At Some D.C. Firms, More Women Discipline Than Men Make … · 2016-02-08 · At Some D.C. Firms,...
2
At Some D.C. Firms, More Women Than Men Make Partner Women accounted for half or more of new partners at eight of the largest firms. THE NATIONAL LAW JOURNAL/WWW.NLJ.COM ❙ JANUARY 19, 2015 15 BY KATELYN POLANTZ Melinda Coolidge of Hausfeld knew it was time to ask wheth- er she could become a partner. The 33-year-old associate was doing the type of legal work that partners do. She had devel- oped business, made recommendations to her firm’s manage- ment committee and felt like a partner. So last year she went to the people in charge of Hausfeld— coincidentally, all men—and asked. They agreed to make her a partner this month. “Here it’s not really that significant that I’m a woman,” Coolidge said. But in a broader sense, Coolidge’s gender is significant. The legal industry is one in which female lawyers have fewer opportunities than do their male colleagues. There are far fewer female partners at large law firms, female partners often are paid less than male partners and retention of female partners within the profession has been troublesome. Despite industrywide setbacks, many law firms in Washing- ton exceeded the standard this year in promoting women. At 14 of 35 firms that have announced promotions since October, as many or more women than male lawyers have become partners in the District of Columbia. In multiple cases, the proportion of new female partners was greater in the D.C. offices of firms than in other firm locations. For instance, half of Hogan Lovell’s eight new partners in D.C. SEE DIVERSITY, PAGE 18 SEE STEVENS, PAGE 20 NEWS FROM WASHINGTON Discipline Voided for Prosecutors Ethics charges stemmed from Ted Stevens case. BY ZOE TILLMAN Top U.S. Department of Justice law- yers violated agency policy in disciplin- ing two prosecutors for ethics breach- es in the botched case against the late Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens, a federal board ruled this month. The panel invalidated the suspensions—adding another blem- ish to the department over a case that sharpened national focus on govern- ment misconduct. Justice Department officials in 2012 concluded that assistant U.S. attorneys Joseph Bottini and James Goeke com- mitted professional misconduct and ordered that they be suspended without pay—Bottini for 40 days and Goeke for 15. The prosecutors, accused of withhold- ing information from Stevens’ defense lawyers, challenged the suspensions. An administrative law judge found department officials violated internal policies during the disciplinary process and reversed the suspensions. The Justice Department appealed. The Merit Systems Protection Board, which reviews discipline involv- ing federal employees, on Jan. 2 upheld the judge’s decision. The Justice Department has not said if it plans to challenge the board’s decision. A spokesman declined to comment. The National Association of Assistant U.S. Attorneys, which opposed the suspensions, praised the board “for holding government agen- cies accountable for adherence to the requisites of due process.” Bennett Gershman, a professor at Pace Law School who writes about prosecutorial ethics issues, said it was a “bad mark” for the department if no prosecutors involved in the Stevens case faced discipline. “This is the one case that cried out for some imposition of some sanctions,” Gershman said. The suspensions “were so weak, just given the nature of the misconduct, but nevertheless there were sanctions,” he added. inadmissible Foley & Lardner is preparing “a thorough response” to the U.S. Supreme Court’s unusual show-cause order last month that could result in sanctions against Foley partner Howard Shipley, the firm’s general counsel says. In the firm’s first public comment about the disciplinary action, Foley gen- eral counsel James Clark said in a written statement to The National Law Journal: “We are preparing a thorough response to the court’s order, which Mr. Shipley and the firm take very seriously. Given the court’s practice that such proceedings remain confidential and our obligation to client confidentiality, we have no further comment at this time.” On Dec. 8, the court issued a rare order directing Shipley to show cause, within 40 days, why he should not be sanctioned for a certiorari petition he filed in a patent case. Shipley’s petition was full of jargon, acronyms and convolut- ed phrasing, the court said. It also contained a footnote that may explain the court’s displeasure: “Prof. Sigram Schindler, the primary inventor of the ’453 patent, should be recog- nized for significant contributions to this petition.” The court clerk’s guide for lawyers preparing petitions states, “Names of nonlawyers such as research assistants, law students and advisers may not appear on the cover [of the petition] under any circumstances; nor are they to be credited with having contributed to the preparation of the petition either in the text, in a footnote or at the conclusion of the petition.” The Supreme Court’s order did not give any reason for the proposed sanction. Under the court’s practice, the order did not create a public file on the court’s docket, and it is unlikely that Shipley’s response will be made public. There is no rule of the court that requires filings in disciplinary cases to be kept confidential but, historically, that has been the court’s practice. —TONY MAURO SANCTIONS THREAT LOOMS IN THE HIGH COURT FOLEY & LARDNER FOR MORE INADMISSIBLE SEE PAGE 16 TED STEVENS PROMOTED: Melinda Coolidge, hired six years ago at Hausfeld as the firm’s first associate, was elevated to the partnership this month. DIEGO M. RADZINSCHI DIEGO M. RADZINSCHI DIEGO M. RADZINSCHI
Transcript of At Some D.C. Firms, More Women Discipline Than Men Make … · 2016-02-08 · At Some D.C. Firms,...
