40 Years of The American Lawyer: Reflections on the Birth of an Industry
For our special 40th anniversary report, we looked to the past and future to examine an industry in flux.
September 03, 2019 at 05:30 AM
4 minute read
When the first issue of The American Lawyer was published in 1979, it represented a shock to the system. In its early years, it seemed to draw fans and critics in equal measure for its unsparing coverage of the legal industry's ups and downs and, before long, its financial health. Forty years later, we're still here, writing about shifts both subtle and dramatic within law firms, reporting on the trends that define the business of law, and publishing financial data that goes deeper than ever.
To celebrate our 40th anniversary, we used the occasion to take stock of the incredible evolution the industry has undergone over the course of four decades and sneak a look into the future to anticipate what's in store. We did so with gratitude for the readers who have helped to keep us running all these years—especially those who have been here from the start—and high hopes for the magazine's future.
Industrial Evolution: How Big Law Blossomed Over the Past 40 Years Since The American Lawyer was founded in 1979, we've tracked the legal profession as it turned into an industry. After 40 Years of Constant Change, What's Next for the Legal Industry? Few could have anticipated the dramatic shift in scope and scale the industry has undergone since The American Lawyer's founding 40 years ago. We asked some of the law's brightest thinkers what we can expect over the next 10. 40 Years of Am Law Financials: By the Numbers How much have firm revenue, profits and head count changed over the years? More than you might think. What's Changed Most in the Legal Industry Since 1979? Legal Luminaries Weigh In Transparency, the pace of practice and the presence of technology are among the most notable shifts, according to the lawyers we asked. 20 Themes That Define 40 Years of Legal Industry Change From mergers and laterals to ALSPs and the A-List, these are the dominant storylines we've covered since 1979. From the Editor: The Human Element at the Heart of the Industry For 40 years, relationships have driven the legal industry, Gina Passarella writes.
This content has been archived.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 AllDavis Polk Lands Spirit Chapter 11 Amid Bankruptcy Resurgence
What Practices Are Driving Law Firms’ ‘Remarkable’ Performance in 2024?
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Trying a Case for Abu Ghraib Detainees Two Decades After Abuse
- 2The Distribution of Dangerous Products Via Online Marketplaces
- 3The Products Liability Case Against Tianeptine: The Deadly ‘Dietary Supplement’ Found at Your Local Store
- 4The Evolving Landscape of Joint and Several Liability in Pa.: A Post-'Spencer' Analysis
- 5A Deep Dive Into the Product-Line Exception in Pennsylvania
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