Author: TSA Press

When
we
last
checked
in
on
Burns
&
Levinson
—
a
midsized
firm
that
had
been
virtually

ransacked
by
Biglaw
firms
looking
for
attorneys
to
fill
their
new
offices
in
Boston
—
the
firm
was
still
in
search
of
a
potential
merger
partner,
but
at
the
time,
things
were

looking
bleak.

Would
the
legal
profession
wave
goodbye
to
this
firm,
or
would
a
merger
partner
finally
come
to
its
rescue?
Unfortunately,
it
seems
that
the
former
has
come
to
pass.
Burns
&
Levinson
has
decided
to
close
its
doors
after
64
years
in
operation.

“Unfortunately,
after
exhaustive
analysis,
we
have
determined
that
the
economics,
the
timeline
and
the
complexity
of
deals
offered
would
not
work
for
the
remaining
partners
as
a
group
and
for
our
wonderfully
varied
practices,”
Paul
Mastrocola,
the
firm’s
managing
partner,
said
in
the
statement.
“Ultimately,
as
a
partnership,
we
have
decided
that
it
is
better
for
our
amazing
attorneys
to
move
on
to
different
firms
where
each
of
our
practices
can
thrive
and
our
clients
can—and
will—be
well
served.”

Prior
to
the
firm’s
decision
to
wind
down,
it
had
been
in
merger
talks
with
Barclay
Damon.
The

American
Lawyer
has
additional
details:

Barclay
Damon
is
set
to
hire
approximately
10
attorneys
from
Burns
&
Levinson’s
intellectual
property
and
real
estate
groups,
firm
chair
John
Langan
said.
Barclay
Damon
was
initially
in
talks
with
Burns
&
Levinson
for
a
full
merger,
but
ultimately
couldn’t
make
it
work
based
on
the
varying
profitability
of
Burns
&
Levinson’s
remaining
practices.

“It’s
sad,
and
unfortunate,
but
we’re
going
to
try
and
make
the
best
of
it,”
Langan
said.
“We’re
excited
about
the
talent
that
we
are
going
to
be
able
to
bring
in.”

We
wish
the
remaining
lawyers
and
legal
professionals
at
Burns
&
Levinson
the
best
of
luck
as
they
seek
new
opportunities
in
the
legal
industry
and
beyond.

If
your
firm
or
organization
is
closing
its
doors
or
reducing
the
ranks
of
its
lawyers
or
staff,
whether
through
open
layoffs,
stealth
layoffs,
or
voluntary
buyouts,
please
don’t
hesitate
to
let
us
know.
Our
vast
network
of
tipsters
is
part
of
what
makes
Above
the
Law
thrive
—
we’ll
never
ignore
you.
You
can email
us or
text
us
(646-820-8477).
Thank
you!

Burns
&
Levinson
to
Wind
Down
After
64
Years
in
Boston
[American
Lawyer]

Earlier:

Midsize
Boston
Firm
Seeks
Merger
Partner
After
Losing
Nearly
50
Lawyers
To
Biglaw
In
Mass
Lateral
Moves

Midsize
Boston
Firm
Searching
For
Merger
Partner
After
Losing
Half
Its
Lawyers,
But
Things
Are
Getting
Tough

---

Staci
Zaretsky is
a
senior
editor
at
Above
the
Law,
where
she’s
worked
since
2011.
She’d
love
to
hear
from
you,
so
please
feel
free
to

email
her
with
any
tips,
questions,
comments,
or
critiques.
You
can
follow
her
on

X/Twitter
and

Threads
or
connect
with
her
on

LinkedIn.