At Some D.C. Firms, More Women Than Men Make Partner
Women accounted for half or more of new partners at eight of the largest firms.
the national law journal/www.nlj.com ❙ january 19, 2015 15
By KATelyn PolAnTz
Melinda Coolidge of Hausfeld knew it was time to ask wheth-er she could become a partner. The 33-year-old associate was doing the type of legal work that partners do. She had devel-oped business, made recommendations to her firm’s manage-ment committee and felt like a partner.
So last year she went to the people in charge of Hausfeld—coincidentally, all men—and asked. They agreed to make her a partner this month. “Here it’s not really that significant that I’m a woman,” Coolidge said.
But in a broader sense, Coolidge’s gender is significant. The legal industry is one in which female lawyers have fewer opportunities than do their male colleagues. There are far fewer female partners at large law firms, female partners often are paid less than male partners and retention of female partners within the profession has been troublesome.
Despite industrywide setbacks, many law firms in Washing-ton exceeded the standard this year in promoting women.
At 14 of 35 firms that have announced promotions since October, as many or more women than male lawyers have become partners in the District of Columbia.
In multiple cases, the proportion of new female partners was greater in the D.C. offices of firms than in other firm locations. For instance, half of Hogan Lovell’s eight new partners in D.C.
See diversity, Page 18
See stevens, Page 20
news from washington
Discipline Voided for ProsecutorsEthics charges stemmed from Ted Stevens case.
By zoe TillMAn
Top U.S. Department of Justice law-yers violated agency policy in disciplin-ing two prosecutors for ethics breach-es in the botched case against the late Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens, a federal board ruled this month. The panel invalidated the suspensions—adding another blem-ish to the department over a case that sharpened national focus on govern-ment misconduct.
Justice Department officials in 2012 concluded that assistant U.S. attorneys Joseph Bottini and James Goeke com-mitted professional misconduct and ordered that they be suspended without pay—Bottini for 40 days and Goeke for 15. The prosecutors, accused of withhold-ing information from Stevens’ defense lawyers, challenged the suspensions.
An administrative law judge found department officials violated internal policies during the disciplinary process and reversed the suspensions. The Justice Department appealed. The Merit Systems Protection Board, which reviews discipline involv-ing federal employees, on Jan. 2 upheld the judge’s decision.
The Justice Department has not said if it plans to challenge the board’s decision. A spokesman declined to comment. The National Association of Assistant U.S. Attorneys, which opposed the suspensions, praised the board “for holding government agen-cies accountable for adherence to the requisites of due process.”
Bennett Gershman, a professor at Pace Law School who writes about prosecutorial ethics issues, said it was a “bad mark” for the department if no prosecutors involved in the Stevens case faced discipline.
“This is the one case that cried out for some imposition of some sanctions,” Gershman said. The suspensions “were so weak, just given the nature of the misconduct, but nevertheless there were sanctions,” he added.
inadmissible
Foley & Lardner is preparing “a thorough response” to the U.S. Supreme Court’s unusual show-cause order last month that could result in sanctions against Foley partner Howard Shipley, the firm’s general counsel says. In the firm’s first public comment about the disciplinary action, Foley gen-eral counsel James Clark said in a written statement to The National Law Journal: “We are preparing a thorough
response to the court’s order, which Mr. Shipley and the firm take very seriously. Given the court’s practice that such proceedings remain confidential and our obligation to client confidentiality, we have no further comment at this time.”
