Bryan Cave and Holme Roberts merge
Its almost like reality matchmaking shows for law firms these days. A large number of firms have announced mergers in recent monthsperhaps headlined by the union of Faegre & Benson and Baker & Daniels in mid-October.
December 06, 2011 at 06:51 AM
2 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
It's almost like reality matchmaking shows for law firms these days. A large number of firms have announced mergers in recent months—perhaps headlined by the union of Faegre & Benson and Baker & Daniels in mid-October.
Yesterday, a new star-crossed pair, Bryan Cave and Holme Roberts & Owen, announced a merger that will see the firms officially united Jan. 1, 2012. The marriage will combine about 1,100 attorneys in more than 25 offices across the U.S., Europe and Asia. The new joint venture will be known as Bryan Cave LLP.
The merger is seen as a win-win for both firms. Holme Roberts expects to benefit from the expanded resources of being part of a larger, full-service firm.
“The combination enables us to provide increased capabilities and enhanced service,” Paul Smith, Holme Roberts' executive committee chair, wrote in a release. “HRO's clients will benefit significantly from expanded expertise and a broader geographic reach in the U.S. and internationally. This combination ensures our clients seamless continuity of service while enabling us to offer a wider array of legal and geographical resources to existing and new clients.”
Bryan Cave also anticipates enhanced opportunities as a result of Holme Roberts' strong regional presence in California and Colorado, as well as in its niche practices.
“We are very excited about the opportunities this move creates for our entire firm,” Bryan Cave's chair of the firm Don Lents wrote in a release. “The combination will add exceptional legal capabilities in energy, natural resources, and sports law to Bryan Cave's international resources while expanding the firm's worldwide presence into the Rocky Mountain region and adding significant new depth and experience in California.”
This content has been archived.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 All
Digging Deep to Mitigate Risk in Lithium Mine Venture Wins GM Legal Department of the Year Award
5 minute read
FTC Settles With Security Firm Over AI Claims Under Agency's Compliance Program
6 minute read
People and Purpose: AbbVie's GC on Leading With Impact and Inspiring Change
7 minute readTrending Stories
- 1From 'Confusing Labyrinth' to Speeding 'Rollercoaster': Uncertainty Reigns in Title IX as Litigators Await Second Trump Admin
- 2Critical Mass With Law.com’s Amanda Bronstad: Why Jurors in California Failed to Reach Verdict Over Zantac, Bankruptcy Judge Tables Sanctions Against Beasley Allen Attorney
- 3Jones Day Client Seeks Indemnification for $7.2M Privacy Settlement, Plus Defense Costs
- 4Elections Have Consequences: Some Thoughts on Labor and Employment Law Topics in 2025 and Beyond
- 5Law Firm Associates, Staffers Continue to Put a Premium On Workplace Flexibility, Study Finds
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
