Gender: Female
Industry: Law
Age: Unknown
Location: Undisclosed

396 matches |  136-140 displayed

1  26 27 28 29 30  80

---

Is it better to be a junior partner or a senior associate?

It's time for that question again--which is better to be?  A junior partner, or a senior associate?  Well, in one area at least, compensation, there is less and less difference. 

According to <a xhref="http://www.law.com/jsp/llf/PubArticleLLF.jsp?id= 1201601151515">this article</a> on Law.com, the recent runup in associate pay has narrowed the gap considerably.  In some cases, due to bonuses and incentives, the top associates can make more than the junior partners. 

Let's face it, the top priority is to protect the senior partners profits.  And with the compensation wars for associates heating up, who is likely left to be holding the bag?  Yep, the junior partners.  Plus, with the downturn in the economy looming, there's likely going to be less money floating around to help pay the junior partners.  In fact, they may get the axe to save the firm money in some certain situations.

What does it all mean?  Well, partner track is looking less and less desirable, I guess.  You may be more valuable to the firm as a top-notch associate than an anonymous junior partner. 

01-30-2008

Post Comment

---

Items of interest

Via <a xhref="http://legalblogwatch.typepad.com/legal_blog_wat ch/2008/01/a-law-firm-chan.html">Legal Blog Watch</a>, a South African firm law firm has implemented a sort of new clock, or schedule: employees can start work at 7 AM and leave at 3:30 PM during the summer months.  Why?  For balance in work and family life.  Also, they got the unexpected bonus of some energy savings.  So, that begs the question: if you could work 7 AM to 3:30, would you?  Or do you stay late to impress the boss? 

Are contingency fee's getting too large?  There's been several stories about Plaintiff's lawyers making out like bandits recently.  In one case, the plaintiffs <a xhref="http://www.overlawyered.com/2008/01/damages_0_se ttlement_attorneys.html">settled for nothing</a>; their attorney's got $9.5 Million.  In another, the court awarded <a xhref="http://www.examiner.com/a-1137716~Freeze_the_fee s_for_Milberg_Weiss.html">$450 odd million to three plaintiff's firms</a>--plus 28 million in expenses.  That's the same as 50 lawyers working 80 hours a week at $500 an hour for 4.5 years without a break.  Think that much work happened?  And Milberg is in trouble with the Feds for illegal kickbacks to the named plaintiff's in class action suits. 

Lastly, there's been a <a xhref="http://www.law.com/jsp/llf/PubArticleLLF.jsp?id= 1200594605875">surge in lateral hires.  </a> Bankruptcy and finance areas are, not surprisingly, the most active, but this is a trend across all areas of practice.  Maybe it's time to start looking at that greener grass in the firm across town!

01-23-2008

Post Comment

---

Judged Jan 16th, 2008

Hi, everyone!  It's been a long time, but the Judge is back.

This week, some of the biggest news was made by big firm Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft, as they <a xhref="http://www.law.com/jsp/law/careercenter/lawArtic leCareerCenter.jsp?id=1200021922205">laid off 35 attorneys</a> in their capital markets and global finance markets.  This move caused widespread <a xhref="http://www.pheedo.com/click.phdo?i=1a8b5019f6b71 815de35b4f7f2f95cf7">coverage</a> and <a xhref="http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2008/01/11/more-on-the- sackings-at-cadwalader/">commentary</a> in the blawgosphere over the <a xhref="http://www.bmacewen.com/blog/archives/2008/01/th e_upcoming_banana.html">impact</a>
 and possible portends this move by one of the big firms may have.  There's no question, it's rough for the financial types right now-- better watch your back.
 
On the bright side, Bankruptcy and restructuring attorneys are <a xhref="http://www.portfolio.com/views/blogs/daily-brief /2008/01/11/whos-benefiting-from-subprime-meltdown"> smiling</a> from the increase in potential work if a recession hits.

Moving to corporate and securities law, The US Supreme Court decided one of it's biggest cases in years this past Tuesday, January 14th.  In <em><a xhref="http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/ 2008/01/06-43.pdf">Stoneridge Investment Partners v. Scientific-Atlanta</a></em>, the Supreme's ruled that <a xhref="http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/uncategorized/court -limits-securities-fraud-law/">investors cannot sue</a> third party businesses for their participation in a "scheme" with public companies to inflate their price.  
 