Say
it
with
me
now:
just
because
they
work
for
the
government,
it
does
not
mean
that
they
are
good
people.
Eric
Adams
is
facing
the
most
flack
for
the
Turkish
hospitality
he’s
allegedly
received,
but
he’s
far
from
the
only
(former)
New
York
employee
in
trouble
with
the
law.
The
New
York
Times
has
coverage:

An
employee
at
the
Queens
district
attorney’s
office
[Derek
Klever]
was
accused
on
Thursday
of
threatening
to
detonate
a
device
at
a
New
York
City
migrant
shelter
after
the
police
found
explosive
materials
in
his
home,
according
to
a
complaint
filed
in
Queens
criminal
court.

…

Mr.
Klever
told
the
witness
that
he
had
been
tinkering
with
the
fireworks
and
that
he
was
thinking
of
renting
a
drone
he
could
use
to
drop
an
explosive,
according
to
the
complaint.
Mr.
Klever
said
that
his
intention
was
to
maim,
not
kill,
and
that
the
migrants
“should
live
in
terror
and
fear
every
day,”
the
complaint
said.

His
plan
was
far
more
sinister
than
“tinkering
with
fireworks”
leads
on.
The
“tinkering”
also
included
nail
gun
cartridges
that
were
set
to
fire
off
in
the
explosion.
The
reason?
His
neighbors
at
a
migrant
shelter
reportedly
partied
too
hard,
too
early.
I
would
imagine
that
headphones
or
moving
would
be
easier,
more
practical
responses
to
a
nose
complaint,
but
what
do
I
know?
I
don’t
work
for
the
DA.
Now,
neither
does
he
—
the
Queens
DA’s
office
confirmed
that
an
employee
was
arrested
and
terminated.

Parties
don’t
have
curfews
in
the
city
that
never
sleeps.
Want
something
different?
Move
to
Connecticut.
Klever
will
have
to
learn
his
lesson
in
prison
if
he’s
convicted.
You
can
learn
it
from
this
article.
Now
get
back
to
work.

D.A.
Employee
Threatened
to
Blow
Up
Queens
Migrant
Shelter,
Police
Say
[NYT]

---

Chris
Williams
became
a
social
media
manager
and
assistant
editor
for
Above
the
Law
in
June
2021.
Prior
to
joining
the
staff,
he
moonlighted
as
a
minor
Memelord™
in
the
Facebook
group Law
School
Memes
for
Edgy
T14s.
 He
endured
Missouri
long
enough
to
graduate
from
Washington
University
in
St.
Louis
School
of
Law.
He
is
a
former
boatbuilder
who
cannot
swim, a
published
author
on
critical
race
theory,
philosophy,
and
humor,
and
has
a
love
for
cycling
that
occasionally
annoys
his
peers.
You
can
reach
him
by
email
at [email protected] and
by
tweet
at @WritesForRent.

In
2016,
Donald
Trump
promised
to
do
an
inspirational
number
of
things
if
we
elected
him.

Trump promised
he
would:
Eliminate
the
$19
trillion
national
debt
within
eight
years,
cut
the
budget
by
20%,
repeal
and
replace
Obamacare,
lower
drug
prices
by
allowing
Medicare
to
negotiate
with
drug
companies,
build
a
wall
—
that
Mexico
would
finance!
—
along
the
southern
border,
invest
in
infrastructure,
triple
the
number
of
Immigration
and
Customs
Enforcement
officers,
raise
the
federal
minimum
wage
to
$10
per
hour,
and
“be
so
presidential,
you’re
going
to
be
bored.”

As
to
those
promises,
Trump
went
0
for
the
bunch
of
’em.

Now,
Trump
tells
us
that
if
Kamala
Harris
wins
the
election,
the
United
States
will
go
to
hell
in
a
handbasket:
Harris
doesn’t
know
what
she’s
doing!
Her
father
was
a
communist!
We’re
heading
to

World
War
III!
If
Harris
wins
the
election,
there
will
be
a

1929-style depression.

Yeah,
yeah.

Bigly.
The
likes
of
which
we’ve
never
seen
before.
Many
people
are
saying
this.

