Discussion of Firms and Life in SF/SV

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by sgtclub
Not to disparage any VLG lawyer, but what does Orrick have to gain from the acquisition? VLG clearly gains, but Orrick already has a fairly prominent west coast presence.

I agree. It's hard to understand. The only thing I can imagine is that Orrick may believe that venture work will rise again, they want to be positioned for it, and they can afford to ride out the storm if it means getting the right people in place. But, wouldn't they worry that the VLG people would just split again, if things get all late-90s again? Or do they assume those people learned a lesson about the importance of diversification?

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
I agree. It's hard to understand. The only thing I can imagine is that Orrick may believe that venture work will rise again, they want to be positioned for it, and they can afford to ride out the storm if it means getting the right people in place. But, wouldn't they worry that the VLG people would just split again, if things get all late-90s again? Or do they assume those people learned a lesson about the importance of diversification?

Even so, I questioned whether it makes sense to acquire the entire firm. Seems to me that it would put an initial drag on Orrick's PPPs, as I assume that the average at VLG is below Orrick's.

[Sidd Finch]

Some time ago, we had a thread discussing diversity at SV offices and firms. The general tenor was that those firms were not diverse, and there were suggestions of racism and intentional discrimination or failure to diversify.

(Of course, we can't actually look at the posts because the thread is gone, which wouldn't be a problem if we just kept a single general thread, ahem. But I digress.)

According to the diversity study discussed in today's Recorder, Wilson was top in diversity in California, and second in the nation. MoFo was third in Cal, 5th in the US. Brobeck (RIP), 3 in Cal, 12 in US. Pillsbury, 7 and 18. Cooley, 9 and 26. All of these firms had huge presence in the Valley, and could not have achieved such levels of diversity without their SV offices also being diverse.

In contrast, LA firms did much worse: O'Melveny, 11 in Cal, 27 in US. Paul Hastings, 13 and 36. Latham, 14 and 465. Sheppard mullin, 16 and 60. Gibson, 19 and 98.

So, here's the big question: Are things much better than we all seemed to think? Or is the relatively strong diversity picture solely due to hiring of Asian-Americans, whereas the earlier discussion focused more on African-Americans?

Thoughts?

[Sidd Finch]

An absolutely scathing letter from a former Brobeck senior counsel. Can anyone reprint it here?

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
An absolutely scathing letter from a former Brobeck senior counsel. Can anyone reprint it here?

For Brobeck Staff, No Sigh of Relief


The Recorder
06-20-2003


In "Brobeck Chipping Away at its Citibank Debts," [June 16] The Recorder reports that Brobeck, Phleger & Harrison "may be breathing a bit easier after shedding more than half its debt load." A minor, but significant, correction is in order. While the former Brobeck partners may be breathing a bit easier, hundreds of former Brobeck staff members are not. No such relief for the loyal employees who can't find new jobs, for those who've lost their homes, for those whose medical benefits were cut off without COBRA, for those who got no severance pay and couldn't use their 401K money to live on because the funds were frozen. No breathing easier for the hundreds of loyal employees who continue to suffer; no breathing easier for all the former employees who continue to feel cheated and betrayed by the Brobeck partners.

After giving or letting Citibank take the reported $30 million, the Brobeck partners can breathe easier because they have reduced their individual and personal liability to Citibank. Apparently, the partners aren't concerned by the fact that they have failed to pay their employees compensation still owed from 2002 and have failed to reimburse expenses employees incurred at the partners' direction. And they don't seem concerned that their employees are stuck with medical and dental bills because premiums taken from employees' paychecks in 2002 were not paid to the medical and dental insurers. Current and future employees of any of the former Brobeck partners might be concerned. Current and future clients might be concerned. The U.S. Department of Labor, various state labor departments, attorneys general, and bar associations might be concerned. But it becomes ever more apparent that neither Citibank nor the Brobeck partners seem concerned that they are paying down their debt with money that belongs to their former employees.

The Recorder article ends with a quote from Steve Snyder, the head of Brobeck's so-called liquidation committee: "Some people just see an opportunity there." What amount of hubris might keep the Brobeck partners from seeing how well those words describe the mistreatment of their former employees?

Jayne Loughry
San Francisco

Editor's note: Jayne Loughry is a former Brobeck senior counsel and a plaintiff in the employee suit against the firm.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
Some time ago, we had a thread discussing diversity at SV offices and firms. The general tenor was that those firms were not diverse, and there were suggestions of racism and intentional discrimination or failure to diversify.

(Of course, we can't actually look at the posts because the thread is gone, which wouldn't be a problem if we just kept a single general thread, ahem. But I digress.)

