In-House Counsel

Want To Leave Biglaw And Open Your Own Shop? Be Prepared To Accept A New Arrangement With Your Clients

For in-house counsel, having a hired Biglaw gun and hundreds of other attorneys on demand certainly has its perks.

By  
on

For almost a decade, our hospital has had a large Biglaw firm on retainer as a sort of “Break Glass In Case Of Emergency” option.

We handle most of our legal work in-house. Those times which we find ourselves under-resourced or engaged in a protracted legal dispute, we may hire outside, but usually local counsel. But for those instances when the federal government issues a business-changing rule or we find ourselves in a multistate, multimillion-dollar dispute, we haul out our Biglaw team and let them get to work.

Throughout the life of the engagement, our account has been handled by the same partner. I could go on for pages detailing how great and brilliant she is. From her legal pedigree to her acumen, she is everything you would expect from Biglaw.

But while I was more than happy to pay to have such a tremendous resource on retainer, for me, that was only a part of her value.

The rest came from the letterhead on which her advice came and the assurance of knowing she was backed by hundreds of talented colleagues. Even though I have given Biglaw a hard time before in some of my previous columns, I will be the first to admit there is a real value in the reputation that comes along with their representation.

Which is why when the partner recently informed me she was leaving Biglaw to set up her own shop, I was torn.

On one hand, I was happy to keep our business with her at her new practice. In fact, she was opening it with another one of her partners whom I had worked with on several occasions over the years and also thought quite highly of him as well.

Sponsored

But on the other, I was a bit reluctant to follow knowing in doing so, I would be foregoing my proverbial safety net of having a large Biglaw firm, and its reputation, on retainer.

Sure, if any of my future opposing counsels took a moment to research her and her background, they may appreciate the level of representation we have, but that takes time and does not bring with it the immediate attention a Biglaw firm’s letterhead demands.

Reputation aside, I was also afraid to lose the backing of what seemed like a near infinite supply of other attorneys in her firm. Although I had never met the vast majority of them, it was nice to know that if a large issue were to arise, she could summon 10 attorneys at a moment’s notice. But in her new firm, in such a moment of need, I was capped at her and her partner lest she seek outside help as well.

At the end of the day, I kept some of our business with her new firm, but now utilize her more as a legal consultant than my outside Biglaw gun. As I previously mentioned, I could not bear the thought of severing all ties with her given how big of an asset she has been for us over the past decade, but I also could not justify the potential risk associated with not having a Biglaw firm on retainer.

Thus far the new relationship has worked well, and by all outside measures, her new firm has hit its stride out of the gate.

Sponsored

However, as I authorize payment on her substantially smaller monthly invoices than when she was with her Biglaw firm, I sincerely hope these new arrangements with her old clients is something she had planned for in her business plan.

Stephen R. Williams is in-house counsel with a multi-facility hospital network in the Midwest. His column focuses on a little talked about area of the in-house life, management. You can reach Stephen at [email protected].

Topics

, , , ,