Eduardo C. Leite, Chairman of the Executive Committee
New York University, MCJ
University of Sao Paulo, JD
Managing Director of the IMF and former Finance Minister of France Christine Lagarde is the former head of the entire firm.
Firm has been involved in more cross-border M&A deals (722) over the past 5 years than all but 2 other firms.
In May 2012, the firm opened its 70th office-in Johannesburg, South Africa.
Lead counsel to Ecolab Inc. in its $8B merger with Nalco Holding Co., covering 160 countries, $11B annual sales – the transaction is the largest in Ecolab’s history.
Represented the Barracuda & Caratinga Leasing Co., B.V. and Petroleo Brasileiro S.A., the Brazilian state-owned oil company in a $200M arbitration award in New York against Kellogg Brown & Root LLC.
Advised AXA Private Equity on the $1.7B purchase of leveraged buyout assets (over 200 limited partnership interests in PE buyout funds & direct stakes) from Citigroup Inc. – one of the largest secondary PE transactions ever.
Would you rather be a great lawyer or be perceived as being a great lawyer?
For many people, I think the answer to that question varies over time: At age 30, you’d rather be a great lawyer. At age 60, you’d rather be perceived as being a great lawyer.
Because, over time, your reputation may come to track reality. If you’re perceived as great when you’re 30, but you’re actually no good, that truth may out over time. As you age, your reputation may catch up with you.
By the time you’re 60, your professional horizon will have shortened, and it’s less likely that the world will unearth your incompetence. If you’re perceived as being a great lawyer when you’re 60, you may well make it to retirement unscathed.
What of law firms? Would you rather that your firm be great or be perceived as being great?
Why go big when you can supersize? As has been reported recently, one of Biglaw’s most aggressive firms in terms of growth, Dentons (née Sonnenschein Nath & Rosenthal and some foreign counterparts cobbled together just a few years ago), is now in serious discussions about a combination with McKenna Long & Aldridge. Both firms are products of recent tie-ups themselves, and the combined firm should the transaction go through will be instantly one of the world’s largest, at least in terms of number of lawyers. Welcome to the age of the global Megalaw franchise, in which a firm can raise its profile by connecting with other firms in the interest of getting bigger, all the while creating a new global brand in the process. Dentons is sure giving it a try.
It is actually unfair to say that Dentons is the Biglaw equivalent of McDonald’s, or even Burger King. Biglaw brands of that stature would be Baker & McKenzie or even DLA Piper, and not only because they are bigger….
Biglaw branding sounds painful, but thankfully, associates at the highest and mightiest of firms don’t have to sear their flesh with their firms’ logos. Biglaw branding is more about the image firms want clients to see when making hiring decisions, and partners are likely equally as worried about their reputations in the marketplace as their year-end profits.
The last time we spoke about law firm branding, we found out that Skadden had the most recognizable brand in the country. But we, loving rankings as we do, wondered which law firm had the best brand in the world. Luckily for us, hot on the heels of the release of the Am Law Global 100, Acritas published its 2013 Sharplegal Global Elite Brand Index.
Who’s got the best Biglaw brand on the planet? Let’s find out…
For all the talk of layoffs and worries over an unstable legal economy, Biglaw just keeps getting bigger. Today, the American Lawyer magazine announced its Global 100, a ranking of the world’s 100 largest law firms in terms of total revenue. The view from the top is simple: as we learned from the 2013 Am Law 100, slow and steady does win the race, because Biglaw is at the biggest it’s been in years, and partners’ profits are headed up, up, up.
Now that we’re on the long road to recovery following the recession and collapse of the U.S. financial markets, there are some lessons to be learned from the past five years. Some firms were able to cash in modestly on their success, while other firms buckled under the pressure and were forced to close their doors for good. The game of musical chairs in the top 10 of the Global 100 reflects this economic uncertainty.
DLA Piper is the new top dog in terms of total revenue. Which firms are the leaders of the pack in other metrics, such as profits per partner and attorney headcount?
For the past three years, Baker & McKenzie has taken the top spot in the American Lawyer’s Global 100, the magazine’s ranking of the 100 highest-grossing law firms in the world. With 74 offices in 46 counties, the firm has a presence in almost as many countries as Starbucks (which is in 50 different countries around the globe).
