump.

Easter weekend was a slow one for weddings, with the New York Times featuring only one couple eligible for LEWW consideration. We’re taking this opportunity to catch up on Couple of the Month voting for January, February, and March.

Below the jump, you’ll find write-ups on all our 2009 weekly winners so far, plus the opportunity to cast your vote for the strongest legal-eagle couple from each month. Polls close Monday at noon; we’ll announce the winners next week.

Happy voting!

The Project for Attorney Retention “works to reduce unwanted attrition among lawyers… by promoting work/life balance and the advancement of women in the legal profession.” The organization, based at the UC Hastings College of Law, may need to tweak its mission statement. It was founded back in 2000 when firms worried about attrition in the form of lawyers quitting. These days, “unwanted attrition” refers to the involuntary variety.

The Project has released its annual report [PDF] for U.S. offices on lady partners… or lack thereof. Last year, the Project for Attorney Retention was psyched that half of the new partners at 12 firms were women. This year, it’s happy to note an uptick: 40 percent of partners at 23 firms are ladies. A doubling of the firms with significant numbers of new female partners — that’s nice. Kudos to the top five female-leader-friendly firms, with over half of their partners of the XX persuasion: Cravath (67% of the partner class female), Dickstein Shapiro (67%), Wiley Rein (60%), Andrews Kurth (57%), and Bryan Cave (56%),

On the negative side: Last year, only one major law firm — Parker Poe — failed to make a single female partner. This year, a whopping 14 firms dissed the ladies. On the list of shame: Cadwalader, Cleary Gottlieb, Dechert, Foley Hoag, Kaye Scholer, Lowenstein Sandler, Milbank, Schulte Roth, Steptoe, Stroock, Venable, Wachtell, White & Case, and Wilkie Farr. Because Parker Poe did not release a press release about new partners this year, The Project doesn’t have info. on them.

Before everyone starts hating on Cadwalader and Cleary, The Project provides a caveat about some of those on this year’s list of shame:

For many of the firms labeled “the worst,” this year does appear to be an aberration. Cadwalader, Cleary Gottlieb, Kaye Scholer, Lowenstein and Steptoe have been notably more successful in the past.

The full list of 23 firms toasting lots of new female partners, and a longer list of firms that dissed the ladies, after the jump.

Remember Lisa Loeb? She got married last week. She’s 40 and still wearing those funky glasses.

Unfortunately, she didn’t marry a lawyer, so she isn’t eligible to be one of finalists. Here they are (only two this week):

1. Emily Rubin and Daniel Feldman

2. Leah Yoon and Cyrus Frelinghuysen

Read more about these couples, after the jump.

While the Latham & Watkins salary freeze came as a shock to most in the Biglaw community, Reed Smith associates have known for days that their salaries would remain frozen in place.

Reed Smith laid off 115 people two weeks ago. Individual salary memos started going out to the remaining Reed Smith associates last week (Reed Smith makes salary decisions known on a person-to-person basis). Not surprisingly, most people are not getting 2009 raises.

Because of the individualized nature of the salary information, we can’t say that nobody at Reed Smith will be receiving a raise. We can say that nobody we’ve talked to has received a full raise, expects a full raise, or is hoping for anything other than having a job when the calendar flips over. A couple of people we talked to will be getting a small salary bump, but nothing at the normal level for their class.

Did somebody say something about bonuses? Our Reed Smith sources don’t expect to get that either. There hasn’t been any official announcement, but the rumblings around the firm all point towards the “special bonus” of $0. Though, one tipster points out that there are enough bonus complications that the firm might be able to avoid the negative press associated with a $0 bonus:

RS doesn’t give end-of-year bonuses. All of our bonuses are dependent on hours or performance or are related to profit sharing. Everything is discretionary, except profit sharing, which is based on the firms performance, and well, we know where that is.

The lesson, as always, if your firm recently picked up a bunch of Thelen attorneys, or a bunch of Heller attorneys, things are not going well.

Earlier: Nationwide Layoff Watch: Reed Smith Cans Staff, Associates, ‘And Your Little Dog Too’
Howrey and Reed Smith: Latest Beneficiaries of Thelen’s Shutdown

The ATL inbox has been buzzing with layoff news about Howrey. Could it be that another firm that recently picked up a bunch of partners from a dissolved firm could be laying people off? Would former-Thelen chief Stephen O’Neal’s new firm cut associates so soon after his arrival?