I don't recall deleting this thread, which suggests that I merged it into this one. I don't think I've ever deleted any threads. One of the admins (i.e., Leagl or Mister_Ruysbroeck, and -- fyi, all -- evenodds is now an admin too) deleted a thread in which some wingnuts were spamming, but that was different. So if you can't look at the threads, it's because you haven't searched for them, or because it's hard to find them in here, which tends to suggest that leaving them in a separate thread would have been the thing to do.

Anyway.

According to the diversity study discussed in today's Recorder, Wilson was top in diversity in California, and second in the nation. MoFo was third in Cal, 5th in the US. Brobeck (RIP), 3 in Cal, 12 in US. Pillsbury, 7 and 18. Cooley, 9 and 26.

FYI -- I linked to this study on the Big Board here, though not a whole lot of discussion ensued. Results by firm can be found here.

[pretermitted_child]

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
Some time ago, we had a thread discussing diversity at SV offices and firms. The general tenor was that those firms were not diverse, and there were suggestions of racism and intentional discrimination or failure to diversify.

(Of course, we can't actually look at the posts because the thread is gone, which wouldn't be a problem if we just kept a single general thread, ahem. But I digress.)

Is this the thread you're looking for? It doesn't show up on the page that lists the SF/SV threads because it has been inactive for over 30 days; you can list all the threads (which have not otherwise been deleted or merged) by fiddling around with the "Showing threads 1 to 6 of 6, sorted by [various options]" feature at the bottom of the thread list.

[leagleaze]

PC is correct, no one deleted the thread. Threads only show up automatically if someone has posted in them within the past 30 days. You need to choose for them to show up if you want to look at older threads.

Good explanation PC, I'll link to it from the front page.

[evenodds]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
I don't recall deleting this thread, which suggests that I merged it into this one. I don't think I've ever deleted any threads. One of the admins (i.e., Leagl or Mister_Ruysbroeck, and -- fyi, all -- evenodds is now an admin too) deleted a thread in which some wingnuts were spamming, but that was different. So if you can't look at the threads, it's because you haven't searched for them, or because it's hard to find them in here, which tends to suggest that leaving them in a separate thread would have been the thing to do.

As PC says above, the thread is still intact in this forum.

There are a couple of methods for finding threads. One is to reset your default so that the inactive threads pop up in your list. The other is to use the handy search function, which can be set to search by post or thread.

We don't delete threads. As the FB moderator, I have edited the content on a duplicate post of political spam which was posted on several different boards, but we don't delete posts entirely.

Oh, and SlaveNoMore is also an admin.

E/O

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by evenodds
As PC says above, the thread is still intact in this forum.

Shows what I know, and why we have admins.

For those who don't visit the site often, and may miss the advice about preferences, I recommend a default that shows everything.

[Say_hello_for_me]

In light of the recent discussion, I haven't cut-n-pasted the whole article, and the link is useless as its a subscription site. The upshot is that the dissolution committee is desparately trying to avoid filing for the big BK b/c the partners will then likely have to expose their personal finances for a determination of what they can contribute. Lots of quotes from hurt staffers, embarrassed former partners and everything else we've seen elsewhere in the press.

A few choice quotes though from the end of the article:

Re: trying to avoid filing for bankruptcy...
>>Bankruptch proceedings are "a very public and messy process," said Peter J. Antoszyk, a bankruptcy lawyer at Brown Rudnick Berlack Israels in Boston.

"In some cases," he added, "partners may even be required to disclose their personal financial capacity — how much they can pay." <<


Re: how they may able to avoid filing for bankruptcy...

a guy from Brobeck's liquidation committee

>>expects many partners will have to help pay the firm's debts, even without a bankruptcy filing.

"The partners are going to lose a ton of money," he said. But he acknowledged that losses by wealthy partners probably would not reassure employees who were looking for work. <<


The article also noted that many paid taxes on income that they did not ultimately earn when the income was recognized b/c it was used to take out (or pay back, I forget) the Citibank loan... to the tune of taxes on a cumulative 40 million in income.

Aside from the points noted above, I didn't see anything really new.

Hello

[pretermitted_child]

Originally posted by evenodds

Oh, and SlaveNoMore is also an admin.

E/O

And all this time I thought he was the Artistic Director and Choreographer.

[LessinSF]

It is the rumorest of rumors, but it comes from what should be a good source. Watch this space, and remember who scooped everyone if it materializes.

[AngryMulletMan]

:smack:

Don't start a fire like that and run away.

[LessinSF]

I'm still here.