Search results

Purpose – In this chapter, I examine critically the assumption in the literature that many lawyers decide to leave the practice of law, and especially large law firms, due to lawyer dissatisfaction. I take a macro focus on employee flows and networks at large law firms, particularly at the elite level.Methodology/approach – I use a large archival data set of alumni data, internal memos, and newsletters from the 1930s through the 1990s from four large New York City corporate law firms. I perform statistical analysis of 2800 cases. I also include qualitative analysis of the newsletters and firm records of comings and goings. I analyze lawyer migration as a mobility project of lawyers in conjunction with Domhoff#x02019;s class-domination theory to explain the interconnectedness of the corporate community, policy networks, governmental positions, the federal judiciary, and high-powered private lawyers.Findings – I explore the various ways that lawyer migration benefits the original firm by creating or strengthening relationships with other large law firms, corporate clients, and governmental organizations. It is clear that most lawyer departures are not meant to signal negative outcomes. Elite lawyers in large firms make both corporate and political connections through their migration, connections that have important repercussions not only for the lawyers but from their original firms.Originality/value of chapter – A fundamental question for sociological analyses of elite professions, and a more practical concern in the field of legal studies, is why do so many lawyers decide to leave the practice of law? The focus of these accounts, both journalistic and academic, is on the fact that lawyers leave – and, in particular, that they leave the practice of law entirely. The explanatory variable, in many cases, is some variation on individual lawyer dissatisfaction. Instead, I show that most lawyer departures are not meant to signal negative outcomes. Lawyer migration benefits the original firm by creating or strengthening relationships with other large law firms, corporate clients, and governmental organizations.

Following an analysis of English construction lawyers’ perceptions, attitudes and practices relative to mediation, this paper aims to offer an insight into the initial stages of the legal decision-making process, involving an examination of the degree of control construction lawyers’ exercise over the decision-making process itself, as well as an analysis of the factors that determine the decision to use mediation. The empirical work thus far focuses on the different potential barriers to mediation that typically characterize the relationship clients’ and legal advisors, addressing to divergent monetary interests, non-monetary and psychological interests and barriers in the principal–agent relationship.

Based on a quantitative survey of legal advisors in England and Wales (n = 212), the purpose of this paper is to explore mediation, specifically the factors that support its use, barriers that hinder use and the perceptions of the efficacy and level of effectiveness of the process.

The findings indicate that more experienced construction lawyers reported using mediation to a far greater extent than less experienced lawyers, consistent with the proposition that more experienced lawyers develop a cooperative reputation as a function of their professional encounters. The results reveal that the absence of good mediators, influence of the courts, inability to create enforceable precedents, negative experiences and preferences for other forms of dispute resolution do not seem to be significant factors militating against the referral of cases to mediation. It would also seem that self-reported financial interests do not deter construction lawyers from referring cases to mediation. Nevertheless, there may be a need to develop more standardised approaches to setting mediation fee scales to minimise lawyers’ diminished fee income as a consequence of their increased involvement as advocates or counsel in mediated cases.

The recent Jackson Cost Review has provided greater impetus for the use of mediation. A failure to respond to a request to engage in mediation may also be deemed unreasonable by the courts, as, for example, in the case of PGF II SA v. OMFS Company 1 Limited. Nevertheless, while the Civil Procedure Rules are being used by the courts in England and Wales increasingly to “encourage” parties to look to alternative methods to settle differences, little can be gleaned from the literature on the central role of construction lawyers in mediation, and more specifically the extent to which they refrain from referring cases to mediation in a manner inconsistent with their clients’ interests. Much of the construction-based research so far has focused on how mediation is bearing up in practice, its use, appealability and possible improvements.

The purpose of this research is to paint a picture of the current utility of mediation in the Scottish construction sector; determine the willingness of Scottish construction lawyers to shift away from traditional dispute resolution approaches towards mediation; and ascertain the drivers towards the adoption of mediatory techniques and the barriers to change.

Drawn from a questionnaire survey, this paper seeks to add to the dispute resolution literature by identifying the attitudes of construction lawyers on the use and effectiveness of mediation to resolve construction disputes in Scotland.

The findings suggest that there is a core of Scottish construction lawyers in Scotland that recognize the promise of mediation as a useful dispute resolution tool. Respondents generally profess knowledge of the process and some measure of positive practical experience and espouse positive views on mediation. Their response to mediation then does not appear to be one of cultural conservatism or fear of the unknown as opposed to traditional dispute resolution mechanisms, which for all their imperfections lawyers understand unequivocally.

It is recognized that the introduction of mediatory techniques into construction disputes will have a cumulative effect on the Scottish legal fraternity over time. Cross‐sectional studies are often unable to yield information about the direction of causal relationships between variables that are interrelated in a complex way. Neither do cross‐sectional studies permit researchers to assess the effectiveness of intervention strategies.

