Dentons and McKenna Long call off merger
The proposed merger between Dentons and Washington-based McKenna Long & Aldridge has been called off, after partners at McKenna Long voted against the tie-up. A final vote on the merger was put on hold earlier this month, with Dentons blaming a lag in the due diligence process.
November 26, 2013 at 12:59 PM
2 minute read
The proposed merger between Dentons and McKenna Long & Aldridge has been called off, after partners at the Washington-based firm voted against the tie-up.
A final vote on the merger was put on hold earlier this month, with Dentons blaming a lag in the due diligence process.
The firms had earlier planned to complete all voting by 14 November, after both boards had given the green light to the tie-up.
Were the two firms to have combined, it would resulted in an outfit with revenues of approximately £1.04bn, putting it on the cusp of the top 10 global law firms by revenue.
A Dentons spokesperson said: "We are not in a position to successfully bring our firms together at this time. We look forward to maintaining the many friendships and working relationships, including with shared clients, that partners in both firms have forged. Both firms will continue to advance their respective strategic positions."
The failure of the merger halts a period of rapid consolidation for Dentons.
In 2010, UK-based Denton Wilde Sapte combined with Chicago's Sonneschein Nath & Rosenthal to create SNR Denton, before Salans and Fraser Milner Casgrain merged under the Dentons banner earlier this year.
The news comes in the same week a proposed merger between US firms Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe and Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman was called off, after the firms cited irresolvable client conflicts.
Had those talks been successful, would have become the ninth largest law firm in the US, with a combined revenue of $1.4bn (£866m).
However, unlike the Dentons-McKenna Long tie-up, the decision to call off the Orrick-Pillsbury talks came before either firm had signed a letter of intent or put the merger to a partner vote.
This content has been archived.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 AllIsrael's Rushed Corporate Tax May Spark Law Firm Mergers, Boost Large Firms Including Gornitzky
4 minute readNorton Rose Sues South Africa Government Over 'Unreasonable' Ethnicity Score System
3 minute readMoFo Launches in Amsterdam: Exclusive Interview with Global Chair Eric McCrath
2 minute readTrending Stories
- 1'It's Not Going to Be Pretty': PayPal, Capital One Face Novel Class Actions Over 'Poaching' Commissions Owed Influencers
- 211th Circuit Rejects Trump's Emergency Request as DOJ Prepares to Release Special Counsel's Final Report
- 3Supreme Court Takes Up Challenge to ACA Task Force
- 4'Tragedy of Unspeakable Proportions:' Could Edison, DWP, Face Lawsuits Over LA Wildfires?
- 5Meta Pulls Plug on DEI Programs
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