Orrick and Pillsbury call off $1.4bn merger over client conflicts
Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe and Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman have called off merger talks, citing irresolvable client conflicts. If merger talks had been successful Orrick Pillsbury would have become the ninth largest law firm in the US, with a combined revenue of $1.4bn (£866m).
November 26, 2013 at 06:09 AM
3 minute read
Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe and Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman have called off merger talks, citing irresolvable client conflicts.
If merger talks had been successful Orrick Pillsbury would have become the ninth largest law firm in the US, with a combined revenue of $1.4bn (£866m).
The decision to call off negotiations was reached before either firm had signed a letter of intent or put the proposed tie-up before their respective partnerships for a vote.
Both firms confirmed they were in talks last month, though the discussions are understood to have begun in the summer.
In a statement, the two firms said: "We mutually determined that we will not be able to proceed due to prospective client conflicts that we have not been able to resolve, notwithstanding each firm's best efforts.
"Our two firms come away from these discussions with enormous respect for each other both institutionally and across our management teams, a mutual respect that has only grown throughout our discussions."
An Orrick spokeswoman confirmed to Legal Week that the conflict involved Pillsbury's tax controversy, environmental and real estate practices and Orrick's public finance practice.
"Pillsbury's corporate clients' interests are sometimes adverse to the interests of the state and municipal entities that Orrick represents," she said.
Despite the failure, the respective chairmen issued glowing appraisals of the other firm's lawyers.
"Pillsbury has long been known to us as a firm with high calibre legal talent and a client-focused culture much like ours," commented Orrick chairman Mitch Zuklie. "Large law firm combinations are always complex, and both our firms are disappointed that we could not clear the way for a merger."
Pillsbury's Jim Rishwain added: "Orrick is a firm with a longstanding and well-deserved reputation for legal excellence. Throughout these discussions, our admiration for Orrick's attorneys has only deepened."
Orrick posted a revenue of $866m (£534m) in 2012, while its 124 equity partners earned an average of $1.63m (£1m).
Pillsbury is the smaller of the two firms, having generated a revenue of $561m (£346m) and profit per equity partner of $1.1m (£679,000) last year. The firm has 609 lawyers, which includes 163 equity partners.
Orrick's key clients include Apple and Microsoft, while Pillsbury's client base includes BNY Mellon, Chevron Corporation and Amazon.
The failure of the talks is the latest in a string of unsuccessful courtships involving Orrick, and follows merger discussions with Bird & Bird and SJ Berwin in the UK as well as legacy Dewey Ballantine in 2006.
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