The Diversity Discussion: Big Law Partner Shares His Experiences to Help Change the Norm
My own experience demonstrates that the combination of a conscious decision by a GC and a meaningful commitment by a law firm to give real opportunities to diverse attorneys can change the trajectory of a person's career. I experienced this myself.
February 07, 2019 at 05:42 PM
4 minute read
Like many of my fellow African-American partners at Am Law 250 firms, I was moved by the insightful observations from Don Prophete in last month's Corporate Counsel magazine. My own experience demonstrates that the combination of a conscious decision by a GC and a meaningful commitment by a law firm to give real opportunities to diverse attorneys can change the trajectory of a person's career. I experienced this myself.
In January of 1999, I was elected equity partner at Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease, an Am Law 250 firm with offices in Columbus, Cincinnati, Cleveland and Akron, Ohio, and additional offices in Washington, D.C., Houston and Pittsburgh. In 2001, a significant class action was filed in Cincinnati against Coca-Cola Enterprises (CCE). The law firm Miller and Martin, with offices in Tennessee and Georgia, had long represented CCE. The CCE relationship lawyer was Miller and Martin partner Shelby Grubbs. John Parker, then the general counsel of CCE, told Grubbs that he wanted to interview the best trial lawyers in Cincinnati to handle the class action that had been filed there. Parker added that he “expected that several of the lawyers to be interviewed would be black.” I flew to Atlanta to meet with Parker and other in-house lawyers at CCE and a number of the Miller and Martin lawyers who had historically served as outside counsel to CCE. After this interview process, Parker, with input and an endorsement from Grubbs, selected me to serve as lead counsel in the Cincinnati class action. I was 37 years old. After years of multiple arguments in the court of appeals, the case was ultimately tried to a jury in 2008. I was lead counsel for CCE during this nine-week jury trial. I also continued to represent CCE in other matters for the better part of a decade.
The CCE engagement allowed me to keep several other lawyers busy at my firm, and enhanced my profile within the firm. Within three years of being retained by CCE, I was appointed to serve on my firm's management committee (2004). In 2006, I was appointed to serve as the managing partner for my firm's Cincinnati office, a position I continue to hold today. Since trying the CCE case, I have served as lead trial counsel in a number of other non-CCE matters including a three-week intellectual property trial with nearly $1 billion at stake, and a six-week fraud trial with over $100 million at stake. These other trials involved local Cincinnati-based clients whom I have worked hard to attract and maintain for several years. But it all started because 18 years ago John Parker gave me a chance, instead of, as Prophete notes, “deferring to the same cadre of lawyers [he] had always used on his matters.” There is simply no question that by giving me an opportunity to display my litigation skills with a lead role in a significant matter, Parker may have changed the trajectory of my career. Over the years, I have told him how much I appreciate his thoughtfulness and his support.
But the challenges of diversity remain. I am now 55 years old. I am much more experienced and far more accomplished than I was as a 37-year-old in 2001. Nonetheless, aside from the call from Parker, and excluding my firm's clients from whom we receive repeat work, I have never received a call from a GC in search of diverse counsel to handle a significant matter. I do not expect to receive anything because I am a diverse lawyer. But I do appreciate that a joint commitment between in-house counsel and law firm management to the principles of diversity can make a real difference. Together, we have the ability to change not only the trajectory of a single career, but also our entire profession. I speak from experience.
Nathaniel Lampley Jr.
Cincinnati Office Managing Partner
Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease
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 AllNew Federal Pregnancy Regulations: Five Key Takeaways and Five Key Action Steps for Employers
7 minute readLegal Profession's Mental Health Woes Start to Take Root in Law School, Many Attorneys Say
6 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Free Speech Causes a Neighborly Feud
- 2Read the Document: 'Google Must Divest Chrome,' DOJ Says, Proposing Remedies in Search Monopoly Case
- 3Voir Dire Voyeur: I Find Out What Kind of Juror I’d Be
- 4When It Comes to Local Law 97 Compliance, You’ve Gotta Have (Good) Faith
- 5Legal Speak at General Counsel Conference East 2024: Virginia Griffith, Director of Business Development at OutsideGC
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