Five things law firms believe that usually aren't true
What better way of shaking off the holiday funk as you emerge blinking and overindulged (or flu-ridden in my case) into 2011 than a good old-fashioned list piece? It's a timeless standby for those moments when you're not yet back into the swing of things and very little interesting has yet happened to write about. But since I can't face the dreaded 'predictions for the year' format, instead I'm throwing down with five things law firms like to believe that are usually total cobblers:
January 05, 2011 at 05:18 AM
4 minute read
What better way of shaking off the holiday funk as you emerge blinking and overindulged (or flu-ridden in my case) into 2011 than a good old-fashioned list piece? It's a timeless standby for those moments when you're not yet back into the swing of things and very little interesting has yet happened to write about.
But since I can't face the dreaded 'predictions for the year' format, instead I'm throwing down with five things law firms like to believe that are usually total cobblers:
"Unlike other firms, we don't shout about what we're doing"
This one scores very highly on the nonsense-ometer since virtually every large law firm shouts about what it does. True, many are very, very bad at it, meaning they shout about things of absolutely no interest to the vast majority of the profession let alone the man in the street. But, make no mistake, this is not for the want of shouting. Armies of PR and marketing staff are employed, oceans of press releases sent, events held and announcement made. Ironically, in many cases these manage to miss the actually interesting or novel in favour of the mundane, primarily because law firms are addicted to pushing out ego-stroking missives regarding deals to the exclusion of all else. But while common sense, judgement and realism may be in short supply, you can be sure that shouting is very much present and correct in Law Firm Land.
"We mainly compete against the magic circle"
This is a market distortion created by the fact that law is relatively fragmented with just a small handful of firms having achieved any real scale. This means that firms can be as likely to see Linklaters or Freshfields on the opposite side of the table as their true peer group, largely because these firms are everywhere. This leads many, many gullible firms to hugely over-estimate their market position. It's always sad to see.
"Clients don't instruct law firms because of legal directories"
In-house legal teams can at times understandably display a protectionist streak that manifests itself as hostility towards anything that could demystify the law. This goes double for any tool – such as a legal directory – which could conceivably be used by non-lawyers to instruct lawyers. But the plain fact is that, with the exception of a few industry sectors such as financial services, in-house legal teams tend to have pretty limited knowledge of law firms other than those they actually instruct. The idea that they don't use legal directories as some part of the process for markets and practices outside their core discipline is very hard to swallow.
"We're client-focused"
Partners can be client-focused. Individual lawyers can be client-focused and many actually are. But law firms as organisations are internally-focused and still far more geared to their internal workings, staffing issues and economics. Exceptions to that rule, at least with firms of any size, are very, very rare.
"Perception lags reality"
To be fair this one is not always nonsense but gains inclusion because it's often used when it is indeed total nonsense. That's because it is true that perception lags reality when the underlying substance changes. But that basic fact also gives convenient cover for law firms to convince themselves that an undeserved reputation is hanging around entirely due to this phenomenon rather than the genuine continued lack of performance of the team/partner in question. There is also the fact that law firms happily trade on the upside of this factor, quietly milking historic reputations when they are fully aware that a particular team or individual is now well past their sell-by date.
Anyway, good to get that off my chest (which is more than I can say for the flu). Readers with suggested additions can email me at [email protected]. And if you want to read a predictions piece executed with a bit of wit and realism, I recommend this blog by ALM's Vivia Chen.
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 AllLatham's magic circle strikes, pay rises and EY's legal takeover: the best of Legal Week over the last few weeks
3 minute readJob losses, soaring partner profits and Freshfields exits - the best of Legal Week over the past two weeks
3 minute readMagic circle PEP hikes, the associate pay conundrum and more #MeToo - the best of Legal Week last week
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1'Merciless' Filing Deadline Dooms Cuban Americans' Property-Trafficking Suit Against BNP Paribas, SocGen
- 2In 2-1 Ruling, Court Clears Way for Decade-Old Wrongful Imprisonment Suit
- 3Trump Sentencing, TikTok Ban Welcome Justices Back to Work
- 4U.S. Eleventh Circuit Remands Helms-Burton Trafficking Case Involving Confiscated Cuban Port
- 5Can Passive Technology Change the Impaired Driving Trajectory?
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