Take
just
a
moment
to
remember
the
things
that Trump
told
us
would
happen if
Joe
Biden
won
the
election
in
2020:

If
Biden
won,
the
economy
was
going
to
sink
into
an
unprecedented
recession.

If
Biden
won,
the
suburbs
would
be
destroyed.

If
Biden
won,
police
departments
would
be
defunded.

If
Biden
won,
there’d
be
an
energy
crisis
for
seniors.

If
Biden
won,
your
guns
would
be
confiscated.

If
Biden
won,
your
religious
freedoms
would
be
assailed.

If
Biden
won,
there’d
be
violence
in
the
cities.

If
Biden
won,
the stock
market
would
crash.

Of
course,
Trump
was
saying
these
things
in
2016
and
2020
only
because
he
was
in
elections,
and
you
expect
a
candidate
to
say
crazy
things
during
election
season.

But
Trump
is
again
in
an
election
season,
and
he’s
again
saying
crazy
things.

Every
time
Trump
says
that
the
country
can’t
survive
four
years
of
Harris,
think
about
the
clarity
of
Trump’s
crystal
ball
when
he
was
making
predictions
in
the
past.

---

 Mark Herrmann spent
17
years
as
a
partner
at
a
leading
international
law
firm
and
is
now
deputy
general
counsel
at
a
large
international
company.
He
is
the
author
of



The
Curmudgeon’s
Guide
to
Practicing
Law and Drug
and
Device
Product
Liability
Litigation
Strategy (affiliate
links).
You
can
reach
him
by
email
at [email protected].

Lawyers
are
still
using
real,
live
people
to
take
a
first
crack
at
document
review,
but
much
like
the
“I’m
not
dead
yet”
guy
from
Monty
Python
and
the
Holy
Grail,
it’s
a
job
that
will
be
stone
dead
soon.
Because
there
are
a
lot
of

deeply
human
tasks
that
AI
will
struggle
to
replace,
but
getting
through
a
first
run
of
documents
doesn’t
look
like
one
of
them.

At
last
week’s

Relativity
Fest,
the
star
of
the
show
was
obviously

Relativity
aiR
for
Review,
which
the
company
moved
to
general
availability.
In
conjunction
with
the
release,
Relativity
pointed
to
impressive
results
the
product
racked
up
during
the
limited
availability
period
including

Cimplifi
reporting
that
the
product
cut
review
time
in
half
and

JND
finding
a
60
percent
cut
in
costs.

“We’ve
used
Relativity
aiR
for
Review
on
multiple
live
projects
with
tremendous
success,”
said Mike
Cichy,
Regional
Manager
of
Litigation
Support
at
Foley
&
Lardner
LLP.
“In
one
case, we
had
an
extremely
tight
production
deadline;
aiR
for
Review
completed
the
review,
which
would
have
taken
over
15
people
and
three
weeks
of
time,
in
less
than
one
week,
all
while
delivering
results
that
far
outperformed
what
we’ve
seen
in
traditional
human
review.”

A
recurring
tale
among
early
users
was
a
belt-and-suspenders
approach
to
first
pass
review,
maintaining
a
team
of
human
reviewers
as
a
quality
assurance
measure.
It’s
a
natural
response
for
a
terminally
overcautious
profession,
but
it’s
also
one
that
multiple
early
adopters
said
they
ultimately
would
abandon
as
unnecessary.
In
fact,
more
than
one
said
the
humans
were
just…
more
wrong.

Not
released
to
the
general
public
yet
—
but
coming
soon
—
Relativity
also
previewed
its

aiR
for
Privilege
product
capable
of
identifying
privileged
documents
and
drafting
a
consistent,
single
voice
privilege
log.
Troutman
Pepper,
already
using
the
limited
availability
product,
anticipates
it
will
cut
privilege
review
time
by
more
than
50
percent.
One
testimonial
provided
at
the
keynote
shared
that
the
product
correctly
found
a
clutch
of
hundreds
of
privileged
documents
that
the
human
reviewers
had
missed.