Today, a firm spokesperson told us:

As we have stated on several occasions, unlike many firms, Howrey is not laying off lawyers or staff.

As in every year, there is an outplacement of some associates based on performance issues. This year, as in previous years, this involves approximately ten associates and occurs only after an exhaustive evaluation process and review. The information that you received is incorrect and has mischaracterized this as layoffs.

Howrey is enjoying a strong year. You should also note that unlike many other firms, we are not rescinding or delaying offers to first years. Our Associate Development program remains robust and on track.

After the jump … what does that mean exactly?

The terrorist attacks in Mumbai reminded everyone that we live in a dangerous world. But as India takes the steps necessary to improve its homeland security, we shouldn’t expect the tragedy to stem the tide of outsourcing American legal functions to Indian companies.

The National Law Journal reports that firms are increasingly proud of their outsourcing initiatives:

As outsourcing becomes more commonplace and corporate counsel and law firms are under increasing pressure to reduce costs for clients, law firms such as Baker & McKenzie; Greenberg Traurig; Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy; and Shapiro Sher Guinot & Sandler are actually touting at conferences the benefits of outsourcing.

Baker & McKenzie was the last best hope for Heller Ehrman, Greenberg Traurig is conducting stealth layoffs, and Millbank just announced Half-Skadden bonuses. But their outsourcing operations are thriving.

And the wave of firms outsourcing legal services to India is only going to get bigger:

Forrester Research projects that legal outsourcing to India will reach $4 billion by 2015. Some experts, however, find that number too low and others too high. Regardless, other numbers don’t lie — there are an estimated 800,000 lawyers in India and nowhere near that many jobs. Attorneys there charge, on average, $35 an hour, or no more than half of what an upper paralegal or lower-level associate bills, and up to three times less than an upper-level associate’s time.

After the jump, will global terrorism have a chilling effect?

Though law firms can’t practice in India, several firms have opened offices there to do support work and handle back-office functions. (Howrey got attention for this earlier this year.) Baker & McKenzie has had its eye on India for some time now (which scares Indian law firms); Baker’s India Focus Group has more than 200 lawyers working in over 70 offices.

Last week, a number of those attorneys were meeting in Mumbai, and found themselves in the middle of the terror attacks that killed at least 172 people. COO Greg Walters sent a firm-wide e-mail out on Thanksgiving. Here’s an excerpt:

We have now accounted for all of our Baker & McKenzie people who were visiting Mumbai. The majority of those are now together in a safe house in Mumbai. However the remaining two members of our group are still in one of the hotels.They are both in their hotel rooms and are not being held hostage (you may be hearing reports of people inside the hotel being directly held hostage). We are continuing to do everything possible to get them out of the hotel as soon as it is safe to do so. We are in constant contact with both of those individuals and their immediate families and are providing support and advice.

One of the Baker attorneys trapped in a hotel was Australian partner David Jacobs, who was staying at the Oberoi/Trident Hotel. He was meeting 10 other Baker attorneys there, but they were out to dinner when he arrived at the hotel Wednesday night. His bad luck— they got to a safehouse, while he spent the next two days surrounded by explosions and gunfire.

According to the Sunday Mail, his Blackberry was his savior, as were two security experts hired by the firm to advise him:

Mr Jacobs spent the next 46 hours, desperately keeping the lines of communication open with his family and two security advisers, hired by his firm, who were in contact with Indian authorities….

The security advisers from a private firm in the US maintained contact throughout the ordeal, telling him about the progress of the rescue team and what to do if there was a fire or if he came face to face with the terrorists.

They told him the best escape routes and passed on advice according to the latest intelligence.

“Should an unlikely scenario play out where you are located by a terrorist first, you are best suited to comply at the initial contact,” one email said.

“If you are taken by terrorists, you need to plan escape.”

How much do security advisers get paid to come up with that one?

Jacobs’ son reports that his father kept his spirits up by making unfunny dad jokes, like, “I’m getting pretty hungry but the room service in this hotel is terrible.” Full Baker e-mail from Greg Walters, and more from “Indiana Jacobs,” after the jump.

Reed Smith officially announced massive layoffs today. They didn’t do it “stealthily,” but you can’t really fire over 115 people and have it go unnoticed.

