I've never heard of it and I can't imagine it would work for a non-IP firm. Especially a corporate boutique- most of those firms have been gobbled up. It seems like they are just try to cut as much fat as possible to make themselves attractive for a firm looking to expand their NYC corporate practice.LawIdiot86 wrote: Right, but I'm talking about firms that survived as going concerns after downsizing into a niche boutique.
How to handle Dewey (or similar firms) Forum
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
-
- Posts: 2777
- Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2011 12:19 pm
Re: How to handle Dewey (or similar firms)
-
- Posts: 1159
- Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2011 5:21 pm
Re: How to handle Dewey (or similar firms)
I thought so. I know some firms have refused to grow out of non-lit boutique/mid-size status, Seward, Stroock, Otterbourg, Mound Cotton, Kramer Levin, Hughes Hubbard, Cahill, Curtis-Mallet, Cullen, Fragomen, maybe Epstein Becker, but I never heard of any shrinking back into a non-IP boutique status.timbs4339 wrote:I've never heard of it and I can't imagine it would work for a non-IP firm. Especially a corporate boutique- most of those firms have been gobbled up. It seems like they are just try to cut as much fat as possible to make themselves attractive for a firm looking to expand their NYC corporate practice.LawIdiot86 wrote: Right, but I'm talking about firms that survived as going concerns after downsizing into a niche boutique.
-
- Posts: 428521
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: How to handle Dewey (or similar firms)
I think Stroock, Cahill, Hughes Hubbard and Kramer Levin are solidly considered biglaw at this point. They just haven't pursued the aggressive international or national expansion that got Dewey and Howrey into trouble. The rest are midlaw.LawIdiot86 wrote:I thought so. I know some firms have refused to grow out of non-lit boutique/mid-size status, Seward, Stroock, Otterbourg, Mound Cotton, Kramer Levin, Hughes Hubbard, Cahill, Curtis-Mallet, Cullen, Fragomen, maybe Epstein Becker, but I never heard of any shrinking back into a non-IP boutique status.timbs4339 wrote:I've never heard of it and I can't imagine it would work for a non-IP firm. Especially a corporate boutique- most of those firms have been gobbled up. It seems like they are just try to cut as much fat as possible to make themselves attractive for a firm looking to expand their NYC corporate practice.LawIdiot86 wrote: Right, but I'm talking about firms that survived as going concerns after downsizing into a niche boutique.
Seward might actually be the best example of what a pared down Dewey would look like.
-
- Posts: 1159
- Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2011 5:21 pm
Re: How to handle Dewey (or similar firms)
My perception is that:Anonymous User wrote:I think Stroock, Cahill, Hughes Hubbard and Kramer Levin are solidly considered biglaw at this point. They just haven't pursued the aggressive international or national expansion that got Dewey and Howrey into trouble. The rest are midlaw.LawIdiot86 wrote:I thought so. I know some firms have refused to grow out of non-lit boutique/mid-size status, Seward, Stroock, Otterbourg, Mound Cotton, Kramer Levin, Hughes Hubbard, Cahill, Curtis-Mallet, Cullen, Fragomen, maybe Epstein Becker, but I never heard of any shrinking back into a non-IP boutique status.timbs4339 wrote:I've never heard of it and I can't imagine it would work for a non-IP firm. Especially a corporate boutique- most of those firms have been gobbled up. It seems like they are just try to cut as much fat as possible to make themselves attractive for a firm looking to expand their NYC corporate practice.LawIdiot86 wrote: Right, but I'm talking about firms that survived as going concerns after downsizing into a niche boutique.
Seward might actually be the best example of what a pared down Dewey would look like.
Patterson Belknap, Stroock, Cahill and Kramer Levin are corporate specialists;
Hughes Hubbard has avoided national expansion;
Mound Cotton is insurance;
Fragomen is immigration;
Curtis-Mallet is some international specialty;
Seward is a IM/finance specialist;
Otterbourg is a bankruptcy boutique;
Epstein Becker is health;
Keller Heckman is science;
Cullen & Dykman is general (I was wrong).
