SPAC to the Future: Law Firms Are Riding the Wave as Interest Explodes
As special purpose acquisition companies grow in size and status after a record-shattering year, law firms are standing at attention, eager to get in on the action—as long as the bubble doesn't burst.
March 25, 2021 at 03:15 PM
14 minute read
Douglas Ellenoff credits the boom to the erasure of stigma. With nearly 250 blank-check companies launched last year, 2020 may have been "the year of the SPAC," according to a list of commentators too long to count. But the veteran dealmaker and founding partner at New York boutique Ellenoff Grossman & Schole insists the explosion didn't happen overnight.
Dating back to the mid-1990s, Ellenoff and a select group of other practitioners began advising the handful of players who were launching the first special purpose acquisition companies. Just like in today's boom market, with capital in hand after their initial public offering, these entities would snap up a privately held business and take it public, a process commonly, but inelegantly called de-SPAC-ing. But in Ellenoff's telling, there were issues with the rules back then that created unease among both regulators and the business community, prompting a first round of tinkering that included increasing disclosure requirements.
This content has been archived.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
© 2025 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 AllSaul Ewing Loses Two Partners to Fox Rothschild, Marking Four Fla. Partner Exits in Last 13 Months
3 minute readDentons Taps D.C. Capital Markets Attorney for New US Managing Partner
Exceptional Growth Becoming the Rule? Demand Drove Strong Year for Big Law
Eagles or Chiefs? At These Law Firms, Super Bowl Sunday Gets Complicated
3 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
- Winston & Strawn LLP
- Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher
- Ellenoff Grossman And Schole Llp
- Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP
- Cadwalader Wickersham & Taft
- Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati
- Sidley Austin
- Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson
- Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP
- Munger, Tolles & Olson
- Goodwin Procter
- Reed Smith
- Kirkland & Ellis
- Ropes & Gray
- King & Spalding
- White & Case
Trending Stories
- 1We Must Uphold the Rights of Immigrant Students
- 2Orrick Picks Up 13-Lawyer Tech, VC Group From Gunderson Dettmer
- 3How Alzheimer’s and Other Cognitive Diseases Affect Guardianship, POAs and Estate Planning
- 4How Lower Courts Are Interpreting Justices' Decision in 'Muldrow v. City of St. Louis'
- 5Phantom Income/Retained Earnings and the Potential for Inflated Support
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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