* Didn’t they just execute somebody with an electric chair? And this is what gets them in trouble with the Constitution? [Jurist]
* Mel Weiss to be indicted. [New York Times]
* Oh, Al Sharpton, you’re incorrigible. [CNN]
* Judge withdraws jury instruction in Spector case; has he set up an easy appeal if there’s a conviction? [CNN]
Plaintiffs Firms
- Bad Ideas, Boutique Law Firms, Email Scandals, Law Firm Names, Plaintiffs Firms, Sex, Sex Scandals, Vicious Infighting
An Update on the Managhan Law Firm (aka ‘My Wife Is Sleeping Around and That’s Why We’re No Longer Law Partners’)
By David Lat
In case you missed this story from last week, here’s a recap. Earlier this month, a plaintiffs’ lawyer in Montana by the name of William Managhan sent out the following email, to the entire Montana Trial Lawyers Association:
From: William L. Managhan
To: Montana Trial Lawyers
Sent: Sunday, September 09, 2007 6:32 PM
Subject: [mtla_members_all] Firm Name ChangeManaghan & Kortum-Managhan Law Firm will no longer be known as such. The name is returning to Managhan Law Firm as Santana Kortum-Managhan is leaving the firm. Turns out that she was having sex with Tim McKeon of Anaconda while attending MMLP hearings in Helena.
Call me silly but I no longer fill [sic] comfortable with her as my law partner or wife. Some will think this is an inappropriate announcement, but considering the small legal community in our state, I might as well preempt the roomer mill [sic]. Please address communication to William L. Managhan through Managhan Law Firm.
More discussion, including accounts of our telephone conversations with Bobbi Bonnington and Tim of Anaconda, after the jump.
- Bad Ideas, Boutique Law Firms, Email Scandals, Law Firm Names, Plaintiffs Firms, Sex, Sex Scandals, Vicious Infighting
Best Reason for a Law Firm Name Change Ever
By David Lat
A fantastic and hilarious email, announcing a name change for a Montana law firm, has been making the rounds. We’d like to reprint it here, but we’ll refrain for now. Instead, read the email and commentary on it here and here.
We have no reason to question the authenticity of the email (which apparently went out to the entire membership of the Montana Trial Lawyers Association). But we haven’t verified it definitively either. And we’d like to give William Managhan and Santana Kortum-Managhan the chance to comment, given the salacious nature of the material. How do they fill about all the roomers?
Accordingly, we have phone calls and emails in to the Managhan Law Firm (whose typo-laden website still identifies it as the “Managhan & Kortum-Managhan Law Firm”). We will let you know if and when we hear back from them.
Update (7 PM): We have been communicating with Bobbi Bonnington via email. We hope to have more information for you soon.
A comedic tidbit…courtesy of Montana [The Amateur Law Professor]
Firm Name Change [The Legal Scoop]
As you know, we’ve been doing a series of fall recruiting open threads on the Vault 100 law firms — which, of course, tend to represent large corporate defendants in litigation matters.
But lately plaintiffs’ firms have been on our mind. Like Hewes & Associates, the fictional firm headed by Glenn Close in the new FX show, Damages. Or Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins — which will drop “Lerach” from its name as of August 31st, after the departure of the colorful and controversial Bill Lerach (whose over-the-top farewell message can be accessed here).
We’re not alone in thinking about plaintiffs’ lawyers. The crew over at Illegal Briefs sent in this request:
We’ve been enjoying your recent recruiting posts/threads. We’d be curious to read about folks’ take on plaintiff-side recruiting and work experiences.
We’re curious too. To kick things off, here are some questions:
1. What are associate salaries (and bonuses) like at the big plaintiffs’ firms, like Lerach Coughlin or Milberg Weiss?
2. Law students (a) want to make money, so they can pay off their student loans, and (b) generally have liberal or left-of-center political views. So why do they all go trooping off to firms that defend big corporations? Why not do plaintiffs’ work, where they can stand up for “the little guy” — and make good money, too?
And, from a different reader, an inquiry about another ATL favorite subject:
You should consider including in your updated clerkship bonus coverage the bonuses being paid by a large plaintiff firm such as Lerach. It would be interesting to see if they are matching their corporate adversaries.
So, does anyone have information or opinions to share on plaintiffs’ firms? If so, please do so in the comments. Thanks.
Bill Lerach To Resign August 31 [WSJ Law Blog]
Lerach’s Departure Memo [WSJ Law Blog]
Actually, this is a two-for-one. We can also get a Benchslap of the Day out of this item. From the Miami Herald:
Prominent attorney Hank Adorno — already under Florida Bar investigation for his role in Miami’s fire-fee scandal — on Wednesday was blasted by the Third District Court of Appeal for what the judges called his ”reprehensible conduct” in the now infamous case.
In a unanimous opinion that upheld a lower-court decision invalidating Miami’s $7 million fire-fee settlement with just seven people, the appeals court ripped into Adorno, who had represented the so-called ”lucky seven.” The Adorno & Yoss firm stood to earn a $2 million share of the $7 million payout, while some 80,000 taxpayers got nothing.
Huh? How did that almost come to pass?
More discussion, plus the benchslap-worthy language from the court’s opinion, after the jump.
If you’re looking for something to do in an hour and a half, why not check out the new legal thriller on FX, Damages?
This new television series stars Glenn Close, whom we have worshiped ever since Fatal Attraction. We love a strong woman, who knows exactly what she wants — and will stop at nothing to get it.
The litigatrix role that Glenn Close plays in Damages has some similarities to Alex Forrest in Fatal Attraction. Here’s the show’s synopsis:
DAMAGES is a legal thriller set in the world of New York City high-stakes litigation. The series, which provides a view into the true nature of power and success, follows the turbulent lives of Patty Hewes (Glenn Close) the nation’s most revered and reviled high-stakes litigator and her bright, ambitious protégé Ellen Parsons (Rose Byrne) as they become embroiled in a class action lawsuit targeting the allegedly corrupt Arthur Frobisher (Ted Danson), one of the country’s wealthiest CEOs.
As Patty battles with Frobisher and his attorney Ray Fiske (Željko Ivanek), Ellen Parsons will be front and center, witnessing just what it takes to win at all costs, as it quickly becomes clear that lives, as well as fortunes, may be at stake.
Tonight’s episode is the third installment of the series. Some thoughts on the first two episodes, from two readers and from us, appear after the jump.
Continue reading “Glenn Close and Damages: Dubious or Delicious?”
We discussed them back in this post, and wondered: What are they all about?
Well, now we have some answers.
But the mystery isn’t completely solved, since we know neither the identity nor the grievances of the ex-Hogan client who is so unhappy with the firm (or its fees) that they’re taking out (presumably expensive) radio ads to make a point. If you can enlighten us, please do so by email (subject line: “Hogan & Hartson”). Thanks.
Former Client Running Ads Against Hogan and Hartson [New York Personal Injury Law Blog]
Disgruntled Client Launches Toll-Free Number for Gripes About BigLaw Firm [Legal Times]
Earlier: Lawsuit of the Day: Have You Been Injured… By Hogan & Hartson?
Lately we’ve been writing a lot about the Lone Star State. So it’s fitting that John O’Quinn, the “legendary and controversial” Texas trial lawyer, is ATL’s Lawyer of the Day.
Why? Here are at least 35.7 million reasons.
Breaking: Wood v. John O’Quinn ruling [Overlawyered]
John M. O’Quinn bio [The O'Quinn Law Firm]
John O’Quinn [Wikipedia]



