Author: TSA Press

Most of the bonus season follows form. A leader announces, most folks follow, some outlier goes over the top to garner a little press but no one follows, then Am Law 100 firms start coming in with bonuses that either outright don’t match or have some sneaky caveats designed to save firms a few bucks. Later payout dates, higher billable requirements… stuff like that.

As far as I know, we’ve gotten into the phase 3 bonus announcements. As the shorting goes its impact isn’t too extreme, but it’s unfortunate for those who will be caught in the crosshairs.

Dechert Price just announced its bonuses, and more or less they follow true to form.

Class of 2018 – $15,000
Class of 2017 – $25,000
Class of 2016 – $50,000
Class of 2015 – $65,000
Class of 2014 – $80,000
Class of 2013 – $90,000
Class of 2012 and senior – $100,000

Associates will need to be in good standing with 1950 “bonus hours” which is a combination of billables, pro bono, firm-as-client work, and 25 hours of shadowing. Bonuses will be paid on January 23, 2020. The memo says January 23, 2019, but it’s doubtful that they possess a time machine.

Only Wachtell has one of those.

What’s missing from this matching list is, of course, the class of 2019. Most firms are granting the newcomers class appropriate bonuses prorated based on their start dates. Dechert is extending that offer too, but only to associates who joined between December 1, 2018 and July 1, 2019. In other words, all the first years who joined in the Fall of 2019 are getting nothing for their efforts.

If you ascribe to the worldview that bonuses mean “bonuses” in Biglaw — that bonuses are a purely discretionary perk to reward a year’s worth of effort — then this all makes sense. New associates didn’t work even half a year yet so they don’t deserve anything on top of the regular salary.

But bonuses aren’t “bonuses” in these firms. It’s an adjustable but a routine and expected component of an associate’s salary. To keep these associates paid in line with their peers at other firms, then they need to be paid what their peers are getting paid. It’s not a terrific amount of money… why skimp here?

In any event, congratulations to most of Dechert’s associates. For the newbies, better luck next year.

(Full memo captured on the next page…)

Complain and you shall receive. Not just a few hours ago I was whining about the relative slowness of this year’s Biglaw bonus announcements. Yes, it is understandable since Milbank’s surprise move the first week of November bumped up the usual timeline. But still, I want more bonus announcements, and I’m sure a lot of you agree.

Well, looks like Schulte, Roth & Zabel heard me. Today, they announced the following bonus scale:

Class of 2019 – $15,000 (prorated)
Class of 2018 – $15,000
Class of 2017 – $25,000
Class of 2016 – $50,000
Class of 2015 – $65,000
Class of 2014 – $80,000
Class of 2013 – $90,000
Class of 2012 – $100,000
Class of 2011 – $100,000
Class of 2010 – $100,000

Plus, the firm will give extra money if associates hit the 2,300 and 2,500 billable-hour marks with $20,000 and $40,000, respectively.

(Full memo on the next page.)

Remember, we depend on your tips to stay on top of important bonus updates, so when your firm matches, please text us (646-820-8477) or email us (subject line: “[Firm Name] Matches”). Please include the memo if available. You can take a photo of the memo and send it via text or email if you don’t want to forward the original PDF or Word file.

And if you’d like to sign up for ATL’s Bonus Alerts (which is the alert list we also use for all salary announcements), please scroll down and enter your email address in the box below this post. If you previously signed up for the bonus alerts, you don’t need to do anything. You’ll receive an email notification within minutes of each bonus announcement that we publish. Thanks for your help!

---

Kathryn Rubino is a Senior Editor at Above the Law, and host of The Jabot podcast. 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).

How do you feel about portraits of prominent slaveholders? If you’re against them, then you’ll probably be sympathetic to a new petition circulating at Washington & Lee University. You see, diplomas at that school display portraits of the school’s namesakes, George Washington and Robert E. Lee, and law school students are circulating a petition to allow students the option of a diploma without the slaveholders’ pictures.

The students take issue with the legacies of both namesakes. Washington’s place in history is somewhat complicated because while he did a pretty good job as the country’s first president, he was also an extremely problematic slave owner. Lee’s role in leading the Confederate forces makes his historical significance more straightforward, and a symbol of the racist legacy of slavery that mars the United States’ history.

“Given the aftermath of the 2017 Unite the Right Rally in Charlottesville and the heightened awareness of making Washington & Lee an inclusive and compassionate environment to all students, we believe this request provides alumni the ability to honor their alma mater without the presence of the portraits that some may find controversial or offensive,” the petition reads.

The petition has been signed by students, alumni, faculty, and staff and is supported by the law school’s Student Bar Association; the Women Law Students Organization; the Black Law Students Association; OutLaw; the Jewish Law Student Association; and the Latin American Law Student Association.

