After Bribery Bust, Willkie Is Latest Firm to Face Vacuum in Leadership
What does Gordon Caplan's ouster mean for management of the Wall Street firm? And what are the lessons for other firms facing a sudden shakeup at the top?
March 14, 2019 at 05:00 PM
4 minute read
No law firm wants to find itself with a sudden gap in its leadership, as Willkie Farr & Gallagher did this week.
But the news that Gordon Caplan was placed on leave from the firm—following a federal indictment alleging that he paid $75,000 to have his daughter's college test score fixed—is one more reminder of the singular nature of firms, where lofty titles carry different weight at different shops. In the end, the long-term effect of any disruption on the Wall Street firm could be muted.
Caplan, a top dealmaker at Willkie, joined the firm's executive committee and became co-chairman in February 2016. But his position was secondary to the firm's two chairmen, Thomas Cerabino and Steven Gartner, who have been leading the firm since the start of 2010, following 21 months as vice co-chairmen.
In a November 2016 interview with Forbes, after Caplan took on the co-chair title, Cerabino explained that he and Gartner lead the firm's 10-member executive committee and that “ultimately” the two are “responsible for directing the firm.” In recent years, it's Gartner who has served as the public voice of the firm.
“The role and responsibility of different types of leader varies very much between different firms,” said Zeughauser Group consultant Kent Zimmermann.
The firm declined to comment about the nature of Caplan's leadership role. But at most firms with co-leaders, there's a formal division of responsibilities, at least internally, noted Altman Weil's Eric Seeger.
“People need to know who to go to for what,” he said.
The immediate move for the firm is likely to apportion out Caplan's management responsibilities to another leader while it grapples with the current and potential headaches of having a prominent partner publicly disgraced and facing severe legal jeopardy.
But the very fact that Caplan was one of several names attached to the management of the firm suggests that his exit will not be as significant as 2018's most stunning law firm leadership change: the abrupt resignation of Latham & Watkins' sole chairman, Bill Voge, after his “communications of a sexual nature” with a woman who had no connection to the firm were revealed.
There, vice chairs Ora Fisher and Richard Trobman immediately stepped in as interim co-chairs, and Trobman was selected as the new chair and managing partner three months later. The disruption has had no apparent drag on Latham's performance. In 2018, the firm had its strongest financial performance in nearly a half-decade.
“It would be infrequent that the absence of one person for a period of time would be a game changer,” Zimmermann contended.
Of course, it doesn't require a scandal to unseat a leader without warning. Consider recent cases such as Dane Butswinkas' short-lived move to Tesla from Williams & Connolly, or the leave that Baker McKenzie global chairman Paul Rawlinson is currently taking for “exhaustion.” Whatever the nature of Caplan's alleged crime or his management role, his unexpected exit serves as another example of the need for robust succession planning.
“It's always wise to create a leadership pipeline by putting your likely future leaders in practice leadership seats and committee chairs and as project leaders,” Seeger said. “That's a good way to assess leadership capacity and groom people for potential management committee and potential management partner positions.”
And beyond simply identifying future leaders, it's good to know who will step in in the event of any sort of rupture. Ironically, Willkie might have a leg up on this sort of contingency planning, thanks to a recent management decision.
In January, the firm hired Michael Gottlieb, a former associate White House counsel under President Barack Obama, from Boies Schiller Flexner. His brief? To lead a new crisis management practice at the firm.
|Read More
On Leave From Willkie, Where Does Gordon Caplan Go From Here?
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 AllTrending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
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