More bad news today, this time from Squire Sanders.

Multiple sources reported massive layoffs at Squire Sanders yesterday. The firm has confirmed that 30 associates and paralegals were let go:

We have completed annual reviews of all of our associates and, as a result of that process and with regret have advised some of our associates that they should explore career opportunities elsewhere and we are giving them time to do so. About 30 associates and paralegals will be affected firmwide,including three associates in Phoenix. This is a higher number than usual leaving following performance reviews. Admittedly, current and projected business conditions influenced the timing of these decisions. Like all firms, we are forced to align our resource capabilities with project client service levels and make some hard personnel decisions. That may sound harsh to some and sound like a 'lay off' to others but we are working closely with all professionals affected and providing support and assistance.

The Phoenix news is significant. Markets like Phoenix (and Tampa, another Squire branch location) are hurting (because of the housing market) but have not yet felt the brunt of Biglaw layoffs.

We understand that the targets of the cuts were more expensive senior associates. We don't have any word on what severance package Squire Sanders is offering.

From the firm's statement, it looks like another case of "forced attrition."

After the jump, we look into the recent past of Squire Sanders.

The latest bailout news is making Simpson Thacher's $300,000 contract to advise the Treasury Department on the $700 billion bailout plan look even more like chump change.

We wrote before about firms that were offered bailout love. Well, Reuters reports that Hughes Hubbard and Squire Sanders are going to get mad bailout love, in the form of $11 million:

Hughes Hubbard & Reed LLP and Squire Sanders & Dempsey LLP have each been awarded a contract for roughly $5.5 million to help shepherd about 2,000 financial firms through the program that would see the government buy company shares, the Treasury Department said on Monday.

Looks like Hughes Hubbard's strategerizing with the acquisition of boutique bankruptcy firm Luskin, Stern & Eisler may have paid off.

Two law firms to help U.S. Treasury dole out aid [Reuters]
The End of Bailout Transparency Already? [BailoutSleuth via WSJ Law Blog]

Earlier: The Firms That Were Offered Bailout Love
Musical Chairs: Hughes Hubbard Is Ready For Some Action

Here is yet another rumor -- somewhat better sourced than the Thacher Proffitt / King & Spalding rumor, but a rumor nonetheless -- about a possible law firm merger.

Word on the street is that Seyfarth Shaw is seeking a merger partner. This should not come as a shock, since Seyfarth has been stumbling a bit due to the downturn. As previously reported, the firm has pushed back start dates and trimmed its lawyer ranks.

The Seyfarth partnership recently returned from its retreat, where strategic opportunities were discussed. The scuttlebutt is that the firm is in "serious" merger talks with another firm of roughly equal size. Upon information and belief, that firm is Squire Sanders.

Both firms hover around the 800-attorney mark. The product of their merger -- nicknamed "S4" by one tipster, standing for either "Seyfarth Shaw Squire Sanders" or "Squire Sanders Seyfarth Shaw" -- would be a 1600-lawyer behemoth. The combination would give Seyfarth a coveted foothold in Bratislava.

Associate meetings were held in all Seyfarth Shaw offices earlier this afternoon. Associates were briefed on the retreat and told about ongoing merger talks with another firm. Details are scarce; the confidential nature of the merger talks was stressed to the associates "about a dozen times."

Whether these talks will bear fruit is anyone's guess. Lately law-firm merger talks have been falling at a high rate.

We'll keep you posted. If you have any info to share, please email us. Thanks.

Earlier today we reported that Squire, Sanders & Dempsey extended offers to 76% of their summer class, but that an untold number of those summers received staff attorney offers.

Well, after an initial "no comment" on the staff attorney question, Squire Sanders decided to clarify their statement:

The firm made one staff attorney offer. The offer was extended to accommodate a law student's interest in a practice area that was only hiring staff attorneys for 2009. We did not include the staff attorney offer when we reported to you that 76% of the summer associates received associate offers. We intend to report associate offer numbers to NALP excluding the staff attorney offer as well.

There you go. At least the 24% of the class that was no-offered do not have to feel as bad about themselves as some commenters suggested.

I guess I can stop screaming at NALP about the purity of their report.

Earlier: Nationwide No Offer Watch: Squire Sanders

The no-offer reports keep rolling in from our readers, but one tip about Squire, Sanders & Dempsey stopped us in our tracks:

[A summer associate] at Squire Sanders got offered a staff attorney position. Apparently one-third of the class got real offers, some got staff attorney offers, and the rest?