On Dec. 8, the court issued a rare order directing Shipley to show cause, within 40 days, why he should not be sanctioned for a certiorari petition he filed in a patent case. Shipley’s petition was full of jargon, acronyms and convolut-ed phrasing, the court said. It also contained a footnote that may explain the court’s displeasure: “Prof. Sigram Schindler, the primary inventor of the ’453 patent, should be recog-nized for significant contributions to this petition.” The court clerk’s guide for lawyers preparing petitions states, “Names of nonlawyers such as research assistants, law students and advisers may not appear on the cover [of the petition] under any circumstances; nor are they to be credited with having contributed to the preparation of the petition either in the text, in a footnote or at the conclusion of the petition.”
The Supreme Court’s order did not give any reason for the proposed sanction. Under the court’s practice, the order did not create a public file on the court’s docket, and it is unlikely that Shipley’s response will be made public. There is no rule of the court that requires filings in disciplinary cases to be kept confidential but, historically, that has been the court’s practice. —Tony Mauro
SAnCTionS THReAT looMS in THe HiGH CoURT
Foley & lARDneR
For more inadmissible see page 16
TeD STeVenS
PRoMoTeD: Melinda Coolidge, hired six years ago at Hausfeld as the firm’s first associate, was elevated to the partnership this month.
diego m. radzinschi
diego m. radzinschi
diego m. radzinschi
are female. But globally, the firm pro-moted only nine women compared with 15 men this winter.
A few firms that promoted partners failed to recognize any women lawyers in D.C. Those firms included Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr; Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman; Mayer Brown; Morrison & Foerster; and Morgan, Lewis & Bockius.
Morgan Lewis, which promoted six white men in D.C. last fall, did not respond to requests for comment.
Programs for PromotionOf course, the gender divide at firms
this year could be a fluke. At many firms, including Crowell & Moring and Arent Fox, diverse classes were the intentional product of a long-term campaign of mak-ing opportunities available to women.
“That’s what’s most important, right? Not the moment you’re crossing the precipice, but the bundle of what’s hap-pening over the years,” Ellen Moran Dwyer, managing partner of Crowell & Moring, said.
Crowell elected six attorneys this year to its partnership. Three women worked their way up from the associate level in the D.C. office. One of the lawyers in the class, Jennifer Ray, became the only female partner in the firm’s tax group.
Her success relied upon her male col-leagues’ making opportunities for her along the way, Dwyer said. Colleagues over the years made sure she could inter-act with clients and sit across the table from senior partners with other firms.
“It was obvious to all of us that folks would really need to make opportunities within the firm,” Dwyer said.
Similarly, Arent Fox voted four law-yers into the partnership nationally this year. All are women. In the past five
years, the firm said, it has promoted as many women as men.
“Part of it is building a pipeline of emerging young lawyers who mature into partners,” Mark Katz, chairman of Arent Fox, said. “This year isn’t a one-year phenomenon for us.”
flexible schedulesFlexible work schedule policies at
firms seem to be a key part of the equa-tion to having more female partners. One lawyer, Katz said, was on maternity leave when the partnership considered her. Another, Sheree Rowe, had worked from
home in the San Francisco Bay Area before the firm opened a San Francisco office two years ago, Katz said.
The flex-time opportunity also has been critical at Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld. This month, the firm promot-ed five lawyers into its partnership in Washington. They included four women, three of whom—Shiva Aminian, Tatman Savio and Kristine Sendek-Smith—have used the firm’s reduced-workload pro-gram.
All three in D.C. will still work reduced hours as partners, a firm spokes-man said. They have a strong role model
who succeeded on the alternative sched-ule: Kim Koopersmith, the firm’s first female chair, started at the firm as a four-day-a-week partner.
One measure of diversity, however, hasn’t extended to the firms. Far fewer minority lawyers than women made partnerships in D.C. this year.
