Most of the focus has been on Washington and Houston, and we have heard very little about what's going on with the grand strategy (to the extent there is one) for California. What's the word?
In addition to the lawyers Eisler names, Ed Han and Joe Walker were also involved in that. Very interesting insight. He seems to be talking to the right people
lol, well, there are about 5 people left in irvine, 1 floor in la, hardly any in EPA. all of the ca offices have been rumored (coming from some very high up sources...who broke the news of rooklidge/gooding/garner/other departures, etc.) to be closing, but no blogs will post about it until it appears in the daily journal a week after the actual occurrence.
I've never seen a partner being listed on two different firms' websites before. On Howrey's website, Frank Cote is listed as a partner in the Irvine office, one of only 9 lawyers still listed there. Curiously, he's also listed as a partner on Jones Day's website.
Makes you wonder how many other attorneys are still listed on Howrey's website even though they're already in the wind, and what kind of California scheming Howrey is up to with that.
But hey, pay no attention to those blogs - Bobby Ruyak is the only source of information you need.
That's funny because for years the firm never announced when anyone left, and the only evidence of a lawyer's departure was that his bio had been pulled from the website. And wow, that bio would be scrubbed within an hour or so of any lawyer leaving the firm -- they did not screw around with that! Now it sounds like Howrey may be delaying updates to its website to hide how many lawyers are going over the wall.
We should start a list of lawyers who have left, but who still have bios listed:
I think this is pretty simple. Howrey's line of credit demands a certain partner headcount. Howrey may be making advantage of "delays" in updating its website. Banks beware.
I can't imagine that banks would be relying on the website to determine headcount. I wonder if that isn't part of a PR "strategy" of some type.
I wonder whether CA, IL, or DC recognize a cause of action for appropriation. Not that there's necessarily any money there, I just think it would be kind of a hysterical lawsuit because, off hand, I can't think of the plausible defenses that the firm would have if pictures remained up for more than a couple days.
The funny thing to me is that when Howrey laid me off, I asked Eileen Billinson if the firm would keep me up on the website until I found a new job. She told me it was against DC Bar regulations for them to do so. Not a month later, she was quoted in an article about the March 2010 partner layoffs saying the firm would keep partner profiles up until they found new jobs. And I know for a fact that there are scores of profiles up right now of people who are long gone.
Well, if there really are dozens of people still on the website who left long ago, please post their names. I'll be happy to send the list to the DC Bar; I'm sure DC Bar will make sure they get scrubbed.
There are definitely a lot of partners still on the website that have left. It was the source of the confusion on the "75%" number. I've heard that Winston gave offers to around 150 partners. If you count the partners on the website, that's over 200 (and hence 75%), if you count actual partners still at the firm, it's more like 160 (or about 95%) getting offers. You can't trust the blogs, but you ESPECIALLY can't trust the Howrey website.
By leaving up the profiles of numerous departed attorneys including partners, it seems to me that Howrey is intentionally misrepresenting its status, its prospects, and its stability to current clients, potential clients, and to potential suitors, ultimately for purposes of financial gain.
Query whether that could give rise to causes of action for fraud in the inducement, misrepresentation, etc., to clients who would otherwise have taken their new and existing projects elsewhere, or not hired Howrey at all, had Howrey been accurate and truthful on its website regarding its personnel status.
This profile thing is probably not nefarious, though with this place, you just never know. I assume that any IT staff that haven't already moved on to greener pastures are bogged down with securing equipment and data as people fly out the door. Updating the website is way down the priority list from that.
I'm not really sure what to make of Jones Day when it comes to IP. I know some folks who do IP for them in DC and they're pretty good. They're not tier 1 or 2, but they do seem solid. I have to imagine with both McBride and Rooklidge in CA they're going to have a meaningful presence there, I guess time will tell.
@4:31, Howrey IT isn't directly responsible for adding or removing attorneys from the website. That is up to HR and/or Marketing. The only time IT gets involved is if there is a problem with the normal process and they need something removed (or added) right away. I have heard that when a partner leaves there is an agreement in place that specifies how long a profile should remain active. (And how long they have access to email, etc.)
"I have heard that when a partner leaves there is an agreement in place that specifies how long a profile should remain active. (And how long they have access to email, etc.)"
I was a partner there, and I never heard of any agreement. When I left the office at 6pm on my last day there, my bio was up and my email worked. The very next morning at 7am (a Saturday even), my bio was gone from the website, and all my remote login passwords were invalid.
To mix up separate strings, when a partrner leaves, they are cut off from all e-mails, BUT Bob Green opens all incoming e-mails to the departed partner's mailbox and forwards whatever he sees fit. At least that was they way it worked before the process got as wholly out of control as it probably is now. Maybe it still works that way.
