Hiring on The Rise
Almost 40 percent of corporate legal departments added at least one attorney last year, and nearly as many plan to hire an attorney this year, according to the 2007 InsideCounsel Hiring Survey.
January 31, 2007 at 07:00 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Almost 40 percent of corporate legal departments added at least one attorney last year, and nearly as many plan to hire an attorney this year, according to the 2007 InsideCounsel Hiring Survey.
Almost half of those planning to hire cite business expansion as the main reason, with about 15 percent attributing the hiring to bringing more work in-house.
The survey of more than 600 general counsel and other in-house attorneys, to be published in the March issue of InsideCounsel, found that hiring of paralegals and support staff lagged behind attorney hires. Only 24 percent of respondents hired a paralegal in 2006, while 17 percent added support staff. In addition, only 13.4 percent of respondents will be adding paralegals in the coming year and 11 percent will be hiring support staff.
Attorneys looking to make a career move will find that companies that are hiring lawyers are looking for generalists (39 percent), contract specialists (30 percent), compliance experts (28 percent), and IP attorneys (21 percent).
Respondents were split on whether they prefer to hire law firm attorneys or other in-house counsel. Twenty percent would rather hire from the ranks of law firms, 34 percent prefer to hire from other legal departments and 45 percent have no preference.
“Many companies end up hiring their external counsels,” says Carrie Printz, managing director of David Carrie, a legal search firm. “The advantage is that the in-house lawyers and the candidates have already become familiar with each other's needs, skills and personalities. Of course, hiring attorneys from companies where the business models and marketplaces are similar can be very effective because these hires can more quickly adapt to their new organization and require a less steep learning curve.”
Watch for complete results from the hiring survey in the March issue of InsideCounsel and on www.insidecounsel.com.
Almost 40 percent of corporate legal departments added at least one attorney last year, and nearly as many plan to hire an attorney this year, according to the 2007 InsideCounsel Hiring Survey.
Almost half of those planning to hire cite business expansion as the main reason, with about 15 percent attributing the hiring to bringing more work in-house.
The survey of more than 600 general counsel and other in-house attorneys, to be published in the March issue of InsideCounsel, found that hiring of paralegals and support staff lagged behind attorney hires. Only 24 percent of respondents hired a paralegal in 2006, while 17 percent added support staff. In addition, only 13.4 percent of respondents will be adding paralegals in the coming year and 11 percent will be hiring support staff.
Attorneys looking to make a career move will find that companies that are hiring lawyers are looking for generalists (39 percent), contract specialists (30 percent), compliance experts (28 percent), and IP attorneys (21 percent).
Respondents were split on whether they prefer to hire law firm attorneys or other in-house counsel. Twenty percent would rather hire from the ranks of law firms, 34 percent prefer to hire from other legal departments and 45 percent have no preference.
“Many companies end up hiring their external counsels,” says Carrie Printz, managing director of David Carrie, a legal search firm. “The advantage is that the in-house lawyers and the candidates have already become familiar with each other's needs, skills and personalities. Of course, hiring attorneys from companies where the business models and marketplaces are similar can be very effective because these hires can more quickly adapt to their new organization and require a less steep learning curve.”
Watch for complete results from the hiring survey in the March issue of InsideCounsel and on www.insidecounsel.com.
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 AllBeyond the Title: Developing a Personal Brand as General Counsel
Step 1 for Successful Negotiators: Believe in Yourself
Deluge of Trump-Leery Government Lawyers Join Job Market, Setting Up Free-for-All for Law Firm, In-House Openings
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
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