  What's it all mean?  Two ways to look at it.  It's clear business won--many security fraud lawsuits are toast.  That may well be a boon for them (especially as it limits contracting party risks, thus lowering the costs of business).  But it also means the heyday of multi-billion security fraud lawsuits may soon have a much tougher road to hoe.  In short: good news for the business sector, bad news for the plaintiff's bar. 
 
Lastly, don't try this at home (or in the firm!)  Don't be like the Miami firm who's two investigators <a xhref="http://www.pointoflaw.com/archives/004661.php&qu ot;>paid a Royal Caribbean</a> Cruises employee to get inside info on the range of possible settlement amounts.  It won't turn out well, and might disqualify <a xhref="http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1200418108 210">your firm</a>
 from representing a bunch of clients.  Which hurts.
 
 Thanks, and see you soon!

01-16-2008

Post Comment

---

Weekly Judged - 17th July

Hi, folks.  On August 1, Ann Althouse blogged on the Minneapolis bridge collapse.  She wrote that watching the coverage on Fox News made her think "there must be a news policy not to talk about terrorism except as fed information from the Department of Homeland Security."  However, homeland security does not rely only upon the department; it is the duty of every lawyer to sue for compensation whenever safety is breached.  I also have to say I share the sentiments of David Nieporent, who posted on Overlawyered at 7:01 a.m. on August 1, "The first trial lawyer Google ad soliciting clients relating to the Minneapolis bridge collapse is already up--indeed, was up as of last night.  Makes me proud to be a lawyer."  Really proud. 

Susan Brenner at CYB3RCRIM3 submitted an interesting post on July 29 titled "Identity theft case fails due to coerced confession" about a case of identity theft that fell through after threats were made by a private investigator to force the confessor to complete community service.  The prosecutor advised against the case based on grounds of coerced confession.  The police department closed the case and reached a voluntary arrangement with the confessor, according to which he will ultimately have to…complete community service! 

Anne Reed, at Deliberatio ns, wrote a great post on the peremptory strike on August 1.  "There was a time when courts treated the peremptory strike like fans treat a football star; these days it’s more like the guy who sweeps up the stadium after the game," she said.  The post, titled "The peremptory strike as broom and dustpan," follows the trend of this vital tool of law practice falling out of favor with the courts. 

The July 31 post by Eric Mueller of UNC Law School on Is That Legal? is titled "Justice Department Tips Off Senator Stevens Before Searching His Home!"  Professor Mueller, who also spent nearly nine years as a federal prosecutor, holds that tipping off the attorneys of an individual to be searched defeats the purpose of the search warrant. 

On July 30, at the Legal Profession Blog, Mike Frisch reported on an attorney who was suspended for 90 days by the Maryland Court of Appeals for failing to disclose, while applying for a position in a federal agency, that she was previously employed by her spouse’s law office.  Even though the attorney had disclosed the relationship in other documents, those documents were held to be unrelated to the actual hiring of the attorney.   

Thanks, and see you all next week.

08-17-2007

Post Comment

---

Weekly Judged 20 - july - 2007

More than half of all U.S. presidents have been lawyers.  On July 3, Peter Lattman, on the Wall Street Journal law blog, provided that interesting nugget of information.  I’ve always suspected I had the makings of a president, but…well…I like giving others a chance.  I hope that didn’t give you a heart attack; however, according to the July 3 post on Eric Turkewitz’s New York Personal Injury Law Blog, the painkiller Vioxx may have increased heart risk immediately after people started using the product rather than after 18 months of use as its maker claimed.  Even more interesting is Turkewitz’s July 2 post that claims Apple’s iPhone poses an ethical problem for attorneys.

The July 4 post on Balkinization is devoted to a dissection of Justice Kennedy’s opinion in the Supreme Court’s school integration case.  And the July 4 post on Minor Wisdom asks, appropriately, “So you think you’re smart?”  I’m not sure who that’s meant for; you’ll need to read the post to find out.

The July 3 post on Deliberatio ns discusses a press release which states that in one out of every eight cases, the jury makes the wrong decision!  The July 4 post on IntLawGrrls is on Abigail Adams, a remarkable Revolutionary woman.  It asks readers to “Remember the Ladies” while celebrating the Declaration of Independence.  

07-20-2007

Post Comment

---

396 matches |  136-140 displayed

1  26 27 28 29 30  80

Judged Blog

Blog Title

Blog Description

Blog Date