Atrium to Shut Down Software Business, Refocus on Broader Startup Services
Layoffs totaling at least 90 jobs are expected to unfold in two waves throughout the month of March as Atrium shuts down its software startup.
March 04, 2020 at 02:23 PM
4 minute read
This story has been updated with comment from additional sources.
The ongoing saga of hybrid law firm and software company Atrium took another twist this week. Atrium's CEO Justin Kan confirmed to TechCrunch on Tuesday that Atrium's software startup would be shutting down. Meanwhile, the law firm will continue onward.
According to a report released by California's Employment Development Department, the first wave of layoffs is scheduled to go into effect March 9, encompassing 76 jobs. This will be followed by a second wave of 14 layoffs scheduled for March 30.
News of the shutdown comes on the heels of a busy couple of years for Atrium, which announced back in January that it would be losing much of its legal staff as part of a "restructuring" that would see the company expanding outside of legal services to concentrate on a "professional services network" that supported startup founders. Atrium's in-house attorneys were presented with the option of becoming preferred providers inside that network, while a few partners were kept in-house to work with clients on financing and mergers and acquisitions
At the time, Kan pointed to the need among startups for a broader portfolio of services "not only surrounding legal but with questions such as when to hire a sales leader, how to best announce their latest fundraising, how to handle recruiting technical talent in a job seeker's market, and so many other areas that are important to scaling a startup."
That sentiment appeared to mark a departure from the objectives Atrium held upon its launch. During a 2018 conversation with The American Lawyer, Kan said part of the company's first year had been spent turning legal documents into structured data and building "applications that produce useful outputs on top of that." Moving forward, he said that the goal was to "help attorneys spend more of their time on meaningful work and less of their time on crank-turning work."
The company's positioning as a "tech-powered platform providing flat-fee legal services" seemed to resonate with investors. Atrium raised $75.5 million in funding, including from groups such as General Catalyst, Sound Ventures, YC Continuity Fund and Andreessen Horowitz. Now, Kan has told TechCrunch that investors would be getting some of that capital back once startup operations have closed down.
So what happened? Zach Abramowitz, a consultant in the legal technology space, doesn't think Atrium's hybrid model itself is to blame. "I do not think the dual structure had anything to do with it. In fact, having a tech company plus a law firm was, in my opinion, one of the savviest moves Atrium made, as was the $75M funding round. Both gave them an opportunity to build a new kind of law firm/company from scratch," Abramowitz said.
It's possible that Atriums struggles were more in line with the same generic difficulties facing other legal tech companies in the market. To be sure, technology can still be a tough sell at law firms, where the traditional structure offers no clear point of entry for the procurement process to begin. Legal consultant Brett Burney raised the question of whether law firms are even interested in solutions that improve efficiency given their reliance on the billable hour model.
"What happens when you get work done quicker? You don't make as much money," Burney said.
In order for that to change, Burney thinks that clients will have to start demanding that firms pursue innovative, technology-driven means of providing legal services faster. Given the competition firms are encountering from entities like alternative legal service providers and the Big Four, they may be obliged to comply. Regardless, Burney expects to see future attempts at replicating Atrium's hybrid model down the line, since frustration with legal work inefficiencies is unlikely to disappear any time soon.
"There will be more people like Justin [Kan] that will just be so fed up and annoyed and exasperated with the legal world as it stands right now," Burney said
Kan had his own thoughts about what happened at Atrium. He told TechCrunch that Atrium and other companies "did not figure out how to make a dent in operational efficiency."
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 AllTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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