In certain offices, howrey leaves the esq’s name on the door and website months after they left. When they laid people off, they’d sometimes let the esqs keep/access their howrey email for months, so it would look like (a) the firm was still busy and (b) the esq could look like he was still employed. In offices like Irvine, if Howrey removed every esq who has left, the RIP of that office would be even more obvious than it already is.
Besides Frank Cote, there’s another name on the Irvine site that shouldn’t be up there…Martha Gooding. On her way out or already left. I believe Michael Stimson left also, but maybe I’m mistaken. The legitimacy of the names of other esqs on the site is questionable as many of those esqs haven’t been seen in their offices in quite awhile and their offices have been cleaned out.
What’s interesting is if you look on the Howrey email servers, you can see “departure” next to entire offices. It appeared right before the latest round of exits and doesn’t bode well.
CA offices? Word inside and on the streets remains that they’re closing, including EPA. What’s left of LA can easily move to WS’ downtown offices. OC’s already been picked clean by vultures. Many people from EPA have left. Doesn’t make financial sense for WS to assume all those leases for space they don’t need.
ca bloodbath will continue. gooding/giali are next. end of the month= more ca closings. perhaps la will remain open, but WS doesn't really need the space and neither does jones day.
nor cal? not sure there are enough left. epa has been designated next on the "Departure" list internally along with irvine.
more new developments at www.sharktanklegal.com
ReplyDeleteIn addition to the lawyers Eisler names, Ed Han and Joe Walker were also involved in that. Very interesting insight. He seems to be talking to the right people
ReplyDeleteca= toast. ws doesn't need the bloated/$$$$ office leases in ca. most of the good lawyers in ca have left.
ReplyDeleteThis thread is a ghost town. Is there anyone left in the California offices to even comment on this post?
ReplyDeletelol, well, there are about 5 people left in irvine, 1 floor in la, hardly any in EPA. all of the ca offices have been rumored (coming from some very high up sources...who broke the news of rooklidge/gooding/garner/other departures, etc.) to be closing, but no blogs will post about it until it appears in the daily journal a week after the actual occurrence.
ReplyDeleteFrom a strategic standpoint, it wouldn't make sense to close the EPA office -- SF is not a substitute for having a Silicon Valley presence.
ReplyDeleteI've never seen a partner being listed on two different firms' websites before. On Howrey's website, Frank Cote is listed as a partner in the Irvine office, one of only 9 lawyers still listed there. Curiously, he's also listed as a partner on Jones Day's website.
ReplyDeleteMakes you wonder how many other attorneys are still listed on Howrey's website even though they're already in the wind, and what kind of California scheming Howrey is up to with that.
But hey, pay no attention to those blogs - Bobby Ruyak is the only source of information you need.
http://www.howrey.com/galvinr/
ReplyDeletehttp://www.wilmerhale.com/robert_galvin/
That's funny because for years the firm never announced when anyone left, and the only evidence of a lawyer's departure was that his bio had been pulled from the website. And wow, that bio would be scrubbed within an hour or so of any lawyer leaving the firm -- they did not screw around with that! Now it sounds like Howrey may be delaying updates to its website to hide how many lawyers are going over the wall.
ReplyDeleteWe should start a list of lawyers who have left, but who still have bios listed:
Frank Cote
Robert Galvin
Mark Whitaker
Who else?
I think this is pretty simple. Howrey's line of credit demands a certain partner headcount. Howrey may be making advantage of "delays" in updating its website. Banks beware.
ReplyDeleteTo 6:21 - there are scores of such names. I'm still up, I left quite some time ago
ReplyDeleteI can't imagine that banks would be relying on the website to determine headcount. I wonder if that isn't part of a PR "strategy" of some type.
ReplyDeleteI wonder whether CA, IL, or DC recognize a cause of action for appropriation. Not that there's necessarily any money there, I just think it would be kind of a hysterical lawsuit because, off hand, I can't think of the plausible defenses that the firm would have if pictures remained up for more than a couple days.
The funny thing to me is that when Howrey laid me off, I asked Eileen Billinson if the firm would keep me up on the website until I found a new job. She told me it was against DC Bar regulations for them to do so. Not a month later, she was quoted in an article about the March 2010 partner layoffs saying the firm would keep partner profiles up until they found new jobs.
ReplyDeleteAnd I know for a fact that there are scores of profiles up right now of people who are long gone.
@ 1253, when I got laid off, Howrey lost zero time in scrubbing me from the web site.
ReplyDeleteMore California news : http://amlawdaily.typepad.com/amlawdaily/2011/02/the-churn21111.html. And so it continues...
6:21, where did Frank go? I liked him.
ReplyDeleteWell, if there really are dozens of people still on the website who left long ago, please post their names. I'll be happy to send the list to the DC Bar; I'm sure DC Bar will make sure they get scrubbed.
