Hangley Aronchick Aims for High-End Practice in a Small Setting
David Pudlin is the longtime president and CEO of Hangley Aronchick, a Philadelphia-based firm that also has offices in Harrsiburg and Norristown, Pennsylvania, and Cherry Hill, New Jersey.
May 10, 2018 at 06:05 PM
4 minute read
David Pudlin is the longtime president and CEO of Hangley Aronchick Segal Pudlin & Schiller, a Philadelphia-based firm that also has offices in Harrisburg and Norristown, Pennsylvania, and Cherry Hill, New Jersey.
How big is your firm, where is it located and what are its primary areas of practice and focus?
Hangley Aronchick has 48 attorneys in commercial litigation, including antitrust and insurance law, environmental, family law, real estate, corporate, tax and estate planning.
Please explain your firm's governance structure and compensation model.
We have an eight-person board elected by our shareholders, with a president/CEO who manages the firm on an ongoing basis. The compensation is based upon a percentage system, with the percentages set at the beginning of the year based upon three-year averages of several factors, with a small (no more than 4 percent of income) discretionary bonus distributed at year-end to shareholders who performed disproportionately well that year.
What do you view as the two biggest opportunities for your firm, and what are the two biggest threats?
A big opportunity is attracting terrific lateral shareholders with portable business who are attracted to a high-quality practice in a smaller setting, and expansion of commercial litigation practice. I would call them challenges and not threats, but having the more junior shareholders replace the business that the more senior shareholders have been generating, and addressing the lifestyle demands of the younger attorneys in a very competitive environment.
After the recession hit, the prevailing theory was that midsize firms would start to see more work come their way from large clients who could no longer justify paying Big Law rates. What has been your experience?
To some extent.
Are your clients pushing for more alternative fee arrangements, and if so what types? Is your firm amenable to those requests?
Absolutely and yes we are. Blended rates and percentage discounts seem to be the most requested.
There is much debate around how law firms can foster the next generation of legal talent. What advantages and disadvantages do midsize firms have in attracting and retaining young lawyers, particularly millennials?
We always have focused on life outside the firm, and also on providing a real opportunity for associates to become shareholders in our firm. Those are advantages we have. We never have had a hard time attracting and retaining younger lawyers, so I cannot think of any disadvantages.
Does your firm employ any nonlawyer professionals in high-level positions (e.g. COO, business development officer, chief strategy officer, etc.)? If so, why is it advantageous to have a nonlawyer in that role? If not, have you considered hiring any?
We have an administrator, a CFO, a head IT person and an in-house marketing person, but most firms do also.
What if any technology advancements have you made in your firm in recent years? What are the challenges in implementing tech changes?
We have made many, but the most recent push is in the area of cybersecurity.
What would you say is the most innovative thing your firm has done recently, whether it be internal operations, how you work with clients, etc.?
Our new website, which is interactive and very state of the art.
Does your firm have a succession plan in place? If so, what challenges do you face in trying to execute that plan? If you don't currently have a plan, is it an issue your firm is thinking about?
No, but we need one sooner rather than later. Yes, I think about it and have for a while, but I cannot get my colleagues excited about, or focused on, it.
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 AllPlaintiffs Seek Redo of First Trial Over Medical Device Plant's Emissions
4 minute readHigh Court Revives Kleinbard's Bid to Collect $70K in Legal Fees From Lancaster DA
4 minute readJudges Push for Action to Combat Increasing Threats Against Judiciary
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
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