More Partner Promotions Don't Signal an Easier Partnership Path: The Morning Minute
The news and analysis you need to start your day.
November 22, 2021 at 06:00 AM
6 minute read
Law Firm Partners
Want to get this daily news briefing by email? Here's the sign-up.
|
WHAT WE'RE WATCHING
MADE UP PARTNERS - Record financial years and a tight talent market are helping to drive many Big Law firms to promote record partnership classes this year. But ALM's recent 2021 New Partners Survey found that the partnership track at many firms has gotten longer in recent years. So what's the truth? Well, both things, actually. As Law.com's Dylan Jackson reports, it all comes down to how you define "partner." "You have to remember most of these promotions are into salary partner not equity partner," legal consultant Brad Hildebrandt noted to Jackson. "There is a realization that firms haven't been doing enough promotion over the last 10 years. But the track to equity partnership I don't think is getting any shorter. It's still hard." As we've written in this space before, swelling nonequity ranks are not a great look for the many firms that use that tier as a parking lot for attorneys who are basically "partners" in name only. Even so, that tag can still serve an important function. "Giving someone the title of 'partner' is the firm's 'Good Housekeeping seal of approval'—a statement to the market that this person has the skills to handle important matters for clients in a manner consistent with the brand of the firm (e.g., fast, innovative, scholarly, aggressive or whatever other attribute is associated with the firm's brand)," Paul T. Denis, a former AmLaw 100 partner and current legal market analyst, recently told Law.com.
SPACE LAUNCHES - Not only are law firm offices not going away, they're multiplying! Even after the rush to Salt Lake City this fall, and a spate of openings this month from Virginia to Kansas City and the San Francisco Bay, law firm leaders told Law.com's Andrew Maloney they will likely continue to grow their footprint in the states next year and beyond. Although the pandemic is still complicating merger talks and has put many firmwide office returns on hold, a recent survey by Thomson Reuters and the Georgetown Law Center on Ethics and the Legal Profession found that "[f]ully one-half of firm business leaders say they definitely or probably will seek to expand into new domestic markets" in the near future. Meanwhile, the physical layout of all these new offices will be interesting to monitor. As Law.com's Jessie Yount reports, the hybrid arrangement many firms have opted for presents the most challenging and dynamic scenario to management teams. As a result, some firms are shying away from the idea of office-sharing or hoteling despite the fact that many are expected to offer some degree of work from home, according to Kevin Bender, Southern California-based managing director at JLL. Regardless, Stephen Bay, a vice chairman in Los Angeles at CBRE, confirmed what we recently noted: smart law firm leaders are looking for innovative ways to make offices a place people actually want to come to, at least part-time. As he told Yount: "The law firm mantra is: I've got to design space that draws people in."
HARD LESSON - Zhangmen Education Inc., a China-based online tutoring portal, and other defendants were hit with a securities class action Friday in New York Southern District Court in connection with the company's initial public offering in June 2021. The suit, which also names underwriters of Zhangmen's IPO, accuses the defendants of concealing facts indicating that China's government was preparing a crackdown on the private tutoring industry. The suit is backed by Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd and Johnson Fistel LLP. Counsel have not yet appeared for the defendants. The case is 1:21-cv-09634, Banerjee v. Zhangmen Education Inc. et al. Stay up on the latest deals and litigation with the new Law.com Radar.
|
EDITOR'S PICKS
'More Heads Chasing Less Work': What Will Happen When Law Firm Demand Dips?
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllHow I Made Partner: 'Persevere Through the Challenging Times,' Says Jennifer Daglio of Hunton Andrews Kurth
How I Made Partner: 'It’s Valuable to Get Comfortable Being Uncomfortable,' Says Ryan Ulloa of White & Case
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Cravath Elevates 7 to Partnership, Up From Last Year
- 2Kline & Specter Hit With Lawsuit From Another Former Associate
- 3USPTO Director Kathi Vidal Announces Resignation Ahead of Administration Change
- 4As Gen AI Acceptance Grows, Lawyers Race to Mitigate Risks
- 5Decisions Have 'Real-Life Consequences': Juvenile Court Judge Considered for Appellate Bench
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250