Baker saw its financial metrics rise like bread in the last fiscal year. Gross revenue grew by 4.6 percent to $2.42 billion; net income rose by an even larger amount, 9.1 percent, to $862 million; and profits per equity partner increased by 10.1 percent, hitting $1.2 million.
But this strong performance wasn’t enough to keep Baker at #1. Who is the new top dog?
* After three years on top, Baker & McKenzie has lost its place as the top grossing firm in the Global 100. But which firm dethroned the once king? None other than… [Am Law Daily]
* Today we celebrate the 50th anniversary of Martin Luther King Jr.’s March on Washington, and yet some of the things he sought to change still remain the same in 2013. [Washington Post]
* The house always wins: Navin Kumar Aggarwal, the ex-K&L Gates partner who stole client funds to pay gambling debts, was jailed after receiving a 12-year sentence. [Am Law Daily]
* “This is like a triple-overtime win.” Merrill Lynch is making a huge $160 million payout in a racial bias case that’s been stuck in the courts for nearly a decade. Congrats, plaintiffs! [DealBook / New York Times]
* As eager young law students return to school, maybe it’s time for you to consider brushing up on the basics. Now is an excellent time to take care of those pesky CLE requirements. [Corporate Counsel]
* Career alternatives for attorneys: judicial drug mule. Following an investigation by the DEA, a former Utah judge pleaded guilty to the possession of enough Oxycodone to kill a small horse. [Salt Lake Tribune]
* Don’t even think about texting anyone, ever again, in the state of New Jersey, especially if they might be driving, because the appeals court says you could be held liable for negligence. [WSJ Law Blog (sub. req.)]
A brief tangent. I was shocked and appalled to find out that I wasn’t asked my thoughts about being no-offered by your summer firm. As, perhaps, the only ATL writer who found himself in such a situation, I thought my insights would be particularly valuable. Instead of cobbling together that fake-as-hell gchat (“I think that is a fine point, sir. As I cogitate on this question, allow me to interject a brief few words in support of the fair maiden whose plight we now consider.”), they could have asked me: straight up, what did you do when Baker & McKenzie no-offered you?
Excellent question, Lat. I let a single teardrop roll down my cheek like I was Denzel in Glory. Then I picked myself up, slapped my dog in the face and did, like, 16,000 biceps curls. I determined that I wasn’t going to let some dumb dumb law firm dictate my life’s trajectory. I was going to be a huge success, someday reaching upwards of two dozen people as a writer for the Internet’s preeminent website for law firm bonuses and women’s shoes. I was also not going to let Baker’s decision get in the way of my life’s dream to one day work at a terrible office filled with half-wit lunatics who either don’t know I’m a lawyer or don’t care. To quote Matthew Wilder, I decided that no law firm gonna break-a my stride, nobody’s gonna slow me down. Oh no. I’ve got to keep on moving!
I also considered taking a huge dump outside Baker’s offices.
Ed. note: This is the latest installment in a series from Bruce MacEwen and Janet Stanton of Adam Smith Esq. and JDMatch. “Across the Desk” takes a thoughtful look at recruiting, career paths, professional development, human capital, and related issues. Some of these pieces have previously appeared, in slightly different form, on AdamSmithEsq.com.
Next in our series on a taxonomy of law firms are the capital-markets centric firms.
If you think this moniker roughly translates to the classic New York white shoe elite, move to the head of the class.
But, as much in our world at the start of the 21st Century, it’s not exactly that simple. Here’s what’s different about these firms.
First, recall that we’ve hypothesized seven primary species…
So this isn’t a proper “Career Alternatives for Attorneys” post, but if the Russian Federal Security Service (FSB) — the successor to the KGB — had their way, we would one day soon watch Spencer Mazyck of Bloomberg sitting down to interview a Russian spy.
When you think about it, Biglaw attorneys share a lot of qualities with spies: working long, odd hours; poring over reams of government documents searching for a few nuggets of information; and feeling that any mistake could cost them their lives.
If you feel you have what it takes to become a spy, give Russia a call because they’re all butthurt over losing out on a potential Biglaw spy…