ReplyDeleteThere are definitely a lot of partners still on the website that have left. It was the source of the confusion on the "75%" number. I've heard that Winston gave offers to around 150 partners. If you count the partners on the website, that's over 200 (and hence 75%), if you count actual partners still at the firm, it's more like 160 (or about 95%) getting offers. You can't trust the blogs, but you ESPECIALLY can't trust the Howrey website.
ReplyDeleteHuh, I would have thought Duane Mathiowetz would go wherever Cherian was going, but maybe he's tired of dealing with him.
ReplyDeleteFrank went to Jones Day.
ReplyDeleteMaybe the person whose job it is to update Howrey's website already quit.
ReplyDeleteIt will be a cold day in hell before Mathiowetz follows Cherian anywhere voluntarily.
ReplyDeleteBy leaving up the profiles of numerous departed attorneys including partners, it seems to me that Howrey is intentionally misrepresenting its status, its prospects, and its stability to current clients, potential clients, and to potential suitors, ultimately for purposes of financial gain.
ReplyDeleteQuery whether that could give rise to causes of action for fraud in the inducement, misrepresentation, etc., to clients who would otherwise have taken their new and existing projects elsewhere, or not hired Howrey at all, had Howrey been accurate and truthful on its website regarding its personnel status.
That could be a 1L Contracts midterm question.
2:28, you mean like the day Mathiowetz followed Cherian to Howrey from Townsend? Has there been a falling-out since then? Do tell.
ReplyDeleteThis profile thing is probably not nefarious, though with this place, you just never know. I assume that any IT staff that haven't already moved on to greener pastures are bogged down with securing equipment and data as people fly out the door. Updating the website is way down the priority list from that.
ReplyDeleteJD for IP in California doesn't sound like much of a safe landing, based on what I've heard, but any port in a storm, I suppose
ReplyDeleteI'm not really sure what to make of Jones Day when it comes to IP. I know some folks who do IP for them in DC and they're pretty good. They're not tier 1 or 2, but they do seem solid. I have to imagine with both McBride and Rooklidge in CA they're going to have a meaningful presence there, I guess time will tell.
ReplyDelete@4:31, Howrey IT isn't directly responsible for adding or removing attorneys from the website. That is up to HR and/or Marketing. The only time IT gets involved is if there is a problem with the normal process and they need something removed (or added) right away. I have heard that when a partner leaves there is an agreement in place that specifies how long a profile should remain active. (And how long they have access to email, etc.)
ReplyDelete"I have heard that when a partner leaves there is an agreement in place that specifies how long a profile should remain active. (And how long they have access to email, etc.)"
ReplyDeleteI was a partner there, and I never heard of any agreement. When I left the office at 6pm on my last day there, my bio was up and my email worked. The very next morning at 7am (a Saturday even), my bio was gone from the website, and all my remote login passwords were invalid.
To mix up separate strings, when a partrner leaves, they are cut off from all e-mails, BUT Bob Green opens all incoming e-mails to the departed partner's mailbox and forwards whatever he sees fit. At least that was they way it worked before the process got as wholly out of control as it probably is now. Maybe it still works that way.
ReplyDeleteSo getting back to the original topic, any word on what will happen to the California offices?
ReplyDeleteIn certain offices, howrey leaves the esq’s name on the door and website months after they left. When they laid people off, they’d sometimes let the esqs keep/access their howrey email for months, so it would look like (a) the firm was still busy and (b) the esq could look like he was still employed. In offices like Irvine, if Howrey removed every esq who has left, the RIP of that office would be even more obvious than it already is.
ReplyDeleteBesides Frank Cote, there’s another name on the Irvine site that shouldn’t be up there…Martha Gooding. On her way out or already left. I believe Michael Stimson left also, but maybe I’m mistaken. The legitimacy of the names of other esqs on the site is questionable as many of those esqs haven’t been seen in their offices in quite awhile and their offices have been cleaned out.
What’s interesting is if you look on the Howrey email servers, you can see “departure” next to entire offices. It appeared right before the latest round of exits and doesn’t bode well.
CA offices? Word inside and on the streets remains that they’re closing, including EPA. What’s left of LA can easily move to WS’ downtown offices. OC’s already been picked clean by vultures. Many people from EPA have left. Doesn’t make financial sense for WS to assume all those leases for space they don’t need.
Mathiowetz to Pillsbury. http://ca.linexlegal.com/index.php?cid=1565865
ReplyDeleteIrvine office now lists 6 attorneys, down from 9 a week ago. Shrinking fast.
ReplyDeleteTTtttttt
ReplyDeleteEPA losing some more attorneys today.
ReplyDeleteca bloodbath will continue. gooding/giali are next. end of the month= more ca closings. perhaps la will remain open, but WS doesn't really need the space and neither does jones day.
ReplyDeletenor cal? not sure there are enough left. epa has been designated next on the "Departure" list internally along with irvine.