-
- Posts: 1245
- Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2009 3:24 pm
Re: How to handle Dewey (or similar firms)
Patterson Belknap and Kramer Levin do almost exclusively litigation.LawIdiot86 wrote: My perception is that:
Patterson Belknap, Stroock, Cahill and Kramer Levin are corporate specialists;
Hughes Hubbard has avoided national expansion;
Mound Cotton is insurance;
Fragomen is immigration;
Curtis-Mallet is some international specialty;
Seward is a IM/finance specialist;
Otterbourg is a bankruptcy boutique;
Epstein Becker is health;
Keller Heckman is science;
Cullen & Dykman is general (I was wrong).
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 2777
- Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2011 12:19 pm
Re: How to handle Dewey (or similar firms)
I thought that was Kasowitz Benson? Kramer has a big corporate group.imchuckbass58 wrote:Patterson Belknap and Kramer Levin do almost exclusively litigation.LawIdiot86 wrote: My perception is that:
Patterson Belknap, Stroock, Cahill and Kramer Levin are corporate specialists;
Hughes Hubbard has avoided national expansion;
Mound Cotton is insurance;
Fragomen is immigration;
Curtis-Mallet is some international specialty;
Seward is a IM/finance specialist;
Otterbourg is a bankruptcy boutique;
Epstein Becker is health;
Keller Heckman is science;
Cullen & Dykman is general (I was wrong).
-
- Posts: 1245
- Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2009 3:24 pm
Re: How to handle Dewey (or similar firms)
Perhaps a mischaracterization - their litigation department is bigger than their corporate department though.timbs4339 wrote:
I thought that was Kasowitz Benson? Kramer has a big corporate group.
On a different note, I'm curious about the speculation that Dewey will become a corporate "boutique." I have no reason to disbelieve it, but it seems like most of the lawyers leaving have been corporate folks.
-
- Posts: 428521
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: How to handle Dewey (or similar firms)
Curtis, Mallet-PrevostLawIdiot86 wrote:My perception is that:
Patterson Belknap, Stroock, Cahill and Kramer Levin are corporate specialists;
Hughes Hubbard has avoided national expansion;
Mound Cotton is insurance;
Fragomen is immigration;
Curtis-Mallet is some international specialty;
Seward is a IM/finance specialist;
Otterbourg is a bankruptcy boutique;
Epstein Becker is health;
Keller Heckman is science;
Cullen & Dykman is general (I was wrong).
and it's international arbitration. Also bankruptcy in the US, as well as some internationally.
-
- Posts: 5923
- Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2009 9:10 pm
Re: How to handle Dewey (or similar firms)
From the article, I got the idea that they're pairing down in order to sell the firm, not to become a corporate boutique. At least that's what it says Martin Bienenstock is looking to restructure in hopes of doing.
Also, Kramer Levin and Cahill have big lit departments (pretty sure Stroock does too, but I don't know much about it). And PBWT is a lit firm, not a corporate firm.
Also, Kramer Levin and Cahill have big lit departments (pretty sure Stroock does too, but I don't know much about it). And PBWT is a lit firm, not a corporate firm.
-
- Posts: 1159
- Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2011 5:21 pm
Re: How to handle Dewey (or similar firms)
I need to listen less to OCS and more to TLS for information about firms.keg411 wrote:From the article, I got the idea that they're pairing down in order to sell the firm, not to become a corporate boutique. At least that's what it says Martin Bienenstock is looking to restructure in hopes of doing.
Also, Kramer Levin and Cahill have big lit departments (pretty sure Stroock does too, but I don't know much about it). And PBWT is a lit firm, not a corporate firm.
-
- Posts: 451
- Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2010 1:59 am
Re: How to handle Dewey (or similar firms)
Has Dewey said anything to the incoming SA's? Does anyone with any information on the matter know?
