Page 1 of 2
Selendy/Gay
Posted: Fri Jan 19, 2018 8:50 pm
by Anonymous User
Don't see another thread about this.
This is a big deal. With Selendy, his favorite co partners, and David Elsberg (who is brilliant and nice) leaving, QE NY seems dead in the water.
It'll be interesting to see how QE reacts to this. I could see them trying to swallow Kas to "fix" things.
Re: Selendy/Gay
Posted: Fri Jan 19, 2018 8:55 pm
by RedPurpleBlue
Anonymous User wrote:Don't see another thread about this.
1) There is probably a reason for that. Likely nobody else cares about firm politics at a single firm's office in a specific market.
2) Don't abuse the anon poster function.
Re: Selendy/Gay
Posted: Fri Jan 19, 2018 9:11 pm
by Anonymous User
RedPurpleBlue wrote:Anonymous User wrote:Don't see another thread about this.
1) There is probably a reason for that. Likely nobody else cares about firm politics at a single firm's office in a specific market.
2) Don't abuse the anon poster function.
There's a reason I am anonymous and people should probably care about one of (the?) most profitable part of the most profitable office of the second most profitable firm in the world spinning off.
profitable
Re: Selendy/Gay
Posted: Fri Jan 19, 2018 9:33 pm
by lolwat
Anonymous User wrote:RedPurpleBlue wrote:Anonymous User wrote:Don't see another thread about this.
1) There is probably a reason for that. Likely nobody else cares about firm politics at a single firm's office in a specific market.
2) Don't abuse the anon poster function.
There's a reason I am anonymous and people should probably care about one of (the?) most profitable part of the most profitable office of the second most profitable firm in the world spinning off.
profitable
I don't know enough to say anything about it.
I don't care about firm politics, but a spin-off might be interesting for other reasons.
I mean, people on TLS seem to really like Hueston Hennigan, and that was a very profitable spin-off of Irell.
I also think there were at least some posts about Don Verilli opening a Munger DC office. Not sure, though.
Re: Selendy/Gay
Posted: Fri Jan 19, 2018 10:01 pm
by Mullens
RedPurpleBlue wrote:Anonymous User wrote:Don't see another thread about this.
1) There is probably a reason for that. Likely nobody else cares about firm politics at a single firm's office in a specific market.
2) Don't abuse the anon poster function.
Strong statement for a 1L. This’ll make some waves in the litigation world. At the very least, it’s the creation of another (presumably market or above market). Also think this is the future of litigation given the number of recent offshoots and the state of technology
Re: Selendy/Gay
Posted: Fri Jan 19, 2018 10:13 pm
by jd20132013
Mullens wrote:RedPurpleBlue wrote:Anonymous User wrote:Don't see another thread about this.
1) There is probably a reason for that. Likely nobody else cares about firm politics at a single firm's office in a specific market.
2) Don't abuse the anon poster function.
Strong statement for a 1L. This’ll make some waves in the litigation world. At the very least, it’s the creation of another (presumably market or above market). Also think this is the future of litigation given the number of recent offshoots and the state of technology
Say more on that last sentence please
Re: Selendy/Gay
Posted: Fri Jan 19, 2018 10:21 pm
by Anonymous User
I’m probably not going to respond, but I got a recruiter email for this and for the first time was actually intrigued. Them coming from QE dampers that a bit though.
Re: Selendy/Gay
Posted: Fri Jan 19, 2018 10:42 pm
by Anonymous User
I just started at QE in a non-NY office and am interested in this. How big of a blow is this? What practice area(s) will be impacted most?
Re: Selendy/Gay
Posted: Fri Jan 19, 2018 10:54 pm
by RedPurpleBlue
Mullens wrote:RedPurpleBlue wrote:Anonymous User wrote:Don't see another thread about this.
1) There is probably a reason for that. Likely nobody else cares about firm politics at a single firm's office in a specific market.
2) Don't abuse the anon poster function.
Strong statement for a 1L. This’ll make some waves in the litigation world. At the very least, it’s the creation of another (presumably market or above market). Also think this is the future of litigation given the number of recent offshoots and the state of technology
One I'm glad to stand by, and I feel is likely correct. There is no reason to believe that this topic has a wide audience. Maybe it caters to a sizable niche, but it's still a niche. Also, I have no clue why you needed to point out that I was a 1L. Seems eerily close to an ad hominem. Could have just said you disagreed.
Re: Selendy/Gay
Posted: Fri Jan 19, 2018 11:17 pm
by A. Nony Mouse
I mean almost every thread here is catering to some kind of niche.
Re: Selendy/Gay
Posted: Fri Jan 19, 2018 11:27 pm
by mcmand
RedPurpleBlue wrote:Also, I have no clue why you needed to point out that I was a 1L.
It's because you don't really know anything yet about a subject you're opining on while talking down to someone else who likely is a lawyer.
Not ad hominem to point out you don't know anything yet.
Re: Selendy/Gay
Posted: Fri Jan 19, 2018 11:36 pm
by Anonymous User
Anonymous User wrote:I just started at QE in a non-NY office and am interested in this. How big of a blow is this? What practice area(s) will be impacted most?
