Time Off to Train a Puppy? That's Actually a Thing at Susman Godfrey
Neal Manne, a managing partner of Houston-based litigation firm Susman Godfrey, said the firm's unlimited vacation policy for associates includes time off to train a puppy.
October 16, 2018 at 05:50 PM
4 minute read
Susman Godfrey, the litigation firm that strives to stand out from the Big Law pack when it comes to pay and benefits, just expanded the definition of its unlimited paid vacation policy to include the newfangled concept of “pawternity” leave.
Neal Manne, a managing partner of the Houston-based firm, said that as soon as he read a commentary about the pawternity leave trend in Texas Lawyer on Monday, it was clear to him that the firm already provides that benefit under the firm's unlimited vacation policy for associates.
“We have an unlimited paid vacation leave—as much as anybody wants. It's a vacation policy; It's a pawternity policy; it's an I-want-to-go-to-the-beach policy,” Manne said.
Susman Godfrey, with about 139 lawyers in offices in Houston, Seattle, Los Angeles and New York, has a long tradition of providing top-of-market benefits for its associates. Most recently, the firm adopted a policy providing all associates with unlimited paid parental leave in addition to the unlimited vacation policy. The firm also this year topped the Cravath, Swaine & Moore pay scale for associates with a starting pay of $195,000. And because the point was raised at a partner retreat not long ago that the firm had no mandatory retirement policy, the partners decided to set one: the mandatory retirement age at Susman Godfrey is now 100.
Manne said the firm wants to be “ahead of the class” in all ways, including benefits offered to its associates, who are required to have completed a federal clerkship before starting work at the firm.
“Really our more recent policy is to have unlimited vacation, unlimited paid parental leave. That just wasn't being ahead of the class, it was showing [our associates] we consider them to be professionals and we have confidence in them to act responsibly and to feel very vested in our firm, where eventually they will become partners,” he said.
He explained that associates would not have to seek special approval for a pawternity leave to take care of a sick animal, to train a new puppy or adopt one. The associates would just need to make sure, as they would in all situations when they go on leave, that the people they are working with know about their time off and any client needs.
“We are completely indifferent to whether they are going to take time to hang out on a beach or stay home and take care of a puppy,” he said.
Manne said he knows associates appreciate the firm's generous benefits package, but he doubts that any young lawyer finishing a federal clerkship is going to pick Susman Godfrey just because of a few extra vacation days. Those associates, he said, are instead likely to appreciate the firm's willingness to “break the paradigm” and come up with new approaches to benefits.
On the other hand, Manne doubts clients pay much attention to what benefits the firm provides its associates.
“Clients hiring Susman Godfrey are focused on the fact that we win cases for them,” he said.
Manne said even founding partner Stephen Susman endorses the expansive benefits application to include the so-called pawternity leave. On Monday, Manne said, Susman sent an email to the firm's partners remarking that pawternity leave is a firm benefit he needs to take advantage of, since he has a new puppy.
Susman could not be reached for immediate comment. Manne said he is on a “grandpawternity leave” to train his two-month-old Cavalier King Charles Spaniel named Gus. Susman also has another dog of the same breed named Stella.
“He's taking time off to help Stella with the new puppy,” Manne said.
RELATED STORIES:
Susman Godfrey to Give All Associates Unlimited Paid Parental Leave
Susman Godfrey Tops Cravath Scale for All Associates; Starting Pay Set at $195K
Susman Godfrey Adopts Retirement Policy: At Age 100, You're Out!
Susman Godfrey Focused on Innovation, Efficiency Before They Were 'Buzzwords'
Susman Godfrey Once Again Crushes Cravath's Average Associate Bonuses
Susman Godfrey Offers $25K Signing Bonuses to Entice Recruits
Considering Fur-ternity Leave for Employees? Paws and Think It Through First
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 AllSunbelt Law Firms Experienced More Moderate Growth Last Year, Alongside Some Job Cuts and Less Merger Interest
4 minute readOnce the LA Fires Are Extinguished, Expect the Litigation to Unfold for Years
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1We the People?
- 2New York-Based Skadden Team Joins White & Case Group in Mexico City for Citigroup Demerger
- 3No Two Wildfires Alike: Lawyers Take Different Legal Strategies in California
- 4Poop-Themed Dog Toy OK as Parody, but Still Tarnished Jack Daniel’s Brand, Court Says
- 5Meet the New President of NY's Association of Trial Court Jurists
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