But of course, the move is not without controversy. As reported by Law.com, a group — Generals Redoubt — that “seeks to prevent further retreat from the University’s history, values and traditions; protect revered campus buildings; and continue to honor the magnificent contributions of its Founders” [yikes] had something to say about the petition:

“The petition is a symptom of strong undercurrents within the university to dismantle the traditions, values and history of Washington and Lee,” according to a statement released this week by the Generals Redoubt, a group that says it’s dedicated to the preservation of the tradition and history of Washington and Lee University. “The removal of the likeness of George Washington and Robert E. Lee, which adorns the offices and homes of many of our alumni is a severe affront to the generous and loyal alumni who respect the character and values of our namesakes.”

Yeah… they are trying to take a stance against a value shared by the school’s namesakes — specifically the value that you can own people.

As for the university’s powers-that-be, a spokesperson said university president William Dudley has yet to officially receive the petition and the school has no comment.

Listen, I’m on board with all the attempts to stop valorizing the Confederacy and agree that Washington’s legacy is correctly under fire. But… I’m not sure removing these portraits does a lot. The school is still named after these problematic folks, and their names will still be displayed on the diploma even if the petition is successful. I suppose it is a step in the right direction, but not giving your hard-earned money (or Sallie Mae’s money that you’re on the hook for) to an institution named after a Confederate general might be a better one.

---

Kathryn Rubino is a Senior Editor at Above the Law, and host of The Jabot podcast. 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).

For nearly a decade, Moore Capital Management founder Louis Bacon and his Bahamas neighbor, Canadian discount fashion mogul Peter Nygard, have nursed a small disagreement about the latter’s 150,000-square foot Mayan-style resort abutting the former’s presumably less-ostentatious beach home. While nominally about Nygard’s alleged illegal dredging of the waters of Lyford Cay, the dispute has metastasized into a morass of international litigation, with allegations of Ku Klux Klan membership, false accusations of Ku Klux Klan membership, military-grade speaker deployment, drug trafficking, arson, assault, breaking and entering, vandalism, political corruption, defamation, counter-defamation by New York Times, insider-trading, attempted murder(s) and actual murder.

[I’d study] law or something, not to practice, just to be able to read my own contracts.

I don’t have enough information. I just started reading my own damn contracts not that long ago, so I don’t know. I have to be more aware and know a little bit more to even figure out what [the root issue is] and how to fix it. I think it’s about accountability for sure.

— American actress and singer Zendaya, explaining what could be next for her in an interview with Allure, while offering her thoughts on pay equity for women in Hollywood. While 23-year-old Zendaya is a high school graduate, she’s not yet taken on college. Zendaya need to complete at least several college-level courses if she’d like to follow in Kim Kardashian’s footsteps and study the law and take the bar exam without going to law school.

---

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 Twitter or connect with her on LinkedIn.

Law firms are operating in a tight, competitive market which offers many challenges but also exciting opportunities for growth. The crucial question for attorneys who are looking to expand their business is this: what do clients look for when selecting a lawyer?

In their 2019 legal trends report, the CLIO team did a deep dive to help attorneys understand how to attract new clients and grow their practice. In preparing the report, CLIO surveyed over 2,500 attorneys and 2,000 consumers to draw their conclusions. Here are some of the key takeaways for law firms looking to attract new clients in 2020:

1. Don’t Rely On One Source. 59% of clients asked for referrals (from family, friends, and other attorneys), 57% did a web search, and 16% did both. 18% said they would never ask for a referral from friends or family. So law firms that are focusing entirely on either web traffic or referral sources are missing out on a lot of potential clients.
2. Be Responsive. This is not exactly a new revelation, but it bears repeating – especially when 89% of attorneys surveyed said they respond to client inquiries within 24 hours, but only 56% of lawyers contacted as part of the CLIO survey responded to phone calls, and only 40% responded to email. That’s a big gap. For law firms, overcoming this gap might mean reviewing your client intake process to identify where communications are getting lost, or leveraging virtual receptionist technology to take on some of the administrative bandwidth.
3. Make Yourself A Resource. The main thing clients say they want from attorneys is more information – and potential clients who don’t find what they are looking for on your website are less likely to retain your firm. 77% want to know a lawyer’s credentials, 72% want to know the kind of cases the firm handles, 70% of potential clients want to understand what they should expect from the legal process, and 66% want an estimate of the total cost of their case. These last two items are a call to action for attorneys to use their websites as a true client resource, including pages that provide an explanation of how your fees will be calculated, and a simple explainer of what the legal process looks like.
4. Analyze Practice Trends. Most law firms were unable – or unwilling – to provide cost estimates or a snapshot of how the case might go in an initial phone call or email, instead preferring to schedule a follow-up consultation. As a lawyer, you know every case is unique, which can make it difficult to calculate cost estimates or identify next steps. However, if you are able to share this information early on, it tells the potential client that you respect their time and their needs, which will help you stand out in the crowd. Take the time to analyze the trends of cases you have handled so you can walk potential clients through typical case examples and how their case might proceed. Communicating effectively with potential clients means overcoming their uncertainties and confusion, and will help your practice grow.

