Coping With Post-Merger Pandemic, Faegre Drinker Trims Partner Pay, Proceeds With Integration
Firm co-chair Andrew Kassner said the legacy firms laid the groundwork for a successful merger before the coronavirus arrived, but there's no escaping the economic fallout.
April 14, 2020 at 03:48 PM
4 minute read
Minneapolis-based Faegre Baker Daniels finalized its merger with Philadelphia's Drinker Biddle & Reath on Feb. 1, creating a new, national mega firm just weeks before the COVID-19 pandemic hit hard in the United States.
Now—during a period experts say is critical for the success of any merger—the newly combined partnership is forgoing a sizable portion of its expected compensation, while lawyers and staff from the two halves of the firm remain physically isolated from their new colleagues.
Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath has deferred its equity partner distributions by one-third for the second quarter in an effort to be "prudent and conservative" during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, the firm said.
It is also monitoring the expenses generated by its workforce of more than 1,300 lawyers, consultants and professionals located across 22 offices, said co-chairs Andrew Kassner and Tom Froehle.
"It's inevitable if it impacts our clients, it'll impact the law firms. Everything has to be on the table as we plan going forward over the second quarter and third quarter and beyond," Kassner said. He initially described it as being a cut in partner distributions, but then emphasized the firm was deferring those distributions: "It's just a deferral. It's all a matter of timing."
Faegre Drinker began feeling the effects of COVID-19 earlier than most other law firms. On March 10, the firm closed all of its offices for the day amid concerns that personnel in its Washington, D.C., office, were potentially exposed to the coronavirus. The firm temporarily reopened all of its offices—except its two D.C. offices—before closing them again less than a week later.
The initial March closure came less than 40 days after the legacy firms completed their combination. When the merger took effect, Faegre Drinker partners said they would spend the next 100 days selling the potential Am Law 50 firm's size and reach.
The first six months of a merged firm's tenure typically determines whether the union will work or not, said Altman Weil's Tom Clay. That's one reason two other firms planning a major merger early this year—Troutman Sanders and Pepper Hamilton—postponed their closing date by three months—from April 1 to July 1.
But Kassner and Froehle said the groundwork laid by the two legacy firms prior to February was instrumental in getting Faegre Drinker to this point. Froehle said the two firms' lawyers spent a lot of time in the months leading up to the merger meeting and getting to know each other.
Watching the legacy halves of Faegre Drinker work together during the pandemic has been a gratifying experience, Froehle added.
"It's harder to do remotely, because you're not seeing each other in person, but we're all working remotely. We're all having to collaborate and connect in different ways," Froehle said. "For me, it's validated some of the things we thought were real."
Like other firms, Faegre Drinker's first quarter was "solid." As various local and state governments began ordering all but essential employees to stay home, the firm's lawyers saw an increase in activity from clients who needed help dealing with the coronavirus and its effects, Froehle said. He added that, in March, the firm did not see a dip in billable hours.
And like other firms, practices centered around labor and employment, health care, government relations and other specialty areas are doing well at Faegre Drinker, Kassner said.
"What most firms are trying to assess is what are the effects of court closures on litigation practices, and what is the effect of the current state of the economy on mergers and acquisition practices," Kassner added. "We're all trying to assess how our clients are going to view, and what's going to be the effect on those practices in the coming weeks and months."
|Read More
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 AllFrom ‘Deep Sadness’ to Little Concern, Gaetz’s Nomination Draws Sharp Reaction From Lawyers
7 minute readDechert 'Spark Tank' Competition Encourages Firmwide Innovation Focus
Akerman Opens Charlotte Office With Focus on Renewable Energy, Data Center Practices
4 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Read the Document: 'Google Must Divest Chrome,' DOJ Says, Proposing Remedies in Search Monopoly Case
- 2Voir Dire Voyeur: I Find Out What Kind of Juror I’d Be
- 3When It Comes to Local Law 97 Compliance, You’ve Gotta Have (Good) Faith
- 4Legal Speak at General Counsel Conference East 2024: Virginia Griffith, Director of Business Development at OutsideGC
- 5Legal Speak at General Counsel Conference East 2024: Bill Tanenbaum, Partner & Chair, AI & Data Law Practice Group at Moses Singer
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