This is the first empirical work ascertaining the views and experiences of Scottish construction lawyers on mediation. While the research reveals evidence of a modest bottom‐up growth of construction mediation in Scotland, it also provides insight into key policy issues which will require to be resolved if mediation is to move from the margins to the mainstream of construction disputing practices in Scotland.

The purpose of this paper is to determine what motivates junior lawyers to join a “Top 5” law firm, to understand their job and career expectations and whether or not these are being met during their employment in the firm.

A survey was delivered to 300 lawyers, out of which 144 valid responses were collected. For the analysis, responses were clustered to identify emerging themes. Interviews were also conducted with randomly selected junior lawyers to clarify emerging topics and deepen understanding of the issues raised.

Key motives for young lawyers to join a law firm were money and improved career options. These expectations were generally met. However, once working, these lawyers were disappointed by a lack of interaction with and appreciation from partners, high pressure to bill more, long working hours and poor work/life balance, a lack of interesting work, and a lack of international secondments.

The research reported in this paper is based on a case study of one of the top five law firms in the world, which is considered to be a leader in many areas of law practice. It cannot be assumed to be representative of the culture, policies and practices of many other firms operating in this sector.

The findings have been used within the case study organisation to improve junior lawyer motivation and could also be used by comparable organisations to improve the retention of junior lawyers.

The main contribution of this paper is the insight gained into the job and career motivations and expectations of junior lawyers. Additional insight is gained by exploring expectations prior to joining the firm and which of these could be fulfilled and which were disappointed during employment with the firm.

The academic literature that addresses the creation and transformation of large law firms seldom mentions the presence of legal secretaries. The absence of legal secretaries, the vast majority of whom are women, reproduces law firm hierarchies in which attorneys are important in understanding the legal profession and law firm dynamics while secretaries remain invisible. Given the lack of secondary literature on legal secretaries, much of this chapter is based upon legal secretaries' responses to a nationwide survey, which I conducted in Spring 2009. Using such data, along with other primary sources, the chapter examines how legal secretaries' roles and work have changed during the past 50 years, how legal secretaries view themselves and their roles in law large law firms, and the material conditions under which legal secretaries work. Moreover, the most significant scholarship on secretaries has depicted the secretary/boss relationship as one of personal and domestic nature – what we might call the “second-wife syndrome.” The chapter explores whether such a description remains accurate and the complicated gender dynamics that exist between legal secretaries and attorneys.

Studies suggest that women in law appear dissatisfied with the practice of law due to the difficulties of balancing work and family. Little research has examined how the contextual characteristics of law firms affect women lawyers’ sense of life balance and career satisfaction, which is the focus of this study. I propose that if women in law firms can have children and be just as satisfied with their careers and have the same degree of life balance as women without children, then women practicing law can “have it all”. I show how contextual characteristics of law firms are important in understanding mothers’ and non-mothers’ work experiences.

Misconduct by lawyers in law firms is often attributed to pressures from increasing competition for legal services. Modern firms do face fierce competitive pressures. We can gain more subtle insights, however, by focusing on the specific markets in which particular firms operate and how forms of influence in law firms interact with common patterns of behavior in organizations. This chapter draws on this approach to analyze the experience of Jenkens & Gilchrist, a national law firm that had to close its doors in 2007 because of tax shelter work that triggered civil lawsuits and government investigations.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the relationship between the marketing and legal departments within the corporation and how this relationship allows corporate attorneys to protect the firm against third‐party lawsuits.

A literature review is followed by a discussion of the relevant sections of the American Bar Association's Model Rules of Professional Conduct which govern the professional conduct of all attorneys in the USA relative to how they treat the client, third parties, and relate to the court. Then, the concept of the client/customer from the viewpoint of marketers and “legal people” (corporate counsels) is examined.

After a thorough examination of the roles of corporate attorneys and the marketing department within the firm, the study concludes that the occasional turf wars between the two departments stem from the differences in the cultures and norms of the two departments.

To the extent that the study focused on the laws protecting consumers in the USA, and the Model Rules of Professional Responsibility as they relate to attorneys in the USA, its findings may be true only in the USA. However, the insights generated may have universal application.

Because the Model Rules of Professional Conduct dictate how lawyers in the USA conduct themselves vis‐à‐vis their clients, efforts on the part of corporate counsels to educate marketers on how these rules affect their conduct could elicit the support and cooperation of marketers within the firm. In addition, organizations must reorganize so that corporate counsels not only maintain an active presence in the marketing department, but also work together with marketers to craft language in warranties, ads, and other communications with third parties in order to fulfill the applicable legal requirements, and yet not perceived by consumers as too “legalease”.

The study sheds light on the causes of turf wars between the two important departments (legal and marketing folk) within the firm, and suggests ways to remedy the situation.