What Are Dentons and Greenberg Traurig Arguing About, Anyway?
Dentons says it wants to be the first "national" law firm. Greenberg Traurig says there already is one—and you're looking at it. Now Greenberg executive chairman Richard Rosenbaum is calling for a truce.
October 18, 2019 at 03:32 PM
4 minute read
What does it mean to be a "national" law firm?
Dentons global chairman Joe Andrew and Greenberg Traurig executive chairman Richard Rosenbaum have been hashing out the question in dueling letters published in The American Lawyer this week, each leader implicitly—or not-so-implicitly—critiquing the other.
The claim that no truly "national" U.S. law firms yet exist was central to Dentons' splashy announcement two weeks ago unveiling its latest growth strategy. The global giant is targeting combinations with existing firms all across the U.S. to dramatically increase its American footprint.
Rosenbaum—whose firm already boasts 31 U.S. offices, more than any of its rivals—disagreed. He described Greenberg Traurig's "march" from Miami, through Florida, to New York and then across the rest of the nation that started in 1984.
"We have done it as one unified firm," he said in his letter Tuesday, which did not name Dentons but left no doubt as to whom he was referring.
Dentons leadership has been explicit about its "dual partnership" model for adding new constituent firms in the U.S. Stopping short of full integration, Dentons argues, avoids the risk and time expenditures that lateral growth or complete mergers would entail.
"Lawyers are able to protect and promote the culture of their firms while also becoming partners in a national partnership that incentivizes them to work collaboratively and has a single global conflict policy, national training and recruiting programs, one set of engagement terms, one know-your-client policy and one bill, all while partners share a commitment to quality and ethics that puts clients first," Andrew said in his response to Rosenbaum.
Andrew added that it has taken 35 years for Greenberg to assume its current geographic profile, suggesting that his firm's current and future clients want wider coverage across the country now. He cited the Russell 3000, the index of the 3,000 largest publicly traded companies in the U.S., the vast majority of which sit outside the country's 10 largest law markets.
While the Big Four, which all have at least 79 offices across the country, are serving these countries on a truly national scale, no law firm is doing so, at least not yet, Andrew argued.
In stating that Greenberg is a "unified" firm, Rosenbaum implicitly took aim at the perceived looseness of the Dentons model.
"This is a 'people' profession. We are not selling cars or software," he said. "People must be carefully selected and make their selections, know and trust each other and become well-integrated and aligned. These things don't happen overnight."
Andrew's answer: "People are different in different cultures and places."
"Trying to do the 'hard work' of making every office the same is like setting up a franchise where you want the hamburger to always be the same, rather than providing the best local cuisine that is appropriate for the place," he added.
While defending a more traditional growth model, Rosenbaum is hardly a hidebound traditionalist. Earlier this year, when Greenberg announced its own innovation-focused subsidiary, he likened the new venture, Recurve, to Uber and Airbnb, describing it as a platform where law firms and their clients can come together with providers of legal tech services, nimble staffing and real estate experts, artificial intelligence purveyors, and more.
And in a letter to The American Lawyer on Thursday night that began "Don't shoot the messenger," he said it was time to end the discussion.
"As we are all seeing enough politics on television (are you or are you not going to raise taxes on the middle class?), we have now presented the facts, enough said. Clients and talent can determine which ring true," Rosenbaum wrote. "But let's stay cool and avoid the personal attacks, they are beneath you, even when you have no other answers. I wish you well."
|Read More
Greenberg Traurig Chair Takes Aim at What Makes a Truly National Firm
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 AllMeet the Finalists: The American Lawyer's Young Lawyers of The Year
Latham Departures Continue as Capital Markets Partner Joins Greenberg Traurig
2 minute readHSF's American Dream: What Will a U.S. Merger Mean For its Asia Practice?
Trending Stories
- 1Judicial Ethics Opinion 24-59
- 2The American Lawyer Names Industry Award Winners
- 3Regulatory Upheaval Is Coming. How Businesses Prepare and Respond Will Separate Winners and Losers
- 4Cravath Elevates 7 to Partnership, Up From Last Year
- 5Kline & Specter Hit With Lawsuit From Another Former Associate
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