Law Firms Pivot as IPO Flow Slows: The Morning Minute
The news and analysis you need to start your day.
July 15, 2022 at 06:00 AM
5 minute read
Initial Public Offerings
Want to get this daily news briefing by email? Here's the sign-up.
|
WHAT WE'RE WATCHING
EXPANDED OFFERINGS - No IPOs? No problem. As initial public offerings come to a near-standstill, Silicon Valley's largest corporate law firms are experiencing a dip in productivity. While the extent of that dip has yet to bear out, capital markets lawyers told Law.com's Jessie Yount that the evolution of their base of tech and life sciences clients is leading to more relationship advisory work from late-stage private companies and newly public companies that could curb the impact of macroeconomic conditions. The nature of the work in capital markets practices is already shifting, as late-stage companies explore financing options and newly public companies navigate new responsibilities. These issues are spurring demand for advisory work, as clients seek "perspectives on how to structure financings without a recap or washout that wipes out prior investors," aid Jon Avina, a capital markets partner at Cooley. Beyond financings, several partners noted they recently wrapped the busiest time period of the year for counsel on SEC reporting. Others pointed to newly public companies that will continue to need legal guidance. "Given the significant number of newly public companies as a result of several active years in capital markets, we're spending a lot of time giving advice to [those clients]," said Allison Spinner, head of the corporate department at Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati.
TOO BIG TO FAIL? - For the gaggle of large law firms moving into smaller markets, the value proposition is clear: the ability to tap into enticing talent, be closer to valuable clients and add offices with lower overhead costs. But, as we explore in the latest Law.com Trendspotter column, while Big Law firms often make a big splash when they first enter these locales, staying power is much harder to establish. For firms with higher overhead in larger markets, making the economics work in the smaller ones can be complicated—all the more so with a potential recession looming. Meanwhile, the prospect of competing with homegrown firms in these markets is hardly a slam dunk either. >> I'm interested to hear from you: What are the keys to success for large law firms entering smaller markets? On the flipside, how can the established regional firms in those markets hold their own? Let me know at [email protected].
WHO GOT THE WORK?℠ - Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz partner John S. Hicks has entered an appearance for Nissan USA in a pending consumer class action. The case, filed May 16 in Tennessee Middle District Court by Milberg Coleman Bryson Phillips Grossman; Berger Montague; Pearson Simon & Warshaw and other plaintiffs firms, accuses Nissan of failing to disclose that the 'xtronic continuously variable transmission' installed in 2017-2018 Nissan Altimas and 2018-2019 Nissan Sentras was defective. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Aleta A. Trauger, is 3:22-cv-00354, Martinez et al v. Nissan North America Inc. >> Read the filing on Law.com Radar and check out the most recent edition of Law.com's Who Got the Work?℠ column to find out which law firms and lawyers are being brought in to handle key cases and close major deals for their clients.
ON THE RADAR - Candy company Mars Inc. was hit with a consumer class action Thursday in California Northern District Court alleging that the company fails to warn customers about a harmful additive in its Skittles candies. The suit, backed by Bursor & Fisher, centers on the chemical titanium dioxide, or TiO2, a coloring agent that has been banned as a food additive by the European Commission. Though TiO2 has not been banned in the United States, the suit claims that Mars misled the public by continuing use of TiO2 after suggesting in 2016 that it would remove the ingredient from its confectionary products. Counsel have not yet appeared for the defendant. The case is 4:22-cv-04145, Thames v. Mars, Inc. Stay up on the latest deals and litigation with the new Law.com Radar.
|
EDITOR'S PICKS
Inside Track: Musk Might Have Disdain for Lawyers, But He Needs Them Now By Greg Andrews |
Meet the Firm Leader Paying Bonuses for Weekend Work By Dan Roe |
Federal Judge Clears Way for Student's Defamation Lawsuit Against Shenandoah University By Allison Dunn |
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 All'The Progression Is Not Natural': As IPOs Surge in India, Law Firms Try to Keep Up
Freshfields Misses Out as HSF, Latham and Kirkland Take on Marex New York IPO
3 minute readSkadden, Jia Yuan to Help Launch Hong Kong's First Billion-Dollar IPO of 2023
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
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