Lovells and Hogan open partnership vote on transatlantic merger
Lovells and Hogan & Hartson partners have begun voting on the transatlantic merger due to go live in May 2010. The vote will pave the way for partners at both firms to see a number of changes to their terms, with Lovells partners set to benefit from the removal of a mandatory retirement age, while Hogan US partners are expected to formally gain set holiday entitlement.
December 09, 2009 at 07:04 PM
2 minute read
Lovells and Hogan & Hartson partners have begun voting on the transatlantic merger due to go live in May 2010.
The vote will pave the way for partners at both firms to see a number of changes to their terms, with Lovells partners set to benefit from the removal of a mandatory retirement age, while Hogan US partners are expected to formally gain set holiday entitlement.
Partners kicked off the merger vote last week and it will close on 15 December. Lovells needs approval from 75% of the partnership in order to push ahead with the deal.
Within Lovells the merger is expected to win considerable support after last month's partnership meeting in Lisbon saw detailed discussions cover how the merged firm, to be called Hogan Lovells, will look.
The merger of equals deal would see the combined firm keep two operational centres, one in London and the other in Washington DC – rather than opting for a single base.
Though the model will see the firms maintaining two partnership entities and would block direct profit-sharing, the firms are set to align remuneration policies, with Lovells moving closer towards Hogan's contribution-based model for partner pay.
Lovells partners will see the firm's official partner retirement age of 65 removed, in line with Hogan's US structure, which does not have a retirement age and allows partners to work as long as they like with pay tailing off accordingly.
Separately, it is understood that Hogan partners will gain the same 30-day holiday entitlement as Lovells partners.
This content has been archived.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 AllKim & Chang, Freshfields, A&O Shearman Take Top Spots for Highest Collective Deal Value as APAC M&A Grew By Just 1% in 2024
Blocking of $14B Nippon US Steel Deal Will Not Dampen Japan-U.S. M&A, Lawyers Say
Latham, Paul Weiss, Debevoise Land on Year-End Big Deals. But Geopolitical Uncertainty Could Slow M&A Growth in 2025
11 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Litigation Leaders: Jason Leckerman of Ballard Spahr on Growing the Department by a Third Via Merger with Lane Powell
- 2Arguing Class Actions: Manifestation Redux
- 3In Free Agent Lateral Era, Big Law Has 'Entire Teams Dedicated to Identifying' Top Talent
- 4Public Notices/Calendars
- 5Monday Newspaper
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