* According to a confidential report from Deloitte, another major firm is set to follow in Heenan Blaikie’s footsteps within the next year. The sheer number of “sorries” after another Canadian Biglaw collapse would be simply terrifying. [Legal Post]
* Dean Demleitner of Washington & Lee Law doesn’t think its 3L reform program is to blame for its decline in rank. It’ll “take five to 10 years for the benefits of the program to become apparent.” Oh, that’s great… for the Class of 2023. [Fortune]
* Here’s another look at the U.S. News rankings. Compare Nebraska and Hofstra. One shot up in rank and tuition increased slightly. The other sank like a stone and tuition skyrocketed. [WSJ Law Blog (sub. req.)]
* For the first time in years, the number of LSAT test takers has increased by a whole 1.1 percent year over year. We can guarantee law schools will fight to the death to enroll those 213 students. [LSAT Blog]
* Judge Judy has never sued anyone, but now she’s suing a personal injury firm for using her picture in its ads. Damages recovered will be donated to scholarships for women. Classy lady. [New York Daily News]
* If the Dewey & LeBoeuf criminal defendants end up going to trial, it’s fair to say the star witnesses in the case will be those who’ve already pleaded guilty — all seven of them. [Am Law Daily]
* Biglaw firms are constantly shrinking in size, leaving many office buildings wide open. Landlords are desperate to put asses in seats, so it’s kind of like law school. [Washington Post]
* “A judicial post is not an hereditary position.” There’s nepotism, and then there’s nepotism, and this Georgia judge is really trying to keep it all in the family. He’s basically ensured that his seat on the bench will go to his daughter. [Daily Report (reg. req.)]
* Let’s keep the rankings party going with an infographic about job rates and median starting salaries. Law schools tied for first place with $160K Biglaw salaries: 21. Not shocked. [U.S. News & World Report]
* The family of Danielle Thomas, the woman who was murdered by indebted law school grad Jason Bohn, is suing the NYPD with claims that the police ignored her calls for help. Sad. [New York Post]
Watching other lawyers in action is fun. Much more fun than watching myself in action, as I have had the opportunity to do on a number of occasions. Such as during my trial training days, when the instructors decided that making us watch clips of ourselves try and conduct a direct examination was valuable. At least they got a kick out of it. But as edifying as watching video of yourself can be, you can learn a whole lot more by watching other lawyers. This lesson was ingrained in me as far back as my 1L “summer clerkship” in New Jersey state court. I remember the clerks gathering around on motion day to check out arguments in front of other judges, mostly to watch the lawyers in action. Ditto for trials.
Of course, once you enter practice — especially in Biglaw, where opportunities to even get out of the office are hard-earned — it becomes even more important to turn opportunities to watch other advocates into learning experiences. Because of the nature of the cases we were handling, many of which involved Biglaw firms of some repute on both sides, there were plenty of opportunities to watch great lawyers in action. Just as frequently, I was able to watch inexperienced lawyers from great firms struggle to get through routine litigation events. I am sure that many other lawyers were forced to endure my inexperienced attempts to handle those events along the way as well. Experienced lawyers just love sitting through a deposition where the questioner spends an hour getting through the educational background of the witness…
People can be so unreliable. Especially if those people are Biglaw litigators in a high-stakes intellectual property dispute. With a scheduling order set months in advance, with no warning as to the volume of disagreement, these lawyers dumped “joint” pretrial filings “so rife with disputes that the documents amount to two separate proposals” and a metric tonne of motions on the court to resolve in two weeks.
Scratch that. With less than two weeks, because they filed all this late. Oh, and they filed a bunch of them redacted and under seal without permission, just for good measure.
If that would make you a very angry judge willing to rip both sides for posterity, you wouldn’t be alone….
Patton Boggs, the once heralded D.C. lobbying firm, has been in trouble for more than a year now. It all started in March 2013 when the firm conducted significant layoffs, and things continued to spiral out of control from there. Additional layoffs followed, flanked by fleeing partners and the closure of the firm’s Newark, New Jersey, office. Profits have plummeted, so much so that Patton Boggs hired the Dewey & LeBoeuf turnaround team of financial advisers Zolfo Cooper and bankruptcy attorney Al Togut. Things certainly aren’t looking very good for the firm, even though managing partner Edward Newberry claims it’s all lollipops and unicorns over there.
Admittedly, first Newberry was afraid, he was petrified. He thought Patton Boggs could never live without cash by its side. But then he spent so many nights thinking how his firm went wrong, and he grew strong. He learned how to get along. His firm will survive — “healthy and profitable” — the same way all floundering firms do: additional layoffs are making their way down the pipeline, and it’s partners’ heads that will roll.
How many partners will have to find new homes? Let’s find out…
Years ago, I heard the frustrated 60-year-old head of an IP department at a big firm complain: “Aren’t there any other IP lawyers at this firm? Why do I have to decide everything?”
The problem, of course, was that his subordinates were on the wrong end of the pushmi-pullyu: They were pulling the senior guy back instead of pushing him forward. My sense is that the average lawyer, either at a firm or in-house, suffers from the same affliction: The average lawyer stands at the . . . er . . . back mouth of the beast.
I recently published a self-assessment test to help you learn whether you were a bad litigator. I’ve cleverly designed another self-assessment test, this one to gauge whether you advance the cause or obstruct it when you work on a legal matter. Here’s the test:
Look at the last email that you sent reporting on a legal development and seeking guidance on the next step forward. How does that email end? For many of you, the last sentence includes one of these two phrases, which prove that you stand at the pullyu end of the beast . . .
* Dewey know who Zachary Warren is? Per this failed firm’s insiders, he seems to be a “man of mystery” who apparently worked in the “bowels of the bureaucracy” that ultimately led to D&L’s demise. [Am Law Daily]
* “You can cross-examine the witness. You can’t cross examine an email.” Defense of the Dewey defendants may be tough when it’s time for trial — and you can bet your ass there’ll be a trial. [New York Law Journal]
* Fear not, friends, because Patton Boggs has found a way to weather the storm. It’s the same way most barely buoyant firms stay afloat: more layoffs. Expect more on this news later today. [National Law Journal]
* Paul Ceglia, the man who claims he owns half of Facebook’s fortunes, can’t toss his criminal charges. Sometimes wheeling and dealing with allegedly faux contracts will land you in the clink. [Bloomberg]
* Because no father wants to see his daughter become “tabloid fodder”: Rachel Canning, the New Jersey schoolgirl who sued her parents, is being “savaged” by the public. Aww, poor little Millennial. [Daily Record]
Ed. note: This is the latest installment in a series of posts on lateral partner moves from Lateral Link’s team of expert contributors. Michael Allen is Managing Principal at Lateral Link, focusing exclusively on partner placements with Am Law 200 clients.
The average tenure for a Biglaw partner is 5.2 years. 5.2 years! If your last lateral move coincided with the death of Michael Jackson, then there is a strong likelihood that you will be on the move again soon. To those outside of the legal world there is a general incredulity as to why attorneys move so often and whether firms are really that different. But alas the Am Law 200 is not a stamp of approval and the quality of Am Law firms greatly varies (and does not linearly correlate to Am Law ranking).
There are a multitude of reasons that attorneys leave and the entirety cannot be covered by a single list, but here are the most popular reasons why attorneys make lateral moves…