A firm-wide email explained the bloodbath:

Today we are laying off approximately 115 support staff personnel across our US offices. These layoffs include people in all of our support areas, including IT, finance, marketing, practice administration, knowledge management, human resources and office services. In addition, in London we are today commencing what is known as a redundancy consultation exercise, under procedures unique to the UK, that could result in the elimination of up to 7 support staff positions there. Lastly, we are also commencing a UK redundancy consultation exercise that could result in the elimination of up to 11 associate positions in the Business & Finance department in London due to overcapacity.

“Redundancy consultation exercise?” You have to love the British use of the English language.

I guess we have to be happy that Reed Smith decided to announce these layoffs officially. Reports have come in from multiple tipsters that the firm has been “quietly shedding people” for weeks. These moves will come to no surprise to Reed Smith associates working out of the New York office.

It’s sad to see the firm cutting so many people just after they acquired a large chunk of Thelen refugees. A couple of weeks ago, we reported:

Reed Smith is another firm profiting from Thelen’s demise. Check out the pun-aided press release from the firm:

“Reed Smith LLP, one of the 15 largest law firms in the world, experienced a power surge today, with the addition of a 14-member group from Thelen, headed by renewable energy law pioneer Ellen L. Bastier.”

These attorneys also come from San Francisco. Kudos to the new hires.

But, to quote Bill Simmons paraphrasing The Wolf, let’s not start licking each others’ popsicles just yet.

Remember, it wasn’t all that long ago that Orrick was happily announcing 27 new partner hires from Heller — 27 new partners then, 40 freshly unemployed associates now.

Pushing 115-plus Tony Rocky Horrors out of a window might be excessive, but Reed Smith people should have expected a “reaction.”

Read the Reed memo after the jump.

The legal community is still buzzing with reaction to the news of Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe’s layoffs of 40 attorneys — while White & Case sacrifices blood and treasure to the altar of “good timing.”

We don’t want to pile onto Orrick, we know a lot of good people that work there. But Ralph Baxter’s interview with the AmLaw Daily today is … a little weird.

Yesterday, we noted that Orrick’s layoffs come a month after they acquired a bunch of Heller Ehrman partners. Baxter addressed that issue specifically with AmLaw … depending on your definition of “addressed”:

What do you say to people who will look at your decision to hire 27 former Heller attorneys in early October, a month before this decision?

You take these two facts together (the Heller hirings and the layoffs), and you get a focused picture of Orrick. We’re bullish about the future, bullish about the role of lawyers in global finance, and we are boldly taking action to diversify Orrick’s practice. All of the Heller lawyers who joined us were in practice areas that are litigation-oriented. Compared with the layoffs, it’s apples and oranges. They are mostly partners, and they bring business with them.

Allow me to translate:

You see, there are these things called Apples. And man, let me tell you, Apples are the future. But unfortunately, there are these other things called Oranges, and Oranges are so obsolete, so yesterday. Really, IN THE FUTURE, the only thing Oranges will be good for is Juice. So we said, screw it man, let’s make some Juice. Let’s make some now! Because the future is now. Apples and Pulp bro’. Don’t sleep.

Other highlights from Baxter’s interview after the jump.

The Recorder is reporting that Howrey will take on 40 lawyers from Thelen’s prestigious San Francisco construction practice:

The group — which Howrey characterized as “most of the construction practice” from Thelen — includes Thelen Chairman Stephen O’Neal, construction practice head John Heisse II, D.C. office managing partner Andrew Ness, San Francisco partner David Buoncristiani (who handles matters for client Bechtel), Los Angeles partner Robert Thum and D.C. partner David Dekker. Most of the 18 partners and about 25 associates and of counsel are in San Francisco and D.C., and the rest are in New York and Los Angeles.

Hmm… Thelen attorneys, Chairman Stephen O’Neal, Howrey — where have I heard that before?

Oh yeah! You’ll remember that the Recorder initially broke the story on O’Neal’s flirtations with Howrey.

