Why (and How) Firms Are Pushing Unproductive Partners Out; Associates Are Not Impressed With Their Firms' Tech; NY Is Preparing to Test Jury Trials: The Morning Minute
The news and analysis you need to start your day.
August 25, 2020 at 06:00 AM
5 minute read
Want to get this daily news briefing by email? Here's the sign-up.
WHAT WE'RE WATCHING
SO LONG, PARTNER  – It's never really a good time to be an unproductive law firm partner, but right now it's particularly tough to justify. As Dylan Jackson reports, many firms are looking for ways to "right-size" as economic turmoil stalls profits—and that often means "counseling out" equity and nonequity partners, many of whom are in the hard-hit corporate space. "Those conversations are happening. I know it," said Peter Zeughauser, a law firm management consultant at the Zeughauser Group. "We've talked to some of our clients about it. It's going to pick up steam." And while removing an attorney from a firm's partnership used to require a partner-wide vote and supermajority, legal industry experts said many firms have amended their partnership agreements in recent years to allow for partners to be removed by an executive or management committee vote. Those firms are now taking advantage of that streamlined process.
TECH SUPPORT GROUP – Given how trying this year has been for lawyers (and everyone else), it was a pleasant surprise to see how positive many of the responses to The American Lawyer's 2020 Midlevel Associates Survey were. But it wasn't all sunshine and five-star reviews. One area where many young lawyers clearly felt their firms fell short was technology—especially when it comes to supporting remote work. As Samantha Stokes reports, technology was mentioned 169 times in response to open-ended questions—and in every instance, midlevel associates said they wish their firms were doing better in that department. ""Having constant laptop issues is frankly embarrassing," said one third-year associate in San Diego, adding "It also does make you feel devalued when you're cranking out long hours and have a technical problem that's completely out of your hands, only to get at best a Band-Aid solution."
PILOT SEASON - Plans to hold in-person jury trials in New York's federal courts this autumn have been met with the type of enthusiasm typically reserved for root canals, but that's not stopping New York state courts from pressing forward with their own trials—on a trial basis. As Ryan Tarinelli reports, New York's chief judge said yesterday that a number of jury trials have been scheduled to start next month on a "pilot basis" in certain parts of the state. "We will proceed carefully, of course, closely monitoring all aspects of these trials in order to ensure compliance with health and safety protocols and refine our practices for safely selecting and seating jurors," said Chief Judge Janet DiFiore in a video statement. Her comments came days after state lawmakers prodded Chief Administrative Judge Lawrence Marks with questions and concerns about the court system's COVID-19 precautions.
EDITOR'S PICKS
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 AllGOP Now Holds FTC Gavel, but Dems Signal They'll Be a Rowdy Minority
6 minute read'Serious Legal Errors'?: Rival League May Appeal Following Dismissal of Soccer Antitrust Case
6 minute read28 Firms Supporting Retired Barnes & Thornburg Litigator in Georgia Supreme Court Malpractice Case
7 minute readHow Some Elite Law Firms Are Growing Equity Partner Ranks Faster Than Others
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Thursday Newspaper
- 2Public Notices/Calendars
- 3Judicial Ethics Opinion 24-117
- 4Rejuvenation of a Sharp Employer Non-Compete Tool: Delaware Supreme Court Reinvigorates the Employee Choice Doctrine
- 5Mastering Litigation in New York’s Commercial Division Part V, Leave It to the Experts: Expert Discovery in the New York Commercial Division
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