Troutman Sanders and Pepper Hamilton in Advanced Merger Discussions
The combined firm would have over 1,000 lawyers, nearly 300 equity partners and revenue topping $855 million.
November 13, 2019 at 01:56 PM
3 minute read
Atlanta-based Troutman Sanders is in merger talks with Philadelphia's Pepper Hamilton, both firms have confirmed.
"Troutman Sanders and Pepper Hamilton can confirm they have entered into discussions about a possible combination," a Troutman spokesperson said in an emailed statement Wednesday. "Our first priority is delivering exceptional legal services to our clients and as such, we will have no further comments at this time."
Pepper Hamilton tweeted the same statement at about 1:30 p.m. Wednesday.
According to data from ALM Intelligence, the combined firm would have over 1,000 lawyers and nearly 300 equity partners. Their combined revenue would be more than $855 million.
Troutman, which ranks at No. 68 in the Am Law 100 with 2018 revenue of $521.5 million, has about 650 lawyers in 12 U.S. offices, while Pepper Hamilton, which ranks at No. 105 on the Am Law 200, has about 450 lawyers in 14 offices and reported gross revenue of $334 million last year.
Both firms have large offices in New York and Washington, as well as several locations in California: Orange County for both firms, Los Angeles and Silicon Valley for Pepper Hamilton and San Diego and San Francisco for Troutman.
The last time Pepper Hamilton was engaged in merger talks that became public, the discussions were with Pittsburgh-born international firm Reed Smith.
"Ever since what happened with Reed Smith a couple years ago, I think we all knew after that that the firm would again look to merge," said one former Pepper Hamilton lawyer, who asked not to be named. But since the Reed Smith talks fell apart, any other merger discussions "have been like state secrets."
Sources said Pepper Hamilton has been working toward a merger for some time, focusing on strengthening its core practices while keeping other practices lean.
Troutman has also been considering mergers with other large U.S. firms. Last year the Atlanta-based firm entertained merger discussions with Dallas-based Winstead, but those talks broke off in July 2018 due to obstacles such as law firm billing rates and preferred client mix, according to Texas Lawyer.
|Read More
A 'Different Firm,' Pepper Hamilton Posts Declines in Revenue, Profits
This content has been archived.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 AllMeet the Finalists: The American Lawyer's Young Lawyers of The Year
Latham Departures Continue as Capital Markets Partner Joins Greenberg Traurig
2 minute readHSF's American Dream: What Will a U.S. Merger Mean For its Asia Practice?
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Decisions Have 'Real-Life Consequences': Juvenile Court Judge Considered for Appellate Bench
- 2NY District Attorneys Ask for Level Funding Amid Statewide Drop in Violent Crime
- 3Texas Trial Boutique Matches Milbank Bonuses, Paying up to $140K
- 4'Final Countdown': SEC Launches Nearly 800% Litigation Surge in October
- 5On the Employment Front, What Changes Are Likely Under Trump?
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