Staff attorney -- i.e., a job with a significantly lower salary than an associate position, featuring endless document review and discovery work, and without any prospect of promotion to partnership. Is that a cold offer, or a coldcock?

Or is it "creative accounting" for purposes of reporting to NALP, which collects and publishes data about summer associate programs? Presumably Squire Sanders will count the staff attorney "offers" in the number of full-time employment offers made to summer associates that it reports to NALP. But bringing the summers on as staff attorneys rather than associates will save the firm a lot of money. This is one of the most creative ways of dealing with the downturn that we've come across.

Squire Sanders spokesperson Drez Jennings provided us with a prompt and direct response:

[W]e made offers to 76 percent of the summers, and no offers to 24 percent.

Ouch. No-offering a quarter of your class is already pretty harsh.

Jennings declined to comment on the staff attorney question (even though it was explicitly presented), leaving ATL readers to speculate on how many, if any, of Squire Sanders summer offers were for staff attorney positions.

More on Squire Sanders and staff attorneys, after the jump.

This marks the end of our review of the firms in the Vault 100. This is the final bunch up for discussion (with prestige scores in parentheses):

91. Lovells (4.494)
92. Thelen Reid Brown Raysman & Steiner LLP (4.489)
93. Hughes Hubbard & Reed LLP (4.478)
94. Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP (4.459)
95. Kilpatrick Stockton LLP (4.452)
96. Locke Lord Bissell & Liddell LLP (4.439)
97. Squire, Sanders & Dempsey LLP (4.421)
98. Seyfarth Shaw (4.399)
99. Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo PC (4.394)
100. Fenwick & West LLP (4.373)

Discuss. Dissect. Compare. Contrast. Most of all, enjoy.

Earlier: Vault 100 Open Threads - 2009

From the Department of Astute Observations:

"Some former Steel Hector partners suggested it may have been unwise to make a large loan to a partner allegedly on the brink of bankruptcy."

Ya think?

Firm Sues Estate of Dead Lawyer for Loan Repayment [Daily Business Review (Miami / South Florida)]

In late March, we made a special shout-out to Squire Sanders & Dempsey. It hadn't participated in the latest round of associate pay raises, and several of you had complained about that to us. So we highlighted their presence on the LIST OF SHAME.

Weeks and weeks passed. But now, after taking its sweet time about it, the firm has followed suit. From a tipster:

Squire Sanders raised salaries last Friday. In Miami, they joined Holland & Knight, among others, at $130k for first years (a $15k raise). They raised senior associates by $20k.

All associates in Miami are still well behind Weil Gotshal and Boies Schiller (at $160k), somewhat behind Hunton & Williams and McDermott Will (at $145k), and just behind Greenberg Traurig (at $135k). Apparently, they're content to be third-to-fourth tier. But something is something.

No idea how the raises shook out at other offices, but I do know that they occurred.

If you happen to know what Squire Sanders did in its other offices, please add comments to this post.

Earlier: Skaddenfreude: What's Up With Squire Sanders?

When we were drawing up our LIST OF SHAME (latest version here), Squire Sanders & Dempsey got dropped along the way. To make the list more manageable, we limited it to firms with a significant New York presence.

Some readers appealed that decision. These two comments are representative:

"The updated List of Shame doesnt include some firms like Squire Sanders and others anymore. I wonder if that's because they matched (I dont think they did) or because they don't have big NY offices, so supposedly they shouldn't be on the list to begin with. If it's the second explanation that's right, then we have to get them returned to the List of Shame".

"PLEASE add Squire Sanders to the list. They're actively seeking a larger New York presence (currently 2 associates). And they certainly suck as much as any of the other firms on the list. Give them the credit they've worked so hard to achieve. Pretty please."

We've also heard, through the grapevine, about a general lack of transparency at SSD concerning associate compensation. So we thought that it might be worth poking around -- especially in view of this recent comment:

A post on the Greedy Ohio website indicates that Squire Sanders has raised first year salaries outside of Ohio. Can anyone confirm or deny? Any add'l information?

Is this correct? Do you have any other information about Squire Sanders & Dempsey? If so, please comment on this post, or email us (subject: "Squire Sanders & Dempsey"). Thanks.

Re: any info on JD salaries [Greedy Ohio]