Turning
over
first
pass
to
the
computers
isn’t
entirely
new.
We’ve
had
TAR
procedures
that
could
tackle
this
for
some
time,
but
lawyers
spent
the
last
decade
performatively
bad
mouthing
tech
review
in
the
courts.
Now,
armed
with
generative
AI,
attorneys
seem
to
have
discovered
a
new
level
of
trust.
Especially
senior
lawyers
who
are

actually
engaging
with
discovery
platforms
for
the
first
time.

How
long
will
attorneys
keep
humans
in
the
loop
for
their
own
peace
of
mind?
As
Relativity’s
CAO/CLO
Adam
Weiss
told
me,
“the
more
ubiquitous
this
technology
becomes,
the
runway
gets
shortened
considerably.”
In
other
words,
lawyers
won’t
let
AI
take
the
wheel
out
of
the
gate,
but
the
more
customers
are
willing
to
say
“trust
us,
we
did
the
same
thing
and
you’ll
soon
realize
it’s
costly
and
useless,”
it’s
going
to
get
harder
to
justify
keeping
the
human
first
pass
reviewers
around.

Which
is
good
news
for
clients
and
attorneys
trying
to
do
more
and
higher
level
work.
It’s
not
particularly
great
news
for
folks
working
as
contract
attorneys
to
pick
up
work
on
brute
force
review
projects.
There’s
still
a
market
for
alternative
legal
service
providers
—
collecting
and
loading
up
documents
remains
a
skill
that
outside
consultants
can
perform
better
and
cheaper
than
a
law
firm.
But
anyone
out
there
with
a
business
model
reliant
on
throwing
hundreds
of
bodies
at
a
problem
should
start
rethinking.

---

Joe
Patrice is
a
senior
editor
at
Above
the
Law
and
co-host
of

Thinking
Like
A
Lawyer.
Feel
free
to email
any
tips,
questions,
or
comments.
Follow
him
on Twitter or

Bluesky
if
you’re
interested
in
law,
politics,
and
a
healthy
dose
of
college
sports
news.
Joe
also
serves
as
a

Managing
Director
at
RPN
Executive
Search.

Baker
McKenzie
is
no
slouch
in
the
world
of
Biglaw
—
by
gross
revenue,
the
metric
used
to
create
the
Am
Law
200
ranking,
the
firm
took
in
$3,286,791,000
in
2023,
making
it
the
number
4
firm.
But
firm
leaders
aren’t
content
to
just
sit
at
the
top
of
that
ranking.
The
international
firm
is
plotting
for
more
growth,
focused
primarily
in
New
York
and
North
America.
They’re
looking
to
lure
lateral
partners
into
the
fold
and
boost
thir
profits
per
equity
partner
(PEP).

As
Colin
Murray,
Baker
McKenzie’s
North
American
CEO,

told
Law.com,
“If
you’re
going
to
go
after
the
best
talent,
you
have
to
pay
market-level
compensation.
Our
U.S.
[PEP]
would
land
us
around
No.
39.
Our
goal
is
to
be
playing
in
the
top
25.”
That
goal
would
raise
the
PEP
from
$3.5
million
to
$8
million.

Alan
Zoccolillo,
chair
of
the
North
American
transactional
practices,
was
blunt
that
in
order
to
get
more
profitable,
they
have
to
offer
big
paydays.
In
the
partner
lateral
market,
compensation
“plays
a
huge
factor,”
he
noted,
and
“part
of
our
success
has
been
growing
the
profitability
of
our
practice
in
the
U.S.”
And
he
gave
some
hints
about
what
that
looks
like
at
Baker
McKenzie.

For
top
lateral
talent,
the
firm
offers
two-
to
three-year
guarantees
in
cash
or
shares
to
laterals,
depending
on
the
partner,
according
to
Zoccolillo.

