As we mentioned in Non-Sequiturs last night, JPMorgan Chase is getting out of the student loan business. The bank will stop accepting new student loan applications this October.
A spokesperson for the bank said: “Students and their families are increasingly relying on government-backed loans rather than private student loans, and as a result the market has declined by 75% in the last five years.”
My friends, this is a bad sign. JPM is just a minor player in the student loan game, but the fact that they don’t think lending money to students for education is a good business anymore should make us worried. The fact that the federal government has crowded out this private lender is not good.
It means that we’re one step closer to the whole student loan bubble bursting…
I mean suing the bejeezus out of Goldman Sachs. And likely a number of other high-profile financial players.
Not over something mundane like the whole “taking part in collapsing the global economy” thing. That’s been discussed to death. I’m talking about something much more concrete and, apparently, easy to establish.
People sometimes derisively call bankers pirates, but it turns out they may be right. Software pirates, at least.
In this month’s issue of Vanity Fair, Michael Lewis looks at the prosecution of former Goldman Sachs programmer Sergey Aleynikov. In addition to detailing the outsized influence large banks have over the justice system and the ease with which the system can break down when the facts of a case are too complex for lay jurors, Lewis uncovers a small nugget that he doesn’t really pursue, but that could be trouble for Wall Street….
At the end of the day, he probably could have done the right thing. But he chose to play the game. It didn’t leave me feeling good about Wall Street.
– Evelyn Linares, a 61-year-old principal who served as a juror in the Fabrice Tourre civil fraud trial, sharing her feelings about Fabulous Fab — he “disappointed” her — after the verdict was announced.
* When it comes to the U.S. Congress — especially the current one, said to be the least productive and least popular in history — and federal lawmaking, “action isn’t the same as accomplishment.” [Boston Globe]
* The Department of Justice won’t seek the death penalty against Edward Snowden, but only because the crime he’s charged with doesn’t carry that kind of punishment as an option. But oh, Eric Holder can wish. [CNN]
* Sorry to burst your bubble, but Biglaw as we know it is on a respirator, so be prepared to recite its last rites. The New Republic’s Noam Scheiber responds to the critics of last week’s hard-hitting piece. [New Republic]
* The grass isn’t greener on the other side right now. Revenue per lawyer rose at Biglaw firms in 2012 (up 8.5 percent), but small firms struggled (with RPL down 8.1 percent). Ouch. [National Law Journal]
* Let me Google that for you: Hot new technology startups have been looking to lawyers who hail from the innovative internet company’s ranks when staffing their own legal departments. [The Recorder]
* If you’re wondering why more financial crimes haven’t been prosecuted since the Wall Street meltdown of 2008, it’s probably because they’re too just difficult for most juries to understand. Comforting. [NPR]
* In a recent interview having to do with all of the problems that law schools are currently facing, from shrinkage to joblessness, Professor Paul Campos sat down to politely say, “Told ya so.” [Denver Post]
“For example, on or about July 29, 2009, a recently hired SAC PM (the ‘New PM’) sent an instant message to [Steve Cohen] and relayed that, due to some ‘recent research,’ the New PM planned to short Nokia when he started work 10 days later. The New PM apologized for being ‘cryptic’ but noted that the head of SAC compliance ‘was giving me Rules 101 yesterday – so I won’t be saying much[.] [T]oo scary.’”
Possibly the weirdest part here is that new hires got compliance lectures two weeks before they showed up at the firm? But maybe not; the DOJ takes a pretty dim view of SAC’s hiring process generally, and if you believe the DOJ that SAC’s main hiring criterion was “is good at insider trading,” then you could imagine the need for a little pre-start-date warning in email etiquette:
If you are black in America, you are not supposed to fight back. Ever. For any reason. Sorry.
If you are white, you can do whatever you want, and if you are Hispanic, you can defend yourself as long as you are defending yourself against a black man. But if you are black, you just need to sit there and take it. Or else you’ll get in trouble. You’ll get shot or arrested. The full force of the police state will be brought down upon you.
