* The right to choose… to drive out of state? SCOTUS rejected an application to block Texas from enforcing a law requiring abortion doctors to have privileges at nearby hospitals. [New York Times]
* Patton Boggs should prepare for the day when Locke Lord is too busy washing its hair to go on a date. The would-be merger is just one of many “interesting opportunities” the firm is considering. [Am Law Daily]
* Law firm merger mania, mid-size Midwest edition: Chi-Town law firm Shefsky & Froelich merges with Cincinnati-based Taft Stettinius & Hollister. [Crain's Chicago Business]
* When it comes to law faculty hiring, it doesn’t matter what color your skin is or what you’ve got between your legs, so long as your résumé is covered in Ivy and you’re dripping with prestige. [National Law Journal]
* Ave Maria School of Law is in need of a new dean. It seems the man who created the school’s “Advanced Critical Thinking Department” engaged in deep thought before deciding to call it quits. [Naples Daily News]
And now time for another attempt to “re-imagine” the otherwise useless third year of law school. This time, ALM editor-in-chief Aric Press weighs in with a thoughtful piece about how law schools could be doing a much better job at preparing people to take and pass the bar exam, especially minority students. Whether or not the bar exam is a good test of practice-ready skills barred attorneys need is a different question: at the very least, we can argue that law schools should be preparing would-be lawyers to be licensed.
It’s an interesting idea, but let’s be clear: most people, most of the time, can pass the bar with the help of an eight-week dedicated prep course. “Preparing students for the bar” cannot by itself justify an entire year of some of the most expensive education around. Getting people ready for the bar isn’t a “reform,” it should be a basic requirement for any accredited law school. And many law schools are already doing a decent enough job at graduating law students who can pass the bar. I’m not sure that we should change the focus of education for everybody just because some schools are not achieving basic competence…
* The Young Conservatives group at the University of Texas has canceled its intended “Catch an Illegal Immigrant” contest amid a firestorm over discrimination vs. free speech. Now Cartman can go back to class. [NPR]
* The Title IX Network is filing lawsuits against universities that allegedly mishandle sexual assault claims on campus. I mean, if the government isn’t going to do its job, someone has to step in. [Jezebel]
* An individual has no expectation of privacy in an online dating profile. They should also have no expectation of a fulfilling relationship. [IT-Lex]
* What is the duty of a sports franchise to protect spectators from flying hot dogs? Asking for a friend… [The Legal Blitz]
* Real Simple Magazine’s December Book Club nominees are out and the list includes Helen Wan’s The Partner Track (affiliate link). The winner will be determined by online voting and closes Sunday, Nov. 24 at 11:59 PM EST, so please go to this link and vote for The Partner Track! [Real Simple]
* Popehat has a site store now. As of now they don’t sell branded mitres, which seems like a damn shame. [Popehat]
* The Obama administration is supporting a ban on unlocking cellphones while publicly supporting unlocking. First they came for unlocking and I didn’t speak out because I didn’t need to unlock my phone. Then they came for Angry Birds and there was no one left to speak for me. [Slate]
* Dean Frank H. Wu discusses the Jimmy Kimmel controversy. It’s not a funny piece, but neither is Jimmy Kimmel. [Huffington Post]
The ruins of a house on the outskirts of Tacloban, capital of Leyte.
Law firms and the legal profession have a long and distinguished tradition of contributing to the public interest. Earlier today, we highlighted five Biglaw firms that are pro bono all-stars.
Most pro bono cases involve clients and causes here in the United States. But in today’s increasingly global world, law firms look beyond borders when it comes to helping the needy.
Yesterday we commended Skadden for its generous support of Typhoon Haiyan relief efforts in my ancestral homeland of the Philippines. And today we recognize several other law firms that have joined in this worthy cause….
I trust juries. They closely listen to the evidence that’s presented to them. They listen to the law and, they collectively do what they believe is right. My years in courtrooms, both as a lawyer and in what I just went through, lead me to that same conclusion.
The Dewey nightmare continues for non-settling partners.
Many former partners of now-defunct Dewey & LeBoeuf signed up to join the “Partner Contribution Plan” that was hatched during the law firm’s bankruptcy case. The gist of the Plan: pay a certain sum (which varied from partner to partner) into the pot, and win a release from any future Dewey-related liability.
The main appeal of the Plan was finality, a way of putting the entire Dewey debacle in the rearview mirror. And that appeal was strong: more than 400 ex-partners agreed to the Plan, which freed them up to focus on their post-Dewey lives at new firms.
But a minority of former partners refused to sign on. A lawsuit filed last week against one ex-partner reveals what lies in store for them….
South Park metaphorically linked the 2004 election to a matchup between a turd sandwich and a giant douche. As bad as the Bush era had become, John Kerry came across as such a self-righteous tool it was hard to get swing voters psyched up to vote one way or the other. I think of this episode today as I approach the tale of two lawyers sniping at each other over Facebook about whether a woman deserves to have her parental rights terminated. It’s not that I think either is really wrong, as much as both of them exhibit the worst of their respective positions in their online feud.
So what did one entitled Biglaw lawyer say about a poor client, and what did a self-righteous public interest lawyer say in response? All bets final once you read past the jump….
A 74-year-old OB/GYN is the latest blood sacrifice to our cultural inability to keep guns out of the hands of crazy people. Just like the founders intended, I guess.
Dr. Stephen Larson was murdered in his home, while on the phone with a patient, allegedly by a law school graduate who blamed the doctor for delivering him. It’s like if an ATL commenter murdered Heathcliff Huxtable. The law grad was eventually shot and killed by the police.
