Orrick - VLG
 

No idea, but VLG has been working with Orrick for years now - whenever VLG's clients needed more corporate work that they didn't or couldn't handle, or more specialized work (tax, employee benefits), they sent the work to Orrick.

With VLG having to close most of its offices, lay off most of its associates (or make the others take paycuts or pro bono outside jobs), and issue a capital call from the partners, I wouldn't bat an eyelash if later today even we heard they were being subsumed into Orrick. I think Craig Johnson has made it clear he doesn't want to go back to Wilson and Larry's world.

C(whether he can peacefully live in Ralph's remains to be seen)deuced

Largest Firm with an office in Napa Valley?
 

I know that Farella Braun & Martel has a "wine country" office. Any others?

danger: merging traffic
 

I merged the Gray Cary Moving thread into this one because it seemed like it belonged here. Tucker Max can stay on his own for a while, IMHO. If you disagree or have other opinions that you would like to express about such things, please PM or e-mail me. Thank you again for your support.

Orrick - VLG
 

You can link to a London article about the potential merger here:
http://weirdofthenews.blogspot.com/2....html#93962494

(it says talks are in the "early stages").

Head(always surfin' the legal press)Light

Orrick-Venture Law
 

Do people think any rainmakers at Venture (meaning the big business generators in the SV office - not sure if that's more than a handful or not) would go back to a firm where the per partner #s likely won't match up to the large equity payouts those attorneys reportedly received in past years? Would they want to work in a place they don't control? Big change.

Orrick-Venture Law
 

Uh, lets see here. Large equity payouts in PAST years or a FUTURE going forward? Um, I want to live in the past! ME ME ME!! Forgot about my future, lets relive the PAST.

Oh boy....

74 Otis Street
 

74 Otis Street
 

7 of 9
 

Hi, thanks.

I've been around, mostly lurking. Just couldn't resist the most recent post.

Top Ten Lawyers
 

C'mon, Deuce -- do you really think it's as bad as all that? Two of the top 10 are lesbians, for goodness sakes.

Would I like to see more balance in the ranks of the most accomplished lawyers? Sure, and everywhere else too. But pretending that this list looks like, say, the 1950s Supreme Court is just not accurate.

As to litigators vs. business lawyers, that won't change, I suspect. I don't think the Chronicle is capable of identifying the "best" business lawyers. "Best" basically means "highest profile" in this survey, and that favors litigators.

Kind of ironic, though, when you think about what the Chronicle has previously said about Sonsini.

Top Ten Lawyers
 

I would refute the negative pregnant, as well. If you knew the kind of conflicts of interest that underlay the relationships between some of those particular lawyers and the press who repeatedly write about them, it would make your heart sick. And I don't mean Deger/Snow, either.

Business journalism is just influence peddling by reporters on the one hand, and a marketing budget item by lawyers on the other hand. But don't let it depress you. We all wind up in the same hell.

Top Ten Lawyers
 

Does anyone else understand what the hell Atticus just said?


:shrug: :wtf??:

Top Ten Lawyers
 

"NEGATIVE PREGNANT - Such form of negative expression, in pleading, as may imply or carry within it an affirmative.

This is faulty, because the meaning of such form of expression is ambiguous. Example: in trespass for entering the plaintiff's house, the defendant pleaded that the plaintiff's daughter gave him license to do so and that he entered by that license. The plaintiff replied that he did not enter by her license. This was considered as a negative pregnant and it was held the plaintiff should have traversed the entry by itself, or the license by itself, and not both together. 3. It may be observed that this form of traverse may imply; or carry within it, that the license was given, though the defendant did not enter by that license. It is therefore in the language of pleading said to be pregnant with the admission, namely, that a license was given: at the same time, the license is not expressly admitted, and the effect therefore is, to leave it in doubt whether the plaintiff means to deny the license, or to deny, that the defendant entered by virtue of that license. It is this ambiguity which appears to constitute the fault.

This rule, however, against a negative pregnant, appears in modern times at least, to have received no very strict construction; for many cases have occurred in which, upon various grounds of distinction from the general rule, that form of expression has been free from objection. "

As for the rest, I think he's implying hanky-panky -- but that's just a guess.

Top Ten Lawyers
 

Gort, Master of the Guardians, is correct. I meant to say that the news media is equally unqualified to judge the stature of litigators and transactional lawyers alike, because those "high-profile" litigators are, in various ways, in bed with the particular reporters who repeatedly write puff pieces about them. I can't go into details, but I've seen it happen.

I was trying to be coy about it.

Top Ten Lawyers
 

Okay, fine, but.... I disagree. I don't doubt that there is some back-scratching going on here (trading of puff pieces for good access to interviews in high profile cases, or money, or a Monica or two, say). But the press does follow litigation, and the people it picks as "best lawyers" at least have the rep. of winning big cases, or at least getting hired for them.

It's a lot easier for the press to tell who comes out ahead in litigation than it is in transactions. This does not provide marvelous insight into who the "best" is, of course, but it gives some shred of information, at least.