Allen & Overy and O'Melveny partners meet as merger inches closer
Name of combined firm remains undecided as partners get to know each other
October 26, 2018 at 06:31 AM
3 minute read
Partners from Allen & Overy (A&O) and O'Melveny & Myers have been meeting to find out more about their respective firms, as key details of their proposed transatlantic tie-up – including the name of the combined firm – continue to be discussed.
After a series of recent get-togethers involving management, in recent weeks partners from both firms have been meeting on a more informal basis to get to know each other and learn about their respective working cultures.
It is understood one such meeting was held in Singapore, where both firms have a base.
A number of sources describe the firms as 'inching' closer to a deal, with an expectation in some quarters that a vote could be held before the end of the year. However, with key details such as the name of the combined firm and its compensation structure still to be settled on, it is possible that talks could now run into next year.
The domain name allenomelveny.com was registered earlier this year, although that is understood to be just one of a number of potential options on the table.
One former A&O London partner said: "My sense is they're inching towards a merger. There is some opposition in London, but it's fairly disorganised – there's a lot of moaning but nobody leading a charge."
Meetings involving A&O and O'Melveny leadership have taken place in Germany and London in recent months, while the merger was also top of the agenda at A&O's partner conference in Miami, and sources close to the deal suggest that efforts to build support for the merger are paying off.
One former London A&O partner who left the firm this year said: "Warmth was growing towards it from A&O. There are hotspots in O'Melveny that are especially good – antitrust, for example – and the A&O competition partners thought that would be great.
"The A&O litigators, especially in the US, desperately want to have it. They've never had a strong brand in the US and this gives them a way."
However, one current partner argued: "I don't think it's a slam dunk. It is a numbers vote – but even if you have 500 partners in favour and 50 corporate partners in London against it, you'd be a brave person to put it to a vote."
If a merger between the two firms were to go ahead, it would create a business with a combined revenues of more than £2bn ($2.6bn) and a total lawyer headcount of about 3,000.
The two firms have similar profitability, with O'Melveny seeing profit per equity partner (PEP) rise 3% to $2m (£1.56m) in 2017, while A&O posted PEP of £1.64m for 2017-18. A&O added £54m to its top line during the year to reach £1.57bn, while O'Melveny grew revenues by 1.7% to reach $738m (£576m).
A&O declined to comment. A spokesperson for O'Melveny said: "We do not comment on gossip or market speculation regarding the firm."
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 AllPogust Goodhead Set to Axe Roles as Accounts Remain Overdue
Trending Stories
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