Locke Lord v. Dewey & LeBoeuf: A Tale of Two Mergers

What a difference five years make.

The merger between Texas firm Locke Liddell & Sapp and Chicago’s Lord, Bissell & Brook became official on October 2, 2007. But the tie-up that produced the firm now known as Locke Lord was lost in the glare of the merger one day before of venerable New York firms Dewey Ballantine and LeBoeuf, Lamb, Greene & MacRae.

The stream of lawyers heading out of Dewey & LeBoeuf has spurred many to look back at that firm’s merger and wonder what went wrong. But for anyone looking at the Locke Lord combination, the opposite question occurs: What went right?

Locke Lord’s comparative success seems to be due in part to conservative hiring practices, and the successful integration of its predecessor firms—two areas in which Dewey notably came up short.

After weathering layoffs and a dip in revenue during the recession, Locke Lord came through with a big 2011—a year that saw the firm shorten its name from Locke Lord Bissell & Liddell. Last year its profits per partner rose 9.1 percent to $1.035 million and its gross revenue jumped 4.9 percent to $416 million. That put the firm ahead of its pre-recession gross revenues, according to this year’s Am Law 100 reporting. Those numbers also helped Locke Lord clock in at number 69 on this year’s Am Law 100.

The firm now has 13 offices, establishing its newest outposts in San Francisco in 2010 and in London earlier this year. The U.K. outpost is the firm’s second overseas location (it opened a Hong Kong office a year ago).