OP here.
This is a sizable blow. Selendy was the one who landed FHFA and most of the follow-up work. He and his wife have sizeable other practices.
But, if you joined Chicago to do Koch work, or DC to join the Bill Burck Trump defense circus, those will be fine. Products in NY will be the same except the Colgate work will move over with Faith, I would expect
Re: Selendy/Gay
Posted: Fri Jan 19, 2018 11:45 pm
by Anonymous User
.
Re: Selendy/Gay
Posted: Sat Jan 20, 2018 12:08 am
by RedPurpleBlue
mcmand wrote:RedPurpleBlue wrote:Also, I have no clue why you needed to point out that I was a 1L.
It's because you don't really know anything yet about a subject you're opining on while talking down to someone else who likely is a lawyer.
Not ad hominem to point out you don't know anything yet.
Your argument presumes a lot about me as an individual. What if I come from a family of biglaw lawyers? What if I follow the field? What if I worked at NY law firms before school? What if etc.? I'm not talking down on anyone. I'm just offering a reasonable explanation to why this topic hadn't been created. In the same vein, Posner's sudden retirement may have been news and noteworthy to some in a small niche, but public defenders in Miami, in-house counsel at Microsoft, and the vast majority of the legal world probably just didn't care.
It's completely an ad hominem. "Circumstantial ad hominem points out that someone is in circumstances such that they are disposed to take a particular position. It constitutes an attack on the bias of a source. This is fallacious because a disposition to make a certain argument does not make the argument false." It's like pointing out that I'm a Catholic priest after I gave an opinion why nobody is talking about some Jewish authorities new interpretation of the Talmud. If I said probably because it applies to a niche and the vast majority of people don't care, that would be valid reasoning. Pointing out I'm a Catholic priest and thus know nothing about the Talmud and the jewish community and have an invalid opinion 1) rests on a ton of assumptions and 2) is attacking my position instead of the actual argument I'm making. A proper, non ad hominem reply would be that actually the Jewish community is X significant percent of the population, and there are Y number of people actively engaged/connected to the topic, so it is unusual that it hasn't been brought up. You have yet to articulate 1) that there is a significant population of people that work at QE on this board or at peer firms and 2) that they are actively engaged/care about this topic.
Re: Selendy/Gay
Posted: Sat Jan 20, 2018 12:11 am
by RedPurpleBlue
A. Nony Mouse wrote:I mean almost every thread here is catering to some kind of niche.
Absolutely true, but there also aren't threads on a lot of topics here, and that shouldn't be surprising given the size of the TLS community relative to the size of the legal world.
Re: Selendy/Gay
Posted: Sat Jan 20, 2018 12:20 am
by TLSModBot
Rather than "Well, actually what I meant"ing or "you don't know me!"ing your way out of this (and poorly), maybe just take the L for what was very obviously misdirected snark coming from bad assumptions and/or lack of knowledge.
This is a big deal, and even were you "coming from a family of biglawers" (lol. Jfc lol) a 1L still doesn't know shit about what is or is not relevant to practicing lawyers and cannot speak for them.
Re: Selendy/Gay
Posted: Sat Jan 20, 2018 12:25 am
by TLSModBot
Getting back on-topic, I'd be interested in hearing what the logic behind the split is (like what the hell kind of freedom or PPP are these guys expecting that they wouldn't have in QE?)
Re: Selendy/Gay
Posted: Sat Jan 20, 2018 12:57 am
by Mullens
jd20132013 wrote:Mullens wrote:RedPurpleBlue wrote:Anonymous User wrote:Don't see another thread about this.
1) There is probably a reason for that. Likely nobody else cares about firm politics at a single firm's office in a specific market.
2) Don't abuse the anon poster function.
Strong statement for a 1L. This’ll make some waves in the litigation world. At the very least, it’s the creation of another (presumably market or above market). Also think this is the future of litigation given the number of recent offshoots and the state of technology
Say more on that last sentence please
Predictive coding and othe discovery technology allows smaller teams to conduct the massive litigation that used to only go to biglaw firms. Combine that with pressure from in-house clients to lower cost and the increased use of contract attorneys and I think you will see more biglaw offshoots pop up.
Re: Selendy/Gay
Posted: Sat Jan 20, 2018 1:17 am
by Anonymous User
Capitol_Idea wrote:Getting back on-topic, I'd be interested in hearing what the logic behind the split is (like what the hell kind of freedom or PPP are these guys expecting that they wouldn't have in QE?)
This. The news coverage has said they’re interested in doing entrepreneurial and pro bono work. What does that mean?
Re: Selendy/Gay
Posted: Sat Jan 20, 2018 1:46 am
by FascinatedWanderer
RedPurpleBlue wrote:mcmand wrote:RedPurpleBlue wrote:Also, I have no clue why you needed to point out that I was a 1L.
It's because you don't really know anything yet about a subject you're opining on while talking down to someone else who likely is a lawyer.
Not ad hominem to point out you don't know anything yet.