-
- Posts: 428521
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: How to handle Dewey (or similar firms)
No they haven't. And the Jan. start date for the incoming class was announced back in March (even though it was 'breaking' news today).
-
- Posts: 5923
- Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2009 9:10 pm
Re: How to handle Dewey (or similar firms)
NALP and Chambers (Partners and Associate) should be your BFF's if you're going through OCI this year (I dunno if you are, but for anyone reading this thread).LawIdiot86 wrote:I need to listen less to OCS and more to TLS for information about firms.keg411 wrote:From the article, I got the idea that they're pairing down in order to sell the firm, not to become a corporate boutique. At least that's what it says Martin Bienenstock is looking to restructure in hopes of doing.
Also, Kramer Levin and Cahill have big lit departments (pretty sure Stroock does too, but I don't know much about it). And PBWT is a lit firm, not a corporate firm.
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 428521
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: How to handle Dewey (or similar firms)
Incoming SA here. What have you other SAs done about back up plans? How have you managed to secure other things? I wish the firm would tell us something...
-
- Posts: 428521
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: How to handle Dewey (or similar firms)
Not a Dewey SA, but what have you done, etc? Just curious, tbh.Anonymous User wrote:Incoming SA here. What have you other SAs done about back up plans? How have you managed to secure other things? I wish the firm would tell us something...
-
- Posts: 437
- Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 7:52 pm
Re: How to handle Dewey (or similar firms)
The new NLJ350 listed Kasowitz as having 108 partners. Kasowitz's website lists them as having 5 corporate partners. To say that their litigation department is bigger than their corporate department is a huge understatement. Litigation is what they do (they seem to operate similarly Boies Schiller and Quinn Emmanuel in that regard).imchuckbass58 wrote:Perhaps a mischaracterization - their litigation department is bigger than their corporate department though.timbs4339 wrote:
I thought that was Kasowitz Benson? Kramer has a big corporate group.
- Old Gregg
- Posts: 5409
- Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 1:26 pm
Re: How to handle Dewey (or similar firms)
Kasowitz corporate, like Boies corporate, is a big fat nothing. Don't even consider it when talking about the strength of those firms.xcountryjunkie wrote:The new NLJ350 listed Kasowitz as having 108 partners. Kasowitz's website lists them as having 5 corporate partners. To say that their litigation department is bigger than their corporate department is a huge understatement. Litigation is what they do (they seem to operate similarly Boies Schiller and Quinn Emmanuel in that regard).imchuckbass58 wrote:Perhaps a mischaracterization - their litigation department is bigger than their corporate department though.timbs4339 wrote:
I thought that was Kasowitz Benson? Kramer has a big corporate group.
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 2777
- Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2011 12:19 pm
Re: How to handle Dewey (or similar firms)
I think he was referring to Kramer Levin, which has a slightly larger lit group than corporate but has pretty standard biglaw practice areas (lit, corp, bankruptcy, real estate, IP) and is definitely not midlaw.Fresh Prince wrote:Kasowitz corporate, like Boies corporate, is a big fat nothing. Don't even consider it when talking about the strength of those firms.xcountryjunkie wrote:The new NLJ350 listed Kasowitz as having 108 partners. Kasowitz's website lists them as having 5 corporate partners. To say that their litigation department is bigger than their corporate department is a huge understatement. Litigation is what they do (they seem to operate similarly Boies Schiller and Quinn Emmanuel in that regard).imchuckbass58 wrote:Perhaps a mischaracterization - their litigation department is bigger than their corporate department though.timbs4339 wrote:
I thought that was Kasowitz Benson? Kramer has a big corporate group.
Kasowitz and Patterson are very good lit firms that get shafted by the Vault rankings focus on transactional work.
-
- Posts: 428521
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: How to handle Dewey (or similar firms)
http://newsandinsight.thomsonreuters.co ... e_unclear/
Bankruptcy counsel. I think that basically is the end of the road.
