Group items tagged

# Posted by tng - 2 days, 1 hour, 26 minutes ago Yawn, another lame ABA article. Those 4800 law students should count themselves lucky that they had a summer associate position and the potential for a job offer (not to forget the 2k a week in compensation)... because there were another approximately 30,000 law students who did not win the "summer associate lottery" and work for a firm and get paid. Those some odd 30,000 other law students had to scrambled, beg, and plea for whatever unpaid internship they could find and take on another…say 20k in debt so they could live this past summer. Practically all of those 30,000 law students never had a the hopeful chance that they would get some offer of employment for a job that actually will enable them to pay off those student loans and no live in debt slavery. No, those other 30,000 law students now get to start their 3rd year heavily in debt with practically zero job prospects when they graduate. Time for law students to look for non-legal jobs…they better cruise those undergraduate job fairs. Flag this comment # Posted by JN - 1 day, 18 hours, 10 minutes ago Once again, I hope the clients of these biglaw firms realize what their legal bills are paying for. Is it ridiculous to encourage people making 2000 per week to be able to afford their own lunch? C'mon. The fact that this business model didn't die long ago amazes me. Flag this comment # Posted by annie - 4 hours, 9 minutes ago I would take my summer associate job where I worked with seven seasoned attorneys for the summer with little perks - didn't expect them - and lots of work over these cushy summer internships. I learned a lot that summer and the next fall, they continued to send me work at law school at a pretty decent hourly wage. Anyway, my apparent lack of entitlement made it possible for me to find my own clients and open a little office when I was laid off my first law job. I now work for a small firm. And I enjoyed a nice pean

# Posted by tng - 2 days, 1 hour, 26 minutes ago Yawn, another lame ABA article. Those 4800 law students should count themselves lucky that they had a summer associate position and the potential for a job offer (not to forget the 2k a week in compensation)... because there were another approximately 30,000 law students who did not win the "summer associate lottery" and work for a firm and get paid. Those some odd 30,000 other law students had to scrambled, beg, and plea for whatever unpaid internship they could find and take on another…say 20k in debt so they could live this past summer. Practically all of those 30,000 law students never had a the hopeful chance that they would get some offer of employment for a job that actually will enable them to pay off those student loans and no live in debt slavery. No, those other 30,000 law students now get to start their 3rd year heavily in debt with practically zero job prospects when they graduate. Time for law students to look for non-legal jobs…they better cruise those undergraduate job fairs. Flag this comment # Posted by JN - 1 day, 18 hours, 10 minutes ago Once again, I hope the clients of these biglaw firms realize what their legal bills are paying for. Is it ridiculous to encourage people making 2000 per week to be able to afford their own lunch? C'mon. The fact that this business model didn't die long ago amazes me. Flag this comment # Posted by annie - 4 hours, 9 minutes ago I would take my summer associate job where I worked with seven seasoned attorneys for the summer with little perks - didn't expect them - and lots of work over these cushy summer internships. I learned a lot that summer and the next fall, they continued to send me work at law school at a pretty decent hourly wage. Anyway, my apparent lack of entitlement made it possible for me to find my own clients and open a little office when I was laid off my first law job. I now work for a small firm. And I enjoyed a nice pean

Suits for Unpaid Legal Fees in Top 10 for Stupidity, Lawyer Says Posted Sep 30, 2009, 07:06 am CDT By Debra Cassens Weiss A lawyer who represents a company sued for unpaid legal fees says such claims aren't a good idea. Lawyer Warren Trazenfeld represents Whitney Information Network, sued by the Florida law firm Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler, allegedly for failing to pay more than $400,000 in legal bills, the Daily Business Review reports. Trazenfeld told the publication he is planning to file a malpractice counterclaim. Suing a client is "one of the top 10 stupidest things a lawyer can do," he said. The story asserts the case is one of a growing number of instances in which law firms are suing clients for unpaid bills. "Most clients think the best defense is a good offense, and there's no better offense than a counterclaim for legal malpractice," Trazenfeld told the Daily Business Review. Another law firm that recently filed suit for unpaid fees is Ruden McClosky, the story says. Last week the firm filed suit claiming nearly $40,000 in unpaid legal bills by the father of retired pro quarterback Bernie Kosar. Ruden managing director Carl Schuster acknowledged that some malpractice claims have merit, but said clients often file them as a settlement tool in fee cases. "They obviously haven't paid the bill so that's not a defense, so they have to think up a defense," he told the Daily Business Review.