Immediately after Thelen dissolved, we mentioned possible options for the firm:

Option 1 is the plan they have arguably been pursuing: breaking up the firm practice group by practice group to interested parties. As we reported yesterday, this is the best option to save associate jobs. However, that plan is dependent on Thelen’s banks signing-off on the plan and maintaining their line of credit. Did Stephen O’Neal’s aggressive and ultimately public pursuit of his own lifeboat at Howrey scuttle that option? Once everybody is told that the managing partner could be leaving in ten days, why would other potential suitors compete for full Thelen practice groups? Instead, it’s easier to wait for an official dissolution and cherry-pick the rainmakers. This is what happened to Heller.

I’ll pause until the Thelen people stop screaming and hitting things.

Read about other Thelen landing places, after the jump.

After yesterday’s news that Thelen Chairman Stephen O’Neal was in talks to move to Howrey, the Thelen partnership met today.

That meeting is still ongoing, but early reports are that a partnership committee recommended dissolution to the full partnership.

The firm has been maintaining that they had a plan that would avoid dissolution ever since their proposed merger with Nixon Peabody fell through.

Update (5:05): As we understand it, Thelen has two different options from this point.

Option 1 is the plan they have arguably been pursuing: breaking up the firm practice group by practice group to interested parties. As we reported yesterday, this is the best option to save associate jobs. However, that plan is dependent on Thelen’s banks signing-off on the plan and maintaining their line of credit. Did Stephen O’Neal’s aggressive and ultimately public pursuit of his own lifeboat at Howrey scuttle that option? Once everybody is told that the managing partner could be leaving in ten days, why would other potential suitors compete for full Thelen practice groups? Instead, it’s easier to wait for an official dissolution and cherry-pick the rainmakers. This is what happened to Heller.

Option 2 is essentially what happened to Heller. If the full partnership accepts the recommendation and dissolves, this would likely trigger the WARN Act. As we know from the Heller situation, employees are entitled to 60 days notice. Many people predicted that Thelen would move to dissolve this week, last week one tipster told us that Thelen wanted to wrap up their operations before the end of the year. If true, that all but necessitates an official dissolution announcement this week. But, as Heller teaches us, just because you get 60-days warning doesn’t mean you get 60-days pay. We know that various Thelen associates were told that this type of dissolution was not going to happen. But … it appears to be happening.

Click here for Thelen’s official press release.

Thelen Launches Dissolution Vote [LegalPad]

Earlier: Weebles Wobble, But Does Thelen Fall Down?

We’ve spent the day collecting our Thelen rumors. This morning The Recorder reported that Thelen chairman Stephen O’Neal has been in talks to move to the D.C. firm Howrey. Apparently, he’s poised to take 30 attorneys with him.

The firm is set to hold an all partner meeting on Tuesday to discuss their options:

A much anticipated all-partner meeting is being held Tuesday, according to a Thelen partner, although the agenda hasn’t been made available to rank-and-file partners. The meeting had been set for last Thursday, but was rescheduled at the last minute.

“It’s certainly clear to us as industry observers that Thelen has reached a tipping point,” said William Nason, a recruiter with San Diego-based Watanabe Nason Schwartz & Lippman. “It’s amazing to us how quickly firms dissolve when they get to that point.”

Distinguishing Thelen from other dissolution targets after the jump.

Unfortunately, this Monday brings more statistics and indications that the job market for lawyers is in very bad shape.

The National Law Journal is reporting that while law students are expected to graduate with an average of $73,000 of debt, job prospects are looking especially weak:

[W]hile most would-be lawyers already have accepted that only a small fraction will start their careers with a big-firm salary of $160,000, the past few weeks of economic chaos have caused many to wonder if any kind of attorney work is in their near future. …

[T]here is genuine cause for concern. The number of legal jobs nationwide is steadily declining, according to employment figures released this month by the U.S. Department of Labor. Jobs in the law sector shrank by 2,000 in September — the fifth consecutive month of losses. The legal work force of 1,165,100 was down by 1.15% from a year ago, when the industry employed 1,178,600 people.

NALP is reporting the anecdotal evidence that we’ve been seeing: law firms are scaling back on their summer associate programs.

Not surprisingly, law students are worried:

One of the biggest challenges for career services professionals is dealing with the rumor mill among law students, who are a “worrisome lot” by nature, said Tom Ksobiech, assistant dean for career services at the University of Alabama School of Law.

“Everyone has heard something from ‘a friend,’ ” he said. “According to the ‘friend,’ there are no jobs anywhere.”

After the jump, practicing attorneys are also feeling the pinch.