The Jewish Law Firm: Past and Present

The rise and growth of large Jewish law firms in New York City during the second half of the twentieth century was nothing short of an astounding success story. As late as 1950, there was not a single large Jewish law firm in town. By the mid-1960s, six of the largest twenty law firms were Jewish, and by 1980, four of the largest ten prestigious law firms were Jewish firms. Moreover, the accomplishment of the Jewish firms is especially striking because, while the traditional large White Anglo-Saxon Protestant law firms grew at a fast rate during this period, the Jewish firms grew twice as fast, and they did so in spite of experiencing explicit discrimination. What happened? This book chapter is a revised, updated study of the rise and growth of large New York City Jewish law firms. It is based on the public record, with respect to both the law firms themselves and trends in the legal profession generally, and on over twenty in-depth interviews with lawyers who either founded and practiced at these successful Jewish firms, attempted and failed to establish such firms, or were in a position to join these firms but decided instead to join WASP firms. According to the informants interviewed in this chapter, while Jewish law firms benefited from general decline in anti-Semitism and increased demand for corporate legal services, a unique combination of factors explains the incredible rise of the Jewish firms. First, white-shoe ethos caused large WASP firms to stay out of undignified practice areas and effectively created pockets of Jewish practice areas, where the Jewish firms encountered little competition for their services. Second, hiring and promotion discriminatory practices by the large WASP firms helped create a large pool of talented Jewish lawyers from which the Jewish firms could easily recruit. Finally, the Jewish firms benefited from a flip side of bias phenomenon, that is, they benefited from the positive consequences of stereotyping. Paradoxically, the very success of the Jewish firms is reflected in their demise by the early twenty-first century: because systematic large law firm ethno-religious discrimination against Jewish lawyers has become a thing of the past, the very reason for the existence of Jewish law firms has been nullified. As other minority groups, however, continue to struggle for equality within the senior ranks of Big Law, can the experience of the Jewish firms serve as a “separate-but-equal” blueprint for overcoming contemporary forms of discrimination for women, racial, and other minority attorneys? Perhaps not. As this chapter establishes, the success of large Jewish law firms was the result of unique conditions and circumstances between 1945 and 1980, which are unlikely to be replicated. For example, large law firms have become hyper-competitive and are not likely to allow any newcomers the benefit of protected pockets of practice. While smaller “separate-but-equal” specialized firms, for instance, ones exclusively hiring lawyer-mothers occasionally appear, the rise of large “separate-but-equal” firms is improbable.

To what extent has research conducted by the GaWC Research Network aided our understanding of large EU law firm geography?

This thesis explores whether a specific group of large EU law firms exhibited multiple common behaviours regarding their EU geographies between 1998 and 2009. These potentially common behaviours included their preferences for trading in certain EU locations, their usage of law firm alliances, and the specific reasons why they opened or closed EU branch offices. If my hypothesis is confirmed, this may indicate that certain aspects of large law firm geography are predictable – a finding potentially of interest to various stakeholders globally, including legal regulators, academics and law firms. In testing my hypothesis, I have drawn on research conducted by the Globalization and World Cities (GaWC) Research Network to assist me. Between 1999 and 2010, the GaWC published seven research papers exploring the geographies of large US and UK law firms. Several of the GaWC’s observations arising from these studies were evidence-based; others were speculative – including a novel approach for explaining legal practice branch office change, not adopted in research conducted previously or subsequently. By distilling the GaWC’s key observations these papers into a series of “sub-hypotheses”, I been able to test whether the geographical behaviours of my novel cohort of large EU law firms reflect those suggested by the GaWC. The more the GaWC’s suggested behaviours are observed among my cohort, the more my hypothesis will be supported. In conducting this exercise, I will additionally evaluate the extent to which the GaWC’s research has aided our understanding of large EU law firm geography. Ultimately, my findings broadly support most of the GaWC’s observations, notwithstanding our cohort differences and the speculative nature of several of the GaWC’s propositions. My investigation has also allowed me to refine several of the GaWC’s observations regarding commonly-observable large law firm geographical behaviours, while also addressing a key omission from the group’s research output.

