* Is this brilliant, or awful, or both? [LexBlog via WSJ Law Blog]
* Move over, bonsai trees. Make way for… law faculty recruitment swag? [Feminist Law Professors]
* State government lawyers to…. $197K! No, seriously. [Pennsyltucky Politics Blog / Harrisburg Patriot-News]
* A cautionary tale about law firm websites, courtesy of Jones Day. [Legal Blog Watch (Carolyn Elefant)]
* Don’t take tax advice from Wesley Snipes. [TaxProf Blog]
* Lots of Lawyers (and Judges) of the Day on this list. [Blogonaut]
* Blawg Review #138: on human rights, and law student rites. [De Novo via Blawg Review]
* Is this brilliant, or awful, or both? [LexBlog via WSJ Law Blog]
What are the duties of a Supreme Court law clerk? The primary responsibilities of SCOTUS clerks include reviewing cert petitions, conducting legal research, and drafting opinions.
But Justice Anthony M. Kennedy has added a new task to the list: congressional gossip gathering. On Friday, he dispatched one of his clerks to the Senate. The clerk’s mission? To skulk around hallways and offices, collecting intelligence about the status of the pending judicial pay raise legislation (and maybe to put in a good word or two in favor of the bill, too).
It’s not unusual for a clerk to serve as a justice’s eyes and ears — but these spying duties usually don’t extend beyond One First Street. If Justice Kennedy subscribes to a strict view of separation of powers, and wants cameras out of the courtroom, should he perhaps keep his clerks out of the Capitol?
Okay, we jest. We really don’t think it’s a big deal if Justice Kennedy wants to send a clerk over to snoop around the Senate (and we also suspect that Justice Kennedy, of all the justices, wouldn’t mind cameras in the courtroom). But AMK’s sending over a clerkly spy is a sad commentary on how desperate some judges are for a pay raise.
(Another depressing sign: rumor has it that one federal judge was wandering around the Federalist Society 25th anniversary gala, collecting the unclaimed $1 Madison coins that were left at each place setting.)
So come on, Senators. Pass the federal judicial pay raise, and give these judges back their dignity!
Federal Judiciary Salary Bill Progresses – With Caveats [Washington Briefs]
The litigation powerhouse of Williams & Connolly has announced associate pay raises, effective January 1, 2008. We have confirmed the fact of the raise with sources at the firm.
There was no comprehensive memo, so we’re not 100 percent certain of the specific numbers. But word on the street is that the new pay scale is as follows:
Year — Salary
These base salaries are well above market (160 – 170 – 185, etc.). But remember that Williams & Connolly traditionally pays an above-market base salary, since it does not pay year-end bonuses. So W&C’s move to a $180,000 starting salary is not as exciting as a similar move by Cravath or Simpson would be.
The old pay scale is available here. The pay raise appears to be a $15K bump for the first three classes. Fourth-year associates get a $20K increase. Fifth-year through seventh-year associates get a $25K increase.
We’re reasonably confident in these numbers. But, as noted, they were not set forth in a memo. So if you see any errors, please contact us. Thanks.
Earlier: Skaddenfreude: Williams & Connolly Weighs In
The combined firm will have over 1,500 lawyers in 23 offices. It will “employ the K&L Gates brand and have the legal name of Kirkpatrick & Lockhart Preston Gates Ellis LLP.” Press release here.
Update: Some commentary from an inside source, after the jump.
K&L Gates, Hughes & Luce Partners Vote to Combine Firms Effective January 1 [K&L Gates]
The firm of Dewey Ballantine was never known for being particularly PC. From a 2004 article by Anthony Lin, for the New York Law Journal:
Nearly one year after lawyers at Dewey Ballantine infuriated members of the Asian-American community by performing a stereotype-laden parody song at their annual dinner, the law firm is again dealing with allegations of racial insensitivity….
On Monday, an employee sent a firmwide e-mail advertising the availability of some puppies for adoption. Douglas Getter, a London-based American who heads Dewey Ballantine’s European mergers and acquisitions practice then sent a firmwide reply.
“Please don’t let these puppies go to a Chinese restaurant!” Getter wrote in his e-mail.
Now Dewey has merged with LeBoeuf Lamb. Happily, it appears their firm cultures are a good match. Check out this email exchange appearing below — and note that Partner X came from the LeBoeuf Lamb side of the marriage….
Last week, our Associate Bonus Watch kicked back into high gear, with news (or teasers) from Ropes & Gray, Sidley Austin, Chadbourne & Pourke, Arnold & Porter, Wachtell, Fried Frank, and O’Melveny & Myers, as well as pay raise news from Boies Schiller. Today’s ATL / Lateral Link Featured Job Survey keeps that thread alive.
Update: This survey is closed. Click to see results for New York, Washington, Chicago, Los Angeles San Francisco / Silicon Valley, Boston, and Texas.
More results from last week’s survey, which inquired into billing rates, after the jump.
Some quick updates on law-related sex scandals previously covered in these pages:
First, Kansas Attorney General Paul Morrison, a recent Lawyer of the Day, is resigning. We’d say that this is pretty lame; what prominent public official hasn’t had an affair? But there are other allegations in the mix, including a claim that he tried to get dirt on a political rival from his lover, which make the resignation more understandable.