Your argument presumes a lot about me as an individual. What if I come from a family of biglaw lawyers? What if I follow the field? What if I worked at NY law firms before school? What if etc.? I'm not talking down on anyone. I'm just offering a reasonable explanation to why this topic hadn't been created. In the same vein, Posner's sudden retirement may have been news and noteworthy to some in a small niche, but public defenders in Miami, in-house counsel at Microsoft, and the vast majority of the legal world probably just didn't care.
It's completely an ad hominem. "Circumstantial ad hominem points out that someone is in circumstances such that they are disposed to take a particular position. It constitutes an attack on the bias of a source. This is fallacious because a disposition to make a certain argument does not make the argument false." It's like pointing out that I'm a Catholic priest after I gave an opinion why nobody is talking about some Jewish authorities new interpretation of the Talmud. If I said probably because it applies to a niche and the vast majority of people don't care, that would be valid reasoning. Pointing out I'm a Catholic priest and thus know nothing about the Talmud and the jewish community and have an invalid opinion 1) rests on a ton of assumptions and 2) is attacking my position instead of the actual argument I'm making. A proper, non ad hominem reply would be that actually the Jewish community is X significant percent of the population, and there are Y number of people actively engaged/connected to the topic, so it is unusual that it hasn't been brought up. You have yet to articulate 1) that there is a significant population of people that work at QE on this board or at peer firms and 2) that they are actively engaged/care about this topic.
Dude you seem like the worst. Settle down and don’t take yourself so seriously. And yes, that was an ad hominem.
Re: Selendy/Gay
Posted: Sat Jan 20, 2018 2:46 am
by Anonymous User
Anonymous User wrote:Capitol_Idea wrote:Getting back on-topic, I'd be interested in hearing what the logic behind the split is (like what the hell kind of freedom or PPP are these guys expecting that they wouldn't have in QE?)
This. The news coverage has said they’re interested in doing entrepreneurial and pro bono work. What does that mean?
OP again.
I bet this is never admitted but I would guess it's partially political. QE NY was very liberal. They sued banks because they wanted to, not just because they made money off of it. I really doubt they like the way that Bill Burck has built the white collar defense practice and doubt they like his white supremacist clients.
Re: Selendy/Gay
Posted: Sat Jan 20, 2018 2:51 am
by Anonymous User
Also because it may finally be untrue-
OCEANS RISE
CITIES FALL
QUINN REMAINS (???)
Re: Selendy/Gay
Posted: Sat Jan 20, 2018 3:24 am
by Anonymous User
FascinatedWanderer wrote:RedPurpleBlue wrote:mcmand wrote:RedPurpleBlue wrote:Also, I have no clue why you needed to point out that I was a 1L.
It's because you don't really know anything yet about a subject you're opining on while talking down to someone else who likely is a lawyer.
Not ad hominem to point out you don't know anything yet.
Your argument presumes a lot about me as an individual. What if I come from a family of biglaw lawyers? What if I follow the field? What if I worked at NY law firms before school? What if etc.? I'm not talking down on anyone. I'm just offering a reasonable explanation to why this topic hadn't been created. In the same vein, Posner's sudden retirement may have been news and noteworthy to some in a small niche, but public defenders in Miami, in-house counsel at Microsoft, and the vast majority of the legal world probably just didn't care.
It's completely an ad hominem. "Circumstantial ad hominem points out that someone is in circumstances such that they are disposed to take a particular position. It constitutes an attack on the bias of a source. This is fallacious because a disposition to make a certain argument does not make the argument false." It's like pointing out that I'm a Catholic priest after I gave an opinion why nobody is talking about some Jewish authorities new interpretation of the Talmud. If I said probably because it applies to a niche and the vast majority of people don't care, that would be valid reasoning. Pointing out I'm a Catholic priest and thus know nothing about the Talmud and the jewish community and have an invalid opinion 1) rests on a ton of assumptions and 2) is attacking my position instead of the actual argument I'm making. A proper, non ad hominem reply would be that actually the Jewish community is X significant percent of the population, and there are Y number of people actively engaged/connected to the topic, so it is unusual that it hasn't been brought up. You have yet to articulate 1) that there is a significant population of people that work at QE on this board or at peer firms and 2) that they are actively engaged/care about this topic.
Dude you seem like the worst. Settle down and don’t take yourself so seriously. And yes, that was an ad hominem.
QE has plenty of liberal partners.
Re: Selendy/Gay
Posted: Sat Jan 20, 2018 7:58 am
by TLSModBot
Anonymous User wrote:Also because it may finally be untrue-
OCEANS RISE
CITIES FALL
QUINN'S REMAINS (???)
Re: Selendy/Gay
Posted: Sat Jan 20, 2018 8:14 am
by Anonymous User
with so many biglaw partners packing up and leaving over the last few years, this seems like a great time to be a young litigator. There wasn't a lot of press on this, but a former (young) Cravath partner left early last year to join a boutique formed by other former Cravath attorneys, too.
https://www.law.com/sites/almstaff/2017 ... h-partner/
Add that to Kaplan & Co, Wilkinson Walsh, Hueston Hennigan,the new Munger outpost (though query how large that will become), I think that this is all great for those coming off of clerkships or even young litigators already at large firms wanting to make a jump.