“Typically
we
offer
multiyear
cash
guarantees
in
line
with
market
compensation
for
laterals,
but
sometimes
do
combine
that
with
shares.
It
really
depends
upon
the
specific
situation,”
Zoccolillo
said.
The
firm
has
not
adjusted
compensation
for
other
lawyers
in
order
to
pay
top
performers,
he
added.

One
practice
area
the
firm
is
looking
to
grow
is
mergers
and
acquisitions.
As
Zoccolillo
said,
“10
years
ago,
we
were
a
smaller,
more
middle
market
player
in
M&A.”
But,
“With
our
focus
on
internal
growth,
bringing
on
high-quality
people,
and
focusing
on
key
clients
and
key
industries,
we’ve
substantially
changed
our
profile
and
are
now
routinely
advising
on
some
of
the
world’s
largest
and
most
complicated
transactions.”

But
the
firm
has
stuff
to
offer
laterals
outside
of
*just*
money.
Baker
McKenzie
has
an
international
reach
with
86%
of
partner
outside
the
U.S.
And
they
see
that
as
an
advantage.

“You’re
not
going
to
bring
in
the
very
best
talent
just
through
compensation.
There
has
to
be
a
differentiating
factor,”
Murray
said,
adding
those
factors
include
the
firm’s
“strong
and
collegial
culture”
as
well
as
its
“global
footprint.”
Zoccolillo
added
the
firm
believes
its
“global
footprint
and
practice
depth
is
key.”

Recent
lateral
partner
Arturo
Carrillo
said
the
firm’s
global
reach
in
Latin
and
South
America
was
attractive
when
he
made
the
move
to
Baker.

Some
of
the
most
recent
international
deals
include
NSE
listings
in
Mexico,
M&A
transactions
in
Peru
and
bank
financings
in
Colombia,
according
to
Carrillo.

“The
global
transactions
we
work
on
often
involve
50,
60,70,
sometimes
100
jurisdictions.
There
really
isn’t
another
firm
that
has
the
global
reach
and
full-service
transactional
team
and
that
does
it
as
well
as
we
do,”
Zoccolillo
said.

With
a

lateral
partner
market
that
is
fire
right
now,
Baker
McKenzie
isn’t
alone
in
its
quest
for
the
best
legal
talent.
But
it’s
clear
they’re
putting
in
the
work
to
grow,
grow,
grow.

---

Kathryn
Rubino
is
a
Senior
Editor
at
Above
the
Law,
host
of

The
Jabot
podcast,
and
co-host
of

Thinking
Like
A
Lawyer.
AtL
tipsters
are
the
best,
so
please
connect
with
her.
Feel
free
to
email

her
with
any
tips,
questions,
or
comments
and
follow
her
on
Twitter

@Kathryn1 or
Mastodon

@[email protected].

We’re
still
a
few
months
out
from
the
release
of
the
latest
iteration
of
the
U.S.
News
law
school
rankings,
but
we
know
that
many
are
eager
to
see
what
the
future
may
hold.
For
those
of
you
who
can’t
get
enough
of
the
rankings,
we’ve
got
a
surprise
for
you.

Today,
we
unveil
a
new

rankings
prediction,
courtesy
of
noted
law
school
consultant
Mike
Spivey
of
the
Spivey
Consulting
Group.
With
58%
of
the
data
available,
Spivey
was
able
to
calculate
the
top-ranked
schools
for
the
upcoming
U.S.
News
law
school
rankings
using
the
magazine’s
current
methodology.

Before
we
get
to
the
ranking,
Spivey
cautions
that
his
predictions
may
not
be
completely
accurate
for
a
number
of
reasons:

[O]ur
model
won’t
be
entirely
precise,
especially
given
that
U.S.
News
can
always
change
metric
weights
or
methodology.
For
example,
there
is
ample
reason
to
believe
U.S.
News
likes
to
keep
Yale
ranked
at
#1
and
very
well
might
make
a
slight
metric
or
weight
change
to
do
so.
In
fact,
we’d
predict
they
will
do
just
that
(our
model
is
simply
following
the
current
58%
data
and
not
amending
it
with
our
instincts).
We
do
project
little
methodological
change
this
year….

