Mark Hinderks, managing partner of Stinson. (Courtesy photo)5 Years After Merger, Stinson Trims Its Name
Mark Hinderks, managing partner of the firm formerly known as Stinson Leonard Street, pointed to the wider trend of Am Law 200 firms opting for more concise monikers.
April 30, 2019 at 09:00 AM
3 minute read
The Am Law 200 firm known as Stinson Leonard Street since a 2014 merger has joined the cavalcade of law firms shortening their names, rebranding itself as Stinson.
The firm legally changed its name, going beyond some other recent law firm rebrandings. Managing partner Mark Hinderks said the new name was intended to illustrate the firm's commitment to presenting itself as a single unified entity in the wake of the combination between Kansas City, Mo.–based Stinson Morrison Hecker and Minneapolis-based Leonard, Street and Deinard.
Stinton's new logo.
He said that after surveying clients and constituents, the firm discovered that both groups already thought of it as Stinson.
“Most of the Am Law 200 is moving in the direction of single-named brands, or at least reduced-name brands, that are recognizable and memorizable,” Hinderks said.
Just on Monday, Boston's Sullivan & Worcester announced it had rebranded itself as “Sullivan.” Other firms to truncate their names in recent months include Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy (legally changed to Milbank), Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo (rebranded as Mintz), Much Shelist (Much) and Bartlit Beck Herman Palenchar & Scott (now Bartlit Beck).
Stinson hired a Minnesota-based, women-owned branding agency to both evaluate the benefits of a name change and subsequently to develop a new logo, color palate and website to accompany the new moniker.
There was zero pushback, Hinderks said. ”Our board, which approved the implementation, was unanimous,” he said.
He added that the change was consistent with the firm's postmerger goal of integrating the constituent pieces.
“We didn't want to be a headquarters and satellite firm,” he said. “Instead, we have a distributed headquarters.”
Hinderks also acknowledged that the change could have been made sooner, but he explained that the initial focus following the merger was on how to unify the two previously distinct entities. The firm has also expanded into several new markets since the merger.
“It was appropriate to let a little bit of time go by to build that credibility in the marketplace, so our clients understand these are the things we stand for and that they should associate with our brand,” he said.
|Read More
Market Focus: Is Kansas City a Sleeper Market When It Comes to Innovation?
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
Davis Polk Lands Spirit Chapter 11 Amid Bankruptcy Resurgence
What Practices Are Driving Law Firms’ ‘Remarkable’ Performance in 2024?
4 minute read
Trending Stories
- 1US Magistrate Judge Embry Kidd Confirmed to 11th Circuit
- 2Shaq Signs $11 Million Settlement to Resolve Astrals Investor Claims
- 3McCormick Consolidates Two Tesla Chancery Cases
- 4Amazon, SpaceX Press Constitutional Challenges to NLRB at 5th Circuit
- 5Schools Win Again: Social Media Fails to Strike Public Nuisance Claims
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