Second, yes, we missed last week’s juicy NYM story about financier Jeffrey Epstein, alleged former paramour of model Maximilia Cordero. Fortunately, our colleagues over at DealBreaker didn’t; Bess Levin’s post appeared here.
Finally, a sex scandal that’s new to these pages: some 1Ls at UVA getting busted for bonking, in a cell phone booth at the law library. Of course, library sex is nothing new. But it seems to be moving up the U.S. News rankings.
Attorney General Paul Morrison scandal (collected coverage) [Topeka Capital-Journal via WSJ Law Blog]
In Kansas, Top Official Announces Resignation [New York Times]
Jeffrey Epstein, Owner Of An Enormous Townhouse, Doesn’t Bitch About Having To Answer The Front Door When He’s In The Middle Of A 4th Floor Breast-Feeding [DealBreaker]
The Fantasist [New York Magazine]
Law Lib Bump ‘n Grind? [BLOTUS via TJ's Double Play]
Earlier: Lawyer of the Day: Attorney General Paul Morrison
Sex in Your Law School Library Is Illegal, and ‘Necessity Is Not a Defense’
Yesterday’s New York Times contains an interesting op-ed about how to read the Second Amendment. Adam Freedman — author of The Party of the First Part: The Curious World of Legalese, a potential stocking stuffer for the lawyer in your life — parses the use of commas in the amendment. He concludes:
[At the time of the Second Amendment's drafting,] lawmakers took a devil-may-care approach to punctuation. Often, the whole business of punctuation was left to the discretion of scriveners, who liked to show their chops by inserting as many varied marks as possible.
Another problem with trying to find meaning in the Second Amendment’s commas is that nobody is certain how many commas it is supposed to have. The version that ended up in the National Archives has three, but that may be a fluke. Legal historians note that some states ratified a two-comma version. At least one recent law journal article refers to a four-comma version.
The best way to make sense of the Second Amendment is to take away all the commas (which, I know, means that only outlaws will have commas). Without the distracting commas, one can focus on the grammar of the sentence.
… [W]hen the justices finish diagramming the Second Amendment, they should end up with something that expresses a causal link, like: “Because a well regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.” In other words, the amendment is really about protecting militias, notwithstanding the originalist arguments to the contrary.
In fairness to the other side of the debate, that’s just one scholar’s opinion. Many others, including prominent liberal academics, disagree.
What do you think? Take our poll, after the jump.
* Bush administration seeks greater power over promotions of military lawyers. [Boston Globe via How Appealing]
* Saudi king pardons rape victim who had been sentenced to 200 lashes (for being alone with a man at the time of the attack). [AP via New York Times]
* Limited effects of recent SCOTUS sentencing decision? [Chicago Tribune]
* CNN’s guide to Mitchell report players. [CNN]
* Law Blog’s guide to Sen. George Mitchell (including a funny story of a minor faux pas). [WSJ Law Blog]
* Poll suggests support for individual rights reading of Second Amendment. [CNN]
* Comcast v. NFL Network dispute produces another lawsuit. [Sportsline]
For non-New York associates of Sidley Austin, Monday is the big day. The firm just sent out a memo informing them that bonuses will be distributed at that time. As you may recall, the firm previously announced special bonuses, but only for its New York office — news that was not well-received outside of NYC.
If you’re hoping for hard numbers, you’ll be disappointed; the memo is rather vague. It states:
[W]e continue to determine bonuses on an individual basis and consistent with our culture and practice, will communicate with you individually about them. Because year-end bonuses remain discretionary and are tailored to individual circumstances, no description of the relevant factors could be exhaustive. As in recent years, however, we again have considered the hours that each associate has spent on chargeable, pro bono, and certain non-chargeable matters such as legal services to the Firm, as well as the quality of each associate’s work and other special contributions to the Firm.
You can read the whole thing, in all of its glorious opacity, after the jump.
Law school list serve trainwrecks are a staple here at ATL. We’ve written about several — see, e.g., Cumberland Law School; Washington University School of Law — and they tend to be popular with readers.
A student at NYU Law School brought a recent listserv debacle to our attention:
[This listserve controversy] touches on many law school and other legal topics. They include grades, finals, state vs. T14 schools, Jesus, the Constitution, Jesus vs. the Constitution, and [people] who were arrested at Harvard [see April 24, 2:21 AM entry] and feel the need to announce it to the whole law school.
Perhaps it’s just exam stress all around, but having just taken my crim pro final earlier today, the last bit made things extra hilarious.
The reader then included several emails from the thread. But fortunately for us, another NYU law student already collected and posted them over here (which saves us the trouble of cutting and pasting).
More after the jump.
Here are the results from yesterday’s Featured Job Survey, brought to you by ATL and Lateral Link, which inquired into billing rates.
More than 700 of you responded to yesterday’s survey, not counting a few dubious entries. In case you were wondering, yes, we really do discard your response if you claim to be billing out at $25 an hour at Sullivan & Cromwell. We’re asking for your rates for legal services.
For those of you wondering what the average rate for an hour of lawyerly time is these days — and whether your firm is selling you cheap — here are the national averages based on our (admittedly unscientific) survey:
How many associates think they’re worth more than that? Find out, after the jump.