[Uh, also in the top 10 would be allowing a client to run up a $400,000 tab in these troubled times.] Suits for Unpaid Legal Fees in Top 10 for Stupidity, Lawyer Says Posted Sep 30, 2009, 07:06 am CDT By Debra Cassens Weiss A lawyer who represents a company sued for unpaid legal fees says such claims aren't a good idea. Lawyer Warren Trazenfeld represents Whitney Information Network, sued by the Florida law firm Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler, allegedly for failing to pay more than $400,000 in legal bills, the Daily Business Review reports. Trazenfeld told the publication he is planning to file a malpractice counterclaim. Suing a client is "one of the top 10 stupidest things a lawyer can do," he said. The story asserts the case is one of a growing number of instances in which law firms are suing clients for unpaid bills. "Most clients think the best defense is a good offense, and there's no better offense than a counterclaim for legal malpractice," Trazenfeld told the Daily Business Review. Another law firm that recently filed suit for unpaid fees is Ruden McClosky, the story says. Last week the firm filed suit claiming nearly $40,000 in unpaid legal bills by the father of retired pro quarterback Bernie Kosar. Ruden managing director Carl Schuster acknowledged that some malpractice claims have merit, but said clients often file them as a settlement tool in fee cases. "They obviously haven't paid the bill so that's not a defense, so they have to think up a defense," he told the Daily Business Review.

The report indicated economic outlooks do not look good and Bockman and Sirotnik agreed based on the reactions of purchasing managers.

The report indicated economic outlooks do not look good and Bockman and Sirotnik agreed based on the reactions of purchasing managers.

Citigroup GC Has No Sympathy for Law Firms Seeking Premium Fees Posted Sep 28, 2009, 08:52 am CDT By Debra Cassens Weiss The general counsel for Citigroup says his in-house legal department has been battered by the economic downturn, leaving him with little sympathy for law firm arguments for premium fees. General counsel Michael Helfer, a panelist at an event sponsored by Bisnow, said Citigroup's in-house legal department has shrunk by about 300 employees over the last few years, many of them felled by layoffs, according to the Washingtonian's Capital Comment Blog. Compensation for the lawyers who are left has been cut by up to 60 percent. In such an environment, "The amount of sympathy I have for the argument that $1,000 an hour is a reasonable rate ... is nil," Helfer said, according to the blog account. Law firms aiming to please general counsel such as Helfer are agreeing to charge alternative fees. Panelists told of changes. The percentage of revenue from alternative billing is about 10 percent at Arent Fox, about 15 percent to 20 percent at Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld, and about 5 percent to 10 percent at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom. Even as law firms move to alternative fees, they hope to maintain partner profits that can average more than $1 million a partner. Akin Gump chairman Bruce McLean acknowledged it won't be easy, the blog says. "It's a big challenge," said McLean. "We're not so good at that yet."

[The new buzzword shall be "alternative fees" ... uh, I think "alternative" here means "lower".] Citigroup GC Has No Sympathy for Law Firms Seeking Premium Fees Posted Sep 28, 2009, 08:52 am CDT By Debra Cassens Weiss The general counsel for Citigroup says his in-house legal department has been battered by the economic downturn, leaving him with little sympathy for law firm arguments for premium fees. General counsel Michael Helfer, a panelist at an event sponsored by Bisnow, said Citigroup's in-house legal department has shrunk by about 300 employees over the last few years, many of them felled by layoffs, according to the Washingtonian's Capital Comment Blog. Compensation for the lawyers who are left has been cut by up to 60 percent. In such an environment, "The amount of sympathy I have for the argument that $1,000 an hour is a reasonable rate ... is nil," Helfer said, according to the blog account. Law firms aiming to please general counsel such as Helfer are agreeing to charge alternative fees. Panelists told of changes. The percentage of revenue from alternative billing is about 10 percent at Arent Fox, about 15 percent to 20 percent at Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld, and about 5 percent to 10 percent at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom. Even as law firms move to alternative fees, they hope to maintain partner profits that can average more than $1 million a partner. Akin Gump chairman Bruce McLean acknowledged it won't be easy, the blog says. "It's a big challenge," said McLean. "We're not so good at that yet."

Caravaggio, who somehow found time to paint when he wasn't brawling, scandalizing pooh-bahs, chasing women (and men), murdering a tennis opponent with a dagger to the groin, fleeing police assassins or getting his face mutilated by one of his many enemies, has bumped him from his perch.

A survey of more than 50 law firms conducted by the PricewaterhouseCoopers accounting firm found that legal work and law firm profits increased during a three-month period that ended on July 31, in part due to internal cost-cutting by the partnerships, reports the Law Society Gazette. Although certain practice areas, such as real estate, still are struggling, others, such as corporate and mergers and acquisitions, are recovering, David Thurkettle tells the British legal publication. He is a senior director in PwC's professional partnerships group. "Firms have weathered the storm in the main. They have got through the cost and the financial pain, and are now reaping the rewards," he says of the survey results, which he believes are probably representative of the situation at other law firms, too. "The view here is that, if you took a basket of different law firms, most of them are over the worst in terms of activity levels."

"Since we only employ senior-associate and partner-level attorneys, our clients do not pay to train inexperienced young attorneys," the website states.