Law firms are looking to maximize their growth potential, and many attorneys are not up to the task of managing the business side of the practice. Attorneys who can bring in new clients are a hugely valuable asset to their firms. Your key takeaways? Diversify your outreach strategy, communicate clearly and effectively about case trends and costs, and respond quickly. This will set you – and your law firm – up for success in the long term.

Looking for more tips on growing your practice? Check out some of Lawline’s great Law Practice Management CLE programs.

Ever since the 2016 election and the legal turmoil that began shortly after President Donald Trump’s swearing in (and has continued to this day), thousands of college graduates — and women in particular — have been inspired to go to law school.

As our readers know, the latest Princeton Review law school rankings are out, and today, we’ll focus on yet another incredibly important ranking during the #MeToo #TimesUp era in America, an era where a woman who’s a law school graduate could become the Democratic nominee for president: The law schools with the greatest resources for women.

Which law schools do you think came out on top of this list?

First, we’ll begin with the methodology Princeton Review used to determine which law schools offer the greatest resources for women. This ranking was based on the percentage of the student body who identify as women as well as on student answers to a single survey question: whether all students are afforded equal treatment by students and faculty regardless of their gender.

According to Princeton Review, these are the law schools where women stand on equal footing with their male classmates:

1. Stanford University School of Law
2. Vermont Law School
3. University of the District of Columbia David A. Clarke School of Law
4. New England Law – Boston
5. University of Toledo College of Law
6. UC Davis School of Law
7. Washington University School of Law – St. Louis
8. Brooklyn Law School
9. Temple University Beasley School of Law

Law school may be the perfect place for women in America to resist, persist, and prove that the future is female. The law is a powerful tool, and we hope that women who want change will wield it wisely. We wish you the best of luck in law school!

Did your law school or alma mater make the cut? If it did, do you think it was ranked fairly? If it didn’t make the list for best career prospects, do you agree with that assessment? Please email us or text us (646-820-8477) with your thoughts. Thanks.

Greatest Resources for Women [Princeton Review]
Best Law Schools 2020 [Princeton Review]

---

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 Twitter or connect with her on LinkedIn.

Politics

I would not try to get cute with this witness.

By Elie Mystal

at 1:16 PM

—ADVERTISEMENT—

Bonus season came early this year, when the market standard was set by Milbank. But moving on bonuses the first week of November has some downsides — well, for the rest of the market, as some firms were caught flat-footed and weren’t able to match that scale immediately. Even perennial bonus leader Cravath had to take a few days to announce their match of the scale. But once Cravath got on board, we had the early adopters rush to announce their bonuses.

But then, nothing much happened. Crickets. On the one hand, it’s completely understandable — we are still a week out from Thanksgiving. But your Above the Law editors were getting antsy waiting for the next announcement, and I’m sure a lot of associates out there can feel me on that one. Fortunately, Sidley came through with their year-end bonus scale:

Class of 2018 – $15,000
Class of 2017 – $25,000
Class of 2016 – $50,000
Class of 2015 – $65,000
Class of 2014 – $80,000
Class of 2013 – $90,000
Class of 2012  – $100,000
Class of 2011+ – $100,000

The bonuses come with a catch however: Associates must bill a minimum of 2,000 hours, 1,800 of which must be client chargeable and/or legal services to the firm.

(Full memo on the next page.)

Remember, we depend on your tips to stay on top of important bonus updates, so when your firm matches, please text us (646-820-8477) or email us (subject line: “[Firm Name] Matches”). Please include the memo if available. You can take a photo of the memo and send it via text or email if you don’t want to forward the original PDF or Word file.

And if you’d like to sign up for ATL’s Bonus Alerts (which is the alert list we also use for all salary announcements), please scroll down and enter your email address in the box below this post. If you previously signed up for the bonus alerts, you don’t need to do anything. You’ll receive an email notification within minutes of each bonus announcement that we publish. Thanks for your help!

---

Kathryn Rubino is a Senior Editor at Above the Law, and host of The Jabot podcast. 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).

The introduction of new regulations creates obstacles for lawmakers worldwide and the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) was no exception.

New challenges include:

• The elimination of the cost barrier for a data subject to submit a Data Subject Access Request (DSAR) in most circumstances;
• The need for a request to be in writing has been removed, making oral requests, for example, now acceptable;
• A reduction in the timeline to respond from 40 days to one month, compressing response timelines unless an extension can be justified;
• And more!

How can an eDiscovery solution be leveraged to optimize workflows?

Click here to download this free white paper today to learn different ways to optimise workflows to address specific DSAR challenges.