Difference Blindness vs. Bias Awareness: Why Law Firms with the Best of Intentions Have Failed to Create Diverse Partnerships

This Article uses the example of BigLaw firms to explore the challenges that many elite organizations face in providing equal opportunity to their workers. Despite good intentions and the investment of significant resources, large law firms have been consistently unable to deliver diverse partnership structures - especially in more senior positions of power. Building on implicit and institutional bias scholarship and on successful approaches described in the organizational behavior literature, we argue that a significant barrier to systemic diversity at the law firm partnership level has been, paradoxically, the insistence on difference blindness standards that seek to evaluate each person on their individual merit. While powerful in dismantling intentional discrimination, these standards rely on an assumption that lawyers are, and have the power to act as, atomistic individuals - a dangerous assumption that has been disproven consistently by the literature establishing the continuing and powerful influence of implicit and institutional bias. Accordingly, difference blindness, which holds all lawyers accountable to seemingly neutral standards, disproportionately disadvantages diverse populations and normalizes the dominance of certain actors - here, white men - by creating the illusion that success or failure depends upon individual rather than structural constraints. In contrast, we argue that a bias awareness approach that encourages identity awareness and a relational framework is a more promising way to promote equality, equity, and inclusion.

Promotion and succession management and associated retention issues in Australian law firms

The focus of this research was promotion and succession management in Australian law firms. Two staff retention issues currently faced by the Australian legal industry were identified as suggesting possible failures in this area: 1) Practitioners are leaving law firms early in their careers, 2) Female representation is disproportionally low at partnership level. The research described current Australian law firm promotion and succession practices and then explained their possible relevance to the two retention issues. The overall aim of the research was to uncover key findings and present practical recommendations to law firm managers and partners ready for incorporation into their future promotion and succession planning practice. In so doing the research aimed to benefit the Australian legal community as a whole. Four areas of literature relevant to the topic were reviewed, 1) law firm governance concluding that the fundamental values of the P²-Form remained constant (Cooper, Hinings, Greenwood & Brown, 1996; Morris & Pinnington, 1998) with ownership and strategic control of law firms remaining in the hands of partners; 2) the importance of individual practitioners to law firms concluding that the actual and opportunity costs relating to practitioner turnover were significant due to the transient nature of knowledge as a key asset of law firms (Gottschalk & Khandelwal, 2004; Rebitzer & Taylor, 2007); 3) generational differences concluding with support for the work of Finegold, Mohrman and Spreitzer (2002), Davis, Pawlowski and Houston (2006), Kuhnreuther (2003), and Avery, McKay, and Wilson (2007) which indicated that generational cohort differences were of little utility in human resources management practice; and 4) previous research relating to law firm promotion and succession practices indicating that five practices were relevant in law firm promotion outcomes; 1) firm billing requirements (Gorman & Kmec, 2009; Phillips, 2001; Noonan & Corcoran, 2004; Webley & Duff, 2007); 2) mentoring programs (Phillips, 2001; Noonan & Corcoran, 2004); 3) the existence of female partners (Gorman & Kmec, 2009; Beckman & Phillips, 2005); 4) non-partner career paths (Phillips, 2001; Corcoran & Noonan, 2004); and 5) the existence of family friendly policies (Gorman & Kmec, 2009; Phillips, 2001; Noonan & Corcoran, 2004; Webley & Duff, 2007.) The research was carried out via a sequential mixed method approach. The initial quantitative study was based upon a theoretical framework grounded in the literature and provided baseline information describing Australian law firm promotion and succession practices. The study was carried out via an on-line survey of Australian law firm practitioners. The results of the study provided the basis for the second qualitative study. The qualitative study further explained the statistically generated results and focused specifically on the two identified retention issues. The study was conducted via one-on-one interviews with Australian law firm partners and experienced law firm managers. The results of both studies were combined within the context of relevant literature resulting in eight key findings: Key findings 1) Organisational commitment levels across generational cohorts are more homogenous than different. 2) Law firm practitioners are leaving law firms early in their careers due to the heavy time commitment behaviour demanded of them, particularly by clients. 3) Law firm promotion and succession practices reinforce practitioner time commitment behaviour marking it as an indicator of practitioner success. 4) Law firm practitioners believe that they have many career options outside law firms and are considering these options. 5) Female practitioners are considering opting out of law firms due to time commitment demands related to partnership conflicting with family commitment demands. 6) A masculine, high time commitment culture in law firms is related to the decision by female practitioners to leave law firms. 7) The uptake of alternative work arrangements by female practitioners is not fatal to their partnership prospects particularly in firms with supportive policies, processes and organisational culture. 8) Female practitioners are less inclined than their male counterparts to seek partnership as an ultimate goal and are more likely to opt out of law firms exhibiting highly competitive, masculine cultures. Practical recommendations Further review of the data collected in relation to the key findings provided the basis for nine practical recommendations specifically geared towards implementation by law firm managers and partners. The first recommendation relates to the use of generational differences in practitioner management. The next six relate to recommended actions to reduce the time commitment demands on practitioners. The final two recommendations relate to the practical implementation of these actions both at an individual and organisational level. The recommendations are as follows: 1) "Generationally driven," age based generalisations should not be utilised in law firm promotion and succession management practice. 2) Expected levels of client access to practitioners be negotiated on a client by client basis and be included in client retention agreements. 3) Appropriate alternative working arrangements such as working off-site, flexible working hours or part-time work be offered to practitioners in situations where doing so will not compromise client serviceability. 4) The copying of long working hour behaviours of senior practitioners should be discouraged particularly where information technology can facilitate remote client serviceability. 5) Refocus the use of timesheets from an employer monitoring tool to an employee empowerment tool. 6) Policies and processes relating to the offer of alternative working arrangements be supported and reinforced by law firm organisational culture. 7) Requests for alternative working arrangements be determined without regard to gender. 8) Incentives and employment conditions offered to practitioners to be individualised based on the subjective need of the individual and negotiated as a part of the current employee performance review process. 9) Individually negotiated employment conditions be negotiated within the context of the firm’s overall strategic planning process. Through the conduct of the descripto-explanatory study, a detailed discussion of current law firm promotion and succession practices was enabled. From this discussion, 7 eight key findings and nine associated recommendations were generated as well as an insight into the future of the profession being given. The key findings and recommendations provide practical advice to law firm managers and partners in relation to their everyday promotion and succession practice. The need to negotiate individual employee workplace conditions and their integration into overall law firm business planning was put forward. By doing so, it was suggested that both the individual employee and the employing law firm would mutually benefit from the arrangement. The study therefore broadened its practical contribution from human resources management to a contribution to the overall management practice of Australian law firms. In so doing, the research has provided an encompassing contribution to the Australian legal industry both in terms of employee welfare as well as firm and industry level success.