Bankruptcy counsel. I think that basically is the end of the road.
-
- Posts: 428521
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: How to handle Dewey (or similar firms)
It looks like a prepackaged bankruptcy-- for those with a subscription: this is on the front page of the WSJ this morning.Anonymous User wrote:http://newsandinsight.thomsonreuters.co ... e_unclear/
Bankruptcy counsel. I think that basically is the end of the road.
a few key quotes:
"Among potential partners for the merger-and-bankruptcy plan being floated, Dewey has made overtures to New York-based Shearman & Sterling LLP; Greenberg Traurig LLP, which has roots in Miami; and Pittsburgh-based Reed Smith LP"
"The acquiring firm would pay little or nothing up front, but would likely be expected to cover ongoing operating costs as the bankruptcy case proceeded."
I can't imagine any of the firms listed absorbing all of Dewey's offices/attorneys, I'm guessing NY-based practice and lawyers will be mostly retained, but many of the smaller satellite offices would probably be shuttered.
-
- Posts: 5923
- Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2009 9:10 pm
Re: How to handle Dewey (or similar firms)
That's basically what the article said yesterday.Anonymous User wrote:I can't imagine any of the firms listed absorbing all of Dewey's offices/attorneys, I'm guessing NY-based practice and lawyers will be mostly retained, but many of the smaller satellite offices would probably be shuttered.
Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.
Register now, it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 428521
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: How to handle Dewey (or similar firms)
So they've retained BK counsel (see above article and WSJ). I hope they update the SAs...
-
- Posts: 1159
- Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2011 5:21 pm
Re: How to handle Dewey (or similar firms)
The NY office had over 500 before these defections started. Why Shearman, another huge NY firm, would want it is beyond me. Reed Smith and Greenberg are slightly more plausible given their bases in other regions, but I don't know why another firm would dream of going near legacy Dewey's pile of debt.Anonymous User wrote:It looks like a prepackaged bankruptcy-- for those with a subscription: this is on the front page of the WSJ this morning.Anonymous User wrote:http://newsandinsight.thomsonreuters.co ... e_unclear/
Bankruptcy counsel. I think that basically is the end of the road.
a few key quotes:
"Among potential partners for the merger-and-bankruptcy plan being floated, Dewey has made overtures to New York-based Shearman & Sterling LLP; Greenberg Traurig LLP, which has roots in Miami; and Pittsburgh-based Reed Smith LP"
"The acquiring firm would pay little or nothing up front, but would likely be expected to cover ongoing operating costs as the bankruptcy case proceeded."
I can't imagine any of the firms listed absorbing all of Dewey's offices/attorneys, I'm guessing NY-based practice and lawyers will be mostly retained, but many of the smaller satellite offices would probably be shuttered.
- sunynp
- Posts: 1875
- Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 2:06 pm
Re: How to handle Dewey (or similar firms)
Marty Bienenstock is one of the best restructuring guys in manhattan. He was at Weil for a long time. Maybe they just want some other options as I guess he can't represent the firm in restructuring. I really thought they would make it through the summer. If they go in as a pre-packaged, the have to gave some lenders in board. I guess they want to wipeout the bondholder debt? I have no idea how this works with a partnership or llc- whatever they are.
I think they aren't telling summers anything because they have to keep it under wraps.
I really hope the summers make it. The 3ls are screwed.
I think they aren't telling summers anything because they have to keep it under wraps.
I really hope the summers make it. The 3ls are screwed.
-
- Posts: 1245
- Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2009 3:24 pm
Re: How to handle Dewey (or similar firms)
Well, the idea is that the prepack would significantly reduce the amount of debt Dewey carries.LawIdiot86 wrote: The NY office had over 500 before these defections started. Why Shearman, another huge NY firm, would want it is beyond me. Reed Smith and Greenberg are slightly more plausible given their bases in other regions, but I don't know why another firm would dream of going near legacy Dewey's pile of debt.
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login