I cannot imagine how this person got into and all the way through law school without somebody reaching out to him and getting him the help he clearly needed. Sadly, I can totally imagine how he got his hands on a gun…
If you aspire to work in Biglaw, it’s likely that you’ve already got a certain air of je ne sais quoi about you. You’re probably a prestige whore who looks down your nose at others whom you deem to be inferior to you. You probably think you’re the sh*t, and you firmly believe that others should think so too. You know people call you a jerk behind your back, but you don’t care because you know they’re just jealous. You are the most special and unique of all snowflakes, and people should be honored to breathe the same air as you.
Congratulations! You’re an arrogant a-hole, and there are many firms that would be glad to have you among their ranks — because according to the latest survey results, they’re filled to the brim with people just like you.
Which Biglaw firms are just as cocky as you are? Luckily, there’s a ranking for that…
Pro bono work is often an afterthought in the minds of attorneys who have more important things to do with their time — things like “churn[ing] that bill, baby!” But for others, it’s a commitment to fulfilling the very concept their naive and idealistic law school applications were premised upon: helping the people who need it most.
We know lawyers like rankings, so we thought we’d provide you with a way to measure a firm’s prestige and beneficence, all at the same time. Out of all of the Biglaw firms in the United States, which five are filled with the most worthy do-gooders? Let’s find out…
Biglaw firms have a problem. They can’t get their senior partners to retire. Or to pass along their clients to younger partners fast enough.
The reasons for this unwelcome phenomenon are straightforward. First, today’s Biglaw senior partners are making too much money. Would you retire if you were making seven figures and billing 1200 to 1500 hours a year? Of course not. Especially if you are helping to support your children. Or in this age of the 70-year-old rainmaker, a grandchild’s “education” as a communications major at the top party school in this year’s rankings.
Kidding aside, I know that many senior partners have very valid reasons for continuing to maintain their Biglaw practices. But that does not mean that what works for them at an individual level is what is good for Biglaw as a whole. In fact, I think the “sticky senior” issue is the greatest long-term threat to the continued viability of many Biglaw firms….
* President Obama won’t “just sit idly by” as his D.C. Circuit nominees are picked off one by one by Senate Republicans. No, instead he’s going to have his White House Counsel give interviews for him. [National Law Journal]
* Today is the 150th anniversary President Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address. If you’d like, you can watch a live stream of an event celebrating the occasion here at 12 p.m. EST today. [Constitution Accountability Center]
* The Second Circuit slapped down a few requests yesterday, the most notable of which being Argentina’s bid for a full rehearing and Raj Rajaratnam’s plea for a review of his conviction. [Bloomberg; Bloomberg]
* You don’t know what you got till it’s gone: Weil Gotshal is welcoming back a former finance partner after a seven-year stint at Norton Rose Fulbright to fill out its emptied Dallas office. [Law 360 (sub. req.)]
* Dewey know when the axe man commeth for those who refused to join the failed firm’s $70 million partner contribution plan? Right now. Will Marcoux is the first to face off against Alan Jacobs. [Am Law Daily]
If your firm is in ‘go’ mode when it comes to recruiting lateral partners with loyal clients, then take this quiz to see how well you measure up. Keep track of your ‘yes’ and ‘no’ responses.
1. Does your firm have a clearly defined strategy of practice groups that are priorities of growth for your office? Nothing gets done by random chance, but with a clear vision for the future. Identify the top practice areas for which you wish to add lateral partners. Seek input from practice group leaders and get specifics on needs, outcomes, and ideal target profiles.
2. In addition to clarifying your firm’s growth strategy, are you still open to the hire of a partner outside of your plan? I’ve made several placements that fit this category. The partner’s practice was not within the strategic growth plan of my client, but once the two parties started talking with each other, we all saw how it could indeed be a seamless fit. Be open to “Opportunistic Hires.” You never know where your next producing partner might come from, so you have to be open to it. I will be the first to admit that there is a quirky element of randomness in recruiting.
Ed. note: The Asia Chronicles column is authored by Kinney Recruiting. Kinney has made more placements of U.S. associates, counsels and partners in Asia than any other recruiting firm in each of the past six years. You can reach them by email: firstname.lastname@example.org.
We currently have a very exciting and rare type of in-house opening in China at one of the world’s leading internet and social media companies. Our client is looking for an IP Transactional / TMT / Licensing attorney with 2 to 6 years experience. The new hire will be based in Shenzhen or Shanghai. Mandarin is not required (deal documentation will be in English) but is preferred. A solid reason to be in China and a commitment to that market is required of course. This new hire will likely be US qualified (but could also be qualified in UK or other jurisdictions) and with experience and training at a top law firm’s IP transactional / TMT practice and could be currently at a law firm or in-house. Qualified candidates currently Asia based, Europe based or US based will be considered. The new hire’s supervisors in this technology transactions in-house team are very well regarded US trained IP transactional lawyers, with substantial experience at Silicon Valley firms. The culture and atmosphere in this in-house group and the company in general is entrepreneurial, team oriented, and the work is cutting edge, even for a cutting edge industry. The upside of being in an important strategic in-house position in this fast growing and world leading internet company is of the “sky is the limit” variety. Its a very exciting place to be in China for a rising IP transactional lawyer in our opinion, for many reasons beyond the basic info we can share here in this ad / post. This is a special A+ opportunity.
The traditional job application and interview process can be impersonal, and applicants often struggle to present themselves as more than just the sum of their GPAs, alma maters, and previous work history. ATL has partnered with ViewYou to help job seekers overcome this challenge. ViewYou NOW Profiles offer a unique way for job seekers to make a personal, memorable connection with prospective employers: introduction videos. These videos allow job candidates to display their personalities, interpersonal skills, and professional interests, creating an eDossier to brand themselves to potential employers all over the world. Check it out today!