That’s the lesson from this weekend. George Zimmerman’s acquittal has gotten all the attention (and I’ve said all I need to say about that), but in New York City this weekend there was another story about the casual, every day, racist junk that black people have to deal with all the time. But this time the black guy defended himself and so, of course, the black guy got arrested…
The thing is that when you run a brokerage company and it goes and loses $1bn of customer money, the CFTC really ought to charge you with “fail[ing] to supervise diligently the activities of [your] officers, employees, and agents,” no? At least? There are various views of Jon Corzine’s role in MF Global’s efforts to misplace a billion dollars – did he intentionally misuse customer funds? was he aggressive but above-board? just confused? – but no one is going around saying “oh, yeah, Corzine was really on the ball there protecting customer money.” You’re just irreducibly not supposed to lose a billion dollars in customer money, and if you do, “failure to supervise diligently” is pretty much the kindest possible description…
– Judge José A. Cabranes, writing for a three-judge panel of the Second Circuit in upholding the insider trading convictions of former hedge fund manager Raj Rajaratnam. On appeal, Rajaratnam unsuccessfully argued that federal prosecutors obtained a wiretap warrant with a “reckless disregard for the truth.” Rajaratnam will serve the remainder of his 11-year sentence.
(If you’re interested, continue reading for the Second Circuit’s opinion.)
The SEC needs more resources to protect investors. It’s grossly undercapitalized and it doesn’t have money to hire the right people. Basically it’s a training ground, by the time people are qualified they leave and work for private firms.
They didn’t catch me because the whistleblower, Harry Markopolos, was leading them down the wrong alley. He was an idiot.
Are partners just puppets of their law firms’ clients?
Mr. Armstrong sat at the controls of Morgan Stanley, which employed and paid Blank Rome millions of dollars in fees, thus allowing Blank Rome to be the ultimate ‘puppet master,’ as Blank Rome could control Ms. Armstrong’s divorce litigation in a manner designed to protect Morgan Stanley.
– Jonathan Sack, counsel to Kristina Armstrong, in a malpractice lawsuit that Armstrong just filed against her former divorce lawyers at Blank Rome.
(More about Armstrong’s allegations, after the jump.)
If you are considering a virtual law practice, you know that many of today’s solo firms started that way. But why are established, multi-attorney law firms going virtual?
Many small firms are successfully moving part—or even all—of their practice to a virtual setting. This even includes multi-jurisdictional practice spanning several states and practice areas, although solo and small partnerships are still the largest adopters of virtual law.
Can you do the same? The new article Mobile in Practice, Virtual by Design from author Jared Correia, Esq., explores how mobile technology bring real-life benefits to a small law firm. Read this new article—the next in Thomson Reuters’ Independent Thinking series for small firms—to explore how a mobile practice:
Reduces malpractice risk
Enables you to gather the best attorneys to fit the firm, regardless of each person’s geographic location
Leverages mobile devices and cloud technology to enable on-the-spot client and prospect communication
Transitioning in-house is something many (if not most) firm lawyers find themselves considering at some point. For many, it’s the first step in their career that isn’t simply a function of picking the best option available based on a ranking system.
Unknown territory feels high-risk, and can have the effect of steering many of us towards the well-greased channels into large, established companies.
For those who may be open to something more entrepreneurial, there is far less information available. No recruiter is calling every week with offers and details.
In sponsorship with Betterment, ATL and David Lat will moderate a panel about life in-house and we’ll hear from GCs at Birchbox, Gawker Media, Squarespace, Bonobos, and Betterment. Drinks, snacks, networking, and a great time guaranteed. Invite your colleagues, but RSVP fast, as space is limited.
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 seven years. You can reach them by email: email@example.com.
It’s that time of year again when JDs are starting to apply for 2L summer jobs and 2L summers are deciding which practice area to focus on.
For those JDs with an interest in potentially lateraling to or transferring to Asia in the future, please feel free to reach out to Kinney for advice on firm choices, interviewing and practice choices, relating to future marketability in Asia, or for a general discussion on your particular Asia markets of interest. This is of course a free of cost service for those who some years in the future may be our future industry contacts or perhaps even clients.
For some years now Kinney’s Asia head, Evan Jowers, has been formally advising Harvard Law students with such questions, as the Asia expert in Harvard Law’s “Ask The Experts Market Program” each summer and fall, with podcasts and scheduled phone calls. This has been an enjoyable and productive experience for all involved.