Allen & Overy and O'Melveny Hone In On Key Merger Terms
Prospect of a successful deal edges closer as firms look to finalise name and pay structure for the combined outfit.
March 13, 2019 at 07:46 AM
3 minute read
U.K. magic circle firm Allen & Overy and U.S. West Coast litigation leader O'Melveny & Myers are edging towards an historic tie-up, with the final stage of discussions narrowing in on a few key terms.
Management teams from each firm have spent recent months thrashing out the detail of a possible deal, with a number of conditions now expected to be agreed within weeks, according to several people with knowledge of the talks.
Key terms currently being discussed include the combined firm's name and how its pay system would be structured.
One person said that a merged firm is expected to operate one profit pool. A combined firm is likely to run an amalgamation of the two firms' systems in a flexible lock step style, which would have greater flexibility at the top in order to retain and attract stellar talent, the person said.
A&O's standard lockstep ladder runs from 20-50 points, taking 15 years to reach the plateau. However, the firm introduced a bonus pool for star performers in 2014 and broke lockstep to hire a number of finance partners in New York in 2016.
The combined firm's name is also being discussed. A number of hybrids of the duo's names have been registered online, including allenomelveny.com, omelvenyallen.com, aom.com, aomm.com and allenmyers.com. It is not known whether those names were registered by the firms.
A formal proposal document is yet to be sent to both firms' partnerships, but Allen & Overy partners have been sent memos and can access information about the proposed terms online, several people have said.
No date has yet been set for a vote on the merger, and people at both firms are keen to stress that while talks have progressed to a late stage, a tie-up is not guaranteed.
People have previously speculated that it would make sense for a vote to take place following the distribution of profits to partners.
One person said high voting thresholds were required to get each side to agree. But positive momentum is building within the A&O partnership, according to one current and several former partners.
A partner at one of the firms added that following meetings between partners at both firms, they felt there was a good cultural fit between the two sides.
Last month, O'Melveny announced record financial results. Gross revenue at the firm increased by 8.5 percent, climbing just past the $800 million mark. The firm's revenue per lawyer rose 6.4 percent to hit $1.19 million, while a 12.6 percent increase in profits per equity partner (PEP) brought that figure to $2.26 million.
A&O has not yet announced its results as its financial year runs to 30 April 2019. Last year it added $70.7 million to its top line to reach $2.05 billion, while PEP also saw the same percentage increase to hit $2.2 billion.
Legal Week revealed the pair were in merger talks last April, before revealing subsequent meetings between partners in Frankfurt and Singapore.
With reporting by Paul Hodkinson
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 All‘Are You Not Profiting From Postmasters’ Misery?’—Politicians Grill HSF, Dentons on Post Office Conduct
'Not a Good Look'—FCA Fines Barclays £40M But Accused of Incompetence
Gibson Dunn Sued by Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
Australian Corporations More Concerned About Class Actions Risk, HSF Report Finds
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Litera Acquires Document Automation Startup Offices & Dragons
- 2Patent Trolls Come Under Increasing Fire in Federal Courts
- 3Transforming Dispute Processes in Law: The Impact of Large Language Models
- 4Daniel Habib to Serve as Next Attorney-in-Charge of NY Federal Defender Appeals Unit
- 5Protecting Attorney-Client Privilege in the Modern Age of Communications
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