“I think we’ve made some progress on the gender front, [but I hope] that we’ll replicate that in the broader sense of minority,” Dwyer said.
Contact Katelyn Polantz at kpolantz@- alm.com.
Pipeline of Young Lawyers Helps Firms’ Diversitydiversity, from page 15
washington
18 the national law journal/www.nlj.com ❙ january 19, 2015
The following cases were recently filed in the Washington-area district courts. This information is provided by the district courts’ official online bulletins.
U.S. DiStrict coUrt for the DiStrict of colUmbia
GAG Enterprises v. Rayford(No. 15-CV-00041, Jan. 12)Assigned to Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly. Breach of contract. Demand: $141,768. Attorney for plaintiff: Kristina Caggiano, Duane Morris, Washington.
MetLife v. Financial Stability Oversight Council (No. 15-CV-00045, Jan. 13) Assigned to Judge Rosemary Collyer. Judicial review of agency actions. Attorneys for plaintiff: Amir Tayrani and
Eugene Scalia, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, Washington.
Top Sure Investments v. Marck Properties Group(No. 15-CV-00048, Jan. 13)Assigned to Judge Amy Berman Jackson. Real property. Attorney for plain-tiff: Michael Coogen Jr., Coogen Law, Arlington, Va.
U.S. DiStrict coUrt in aleXanDria, Va.Alexander v. Anthem Life Insurance(No. 15-CV-00017, Jan. 7)Assigned to Judge Leonie Brinkema. Employee benefits. Attorney for plaintiff: Juliet Purll, Purll Law, Arlington, Va.
Chaudhary v. Asset Acceptance(No. 15-CV-00021, Jan. 7)
Assigned to Judge Liam O’Grady. Fair Credit Reporting Act. Attorney for plaintiff: Kristi Cahoon Kelly, Kelly & Crandall, Fairfax, Va.
Carmen v. State Farm Fire and Casualty(No. 15-CV-00037, Jan. 9)Assigned to Judge Claude Hilton. Insurance. Demand: $6 million. Attorney for plaintiff: J. Chapman Petersen, Surovell Isaacs Petersen & Levy, Fairfax, Va. Attorney for defendant: Alexander deWitt, Brenner, Evans & Millman, Richmond.
U.S. DiStrict coUrt in Greenbelt, mD.California Casualty Indemnity Exchange v. Mua(No. 15-CV-00060, Jan. 8)Assigned to Judge Peter Messitte.
Insurance contract. Demand: $5,128. Attorney for plaintiff: Joel Seledee, Marsden & Seledee, Baltimore.
Bella Plastic Surgery v. Cosmetic Organization for Practice Enhancement(No. 15-CV-00076, Jan. 9)Assigned to Judge Paul Grimm. Trademark infringement. Attorney for plaintiff: Douglas Rettew, Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, Washington.
Badalamenti v. Land(No. 15-CV-00078, Jan. 9)Assigned to Judge Theodore Chuang. Tort/motor vehicle. Attorney for plain-tiff: Timothy Capurso, Gordon Feinblatt, Baltimore. Attorneys for defendants: Gerard Miles Sr. and Gerard Miles Jr., Huesman, Jones and Miles, Hunt Valley, Md.
civil actions
closing the gender gaPWomen accounted for half or more of new partners in D.C. at eight of the 20 largest general-practice firms.
Arent Fox 100%WOMENMEN
Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld 80%Sidley Austin 67%
Jones Day 63%Crowell & Moring 50%
Hogan Lovells 50%Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher 50%
King & Spalding 50%Kirkland & Ellis 36%
Covington & Burling 33%Wiley Rein 33%
Steptoe & Johnson LLP 33%McDermott Will & Emery 20%
Venable 20%Williams & Connolly 20%
Morgan, Lewis & Bockius 0%Latham & Watkins
Morrison & FoersterPillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman
Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr
0%0%0%0%
0 3 6 9 12 15
Each tally represents the partners promoted at Washington law offices in fall 2014 and winter 2015. Arnold & Porter; Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom; and Squire Patton Boggs have not yet announced their 2015 new partner classes.