That
being
said,
what
could
the
new
edition
of
U.S.
News
law
school
rankings
look
like
at
the
very
top?
Here
are
the
top
11
schools
—
of
course
there
are
ties
here,
would
you
expect
anything
less
from
U.S.
News?
—
based
the
calculations
he’s
run:

1.
Stanford
University
2.
Yale
University
3.
University
of
Chicago
4.
Harvard
University
4.
University
of
Pennsylvania
(Carey)
4.
University
of
Virginia
7.
Duke
University
8.
Michigan
University
8.
Columbia
University
8.
New
York
University
8.
Northwestern
University
(Pritzker)

No
more
tie
for
No.
1?!
Stanford
overtakes
Yale
as
the
best
law
school
in
the
country?!
Yale
has
been
ranked
as
the
top
law
school
in
America
for
more
than
30
years.
This
would
be
a
historic
change.
U.S.
News
would
never…
or
would
they?
And
Michigan,
Columbia,
NYU,
Northwestern
in
a
four-way
tie!
This
is
just
too
much.

Will
any
or
all
of
these
things
happen?
That’s
unclear,
but
given
Spivey’s
vast
experience
with
the
rankings,
these
could
all
be
serious
possibilities.
“Our
model
with
the
complete
data
has
proven
to
be
incredibly
precise,”
Spivey
said.
“Last
year,
our
model
predicted
177
schools
exactly
where
they
landed,
and
the
remaining
were
only
off
by
+/-1.”

Stay
tuned
for
Spivey’s
predictions
for
the
Top
100,
due
out
in
December
following
the
release
of
the
2024
ABA-required
509
disclosures.
The
complete
U.S.
News
law
school
rankings
will
likely
be
published
sometime
this
spring.
Stay
tuned
for
what
could
be
a
major
change!

Top
11
U.S
News
Law
Schools
Modeled
2025
Rankings
[Spivey
Consulting]

---

Staci
Zaretsky is
a
senior
editor
at
Above
the
Law,
where
she’s
worked
since
2011.
She’d
love
to
hear
from
you,
so
please
feel
free
to

email
her
with
any
tips,
questions,
comments,
or
critiques.
You
can
follow
her
on

X/Twitter
and

Threads
or
connect
with
her
on

LinkedIn.

*
Eric
Adams
top
aide
served
federal
subpoena
and
has
her
phone
seized
by
the
DA.
So,
welcome
NY
state
prosecutors
to
the
Adams
show!
[

Gothamist]

*
“Negligently
parked
helicopter”
isn’t
a
phrase
you
see
often.
[ABA
Journal]

*
Judge
tells
woman
who
owes
over
$50K
in
contempt
that
her
lawyers
aren’t
helping.
[Bloomberg
Law
News]

*
Lawyer
taking
on
over
50
clients
to
go
after
Diddy.
[Houston
Public
Media]

*
Devastating
hurricane
causing
courthouse
disruption.
[Law360]

*
New
leadership
at
Davis
Wright
Tremaine.
Our
friends
over
at
Law.com
are
experiencing
some
technical
issues,
so
if
this
doesn’t
open,
just
try
again.
[Law.com]

*
Wyoming
wants
to
make
it
easier
to
do
drivebys
on
wolves.
People
firing
from
moving
vehicles…
what
could
possibly
go
wrong?
[CBS]

Above The Law In your inbox

Subscribe and get breaking news, commentary, and opinions on law firms, lawyers, law schools, lawsuits, judges, and more.

We will never sell or share your information without your consent. See our privacy policy.