Top Kirkland partners see cuts to equity shares
Sources describe equity reallocation as "bloodbath" for senior litigators
December 18, 2016 at 03:58 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
In a compensation shakeup, Kirkland & Ellis has changed its framework for allocating equity partner profits, while cutting the shares of its top partners and others.
Kirkland's litigation partners were particularly hard hit, with some senior partners seeing their shares slashed significantly, according to three sources familiar with the firm's move.
"There's been a reallocation of equity from litigation to corporate and maybe bankruptcy," said one former partner who has spoken with current Kirkland partners. "For the litigators, I heard it was a bloodbath."
The partner added: "The general sense is that this is the most recent manifestation of the corporate people taking over the firm." (Another source also used the term "bloodbath" to describe the impact on the litigation ranks.)
Kirkland chairman Jeffrey Hammes is a corporate lawyer who had a strong private equity practice before he took the top leadership post in 2009. The firm's private equity, M&A and bankruptcy practices have been extremely profitable, playing a major role in boosting Kirkland's profits per partner to $3.6m (£2.9m) last year, the fifth highest on the Am Law 100.
Kirkland reallocates its equity every two years, and management informed partners of the latest changes to their individual allocations earlier this month. Before this change, a Kirkland equity partner would receive an allotment of shares ranging from 10 to 80. Under the new system, the top level has been lowered to 75 shares and the bottom tier has dropped to 8.5 shares. The changes go into effect on 1 February, when Kirkland's financial year begins.
The firm did not respond to requests for comment.
One possible reason for the shift downward is the soaring value of a Kirkland share. This year the value is roughly $148,000 (£119,000), according to one source, which means partners with 80 shares will earn $11.8m (£9.5m). If the share value stayed flat next year, top partners would see their cut slip to a still-enviable $11.1m (£8.9m) under the new allocation.
One former partner called the lowering of the top share allocation "politically sensible", given the large sums that top partners are making.
Another former partner said he wasn't surprised that litigators weren't faring well under the new allocations. Kirkland litigators increasingly feel that their corporate partners view them as service partners, the partner said.
But the firm still appears to value star litigators. Kirkland this year made a big investment by bringing in Supreme Court advocate Paul Clement and his entire 17-lawyer firm in Washington DC. It's not clear if the addition of Clement and his group was a factor in management's decision to trim shares from other litigation partners.
One of the firm's top litigators, Mark Filip, who is credited with engineering the Clement deal, is considered a possible successor to Hammes when his term expires in two years. Another leading candidate for that spot is private equity partner Jon Ballis.
The firm's decision to rejig partner shares further expands Kirkland's already wide 8:1 compensation ratio for equity partners. Under the new system, the ratio will approach 9:1. This structure has given Kirkland an edge in recruiting lateral partners from other firms, where compensation ratios are more compressed and the top partners may make much less.
Some elite New York firms, for example, are not so stratified and use a compensation ratio that is closer to 3:1. Earlier this month, Kirkland lured promising young M&A partner Jonathan Davis, from Cravath Swaine & Moore.
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
© 2025 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 AllLawsuit Against Major Food Brands Could Be Sign of Emerging Litigation Over Processed Foods
3 minute readGovernment Attorneys Face Reassignment, Rescinded Job Offers in First Days of Trump Administration
4 minute readLaw Firm Sued for $35 Million Over Alleged Role in Acquisition Deal Collapse
3 minute read4th Circuit Upholds Virginia Law Restricting Online Court Records Access
3 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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