The OO files : providing online formative feedback on Contract Law learning in a narrative setting

Feedback, both formative and summative, enables students to reflect on their understandings and to restructure their thinking to develop their capabilities. It can also encourage positive motivation and help boost self-esteem. Online multiple choice questions can be an efficient and effective means of providing timely formative feedback. At the same time, locating learning in a narrative environment can facilitate engaging and effective learning experiences. Narratives can help learners to navigate through information and support cognitive and imaginative engagement. This article will discuss The 00 Files, an online suite of modules containing multiple choice questions situated in the narrative of a fictional law firm. It notes student responses to the program and discusses lessons that may be learnt from its development which may be of assistance to academics considering the development of similar programs for their courses.

Practice and Procedure: UCPR r 708 - costs order against several defendants and third party

Glenwood Homes Pty Ltd v Everhard [2008] QSC 192 involved the not uncommon situation where one costs order is made against several parties represented by a single firm of solicitors. Dutney J considered the implications when only some of the parties liable for the payment of the costs file a notice of objection to the costs statement served in respect of those costs.

The Credit Act Advisory System (CAAS) : conversion from an expert system prototype to a C++ commercial system

CAAS is a rule-based expert system, which provides advice on the Victorial Credit Act 1984. It is currently in commercial use, and has been developed in conjunction with a law firm. It uses an object-oriented hybrid reasoning approach. The system was initially prototyped using the expert system shell NExpert Object, and was then converted into the C++ language. In this paper we describe the advantages that this methodology has, for both commercial and research development.

A qualidade no serviço de advocacia empresarial: um estudo de caso

° objetivo deste estudo exploratório foi o de investigar a percepção da qualidade no serviço de advocacia empresarial. Para tanto foi realizado um estudo de caso, envolvendo uma organização de grande porte e uma sociedade de advogados que lhe presta serviços de assessoria jurídica, ambos com sede no estado do Rio de Janeiro. Os dados foram obtidos a partir de entrevistas em profundidade com profissionais de ambos os lados, tendo em vista o forte caráter de interação inerente ao serviço estudado e, também, buscando-se identificar eventuais discrepâncias relativas aos critérios de julgamento quanto à sua qualidade. Os resultados indicam que o processo de avaliação da qualidade de serviços tende a apresentar traços distintos na sociedade brasileira devido às peculiaridades de seu sistema cultural. Especificamente quanto ao serviço de advocacia empresarial, restou claro que as expectativas do cliente desempenham um papel relevante para a percepção de sua qualidade, e que fatores não técnicos, ou de natureza funcional, também possuem grande influência no processo.

Estudo sobre os aspectos culturais da terminologia dos contratos de prestação de serviços em língua portuguesa e língua francesa

Pós-graduação em Estudos Linguísticos - IBILCE