Comments on: The Expansion of the Supreme Court Bar: http://volokh.com/2006/03/02/the-expansion-of-the-supreme-court-bar/ Commentary on law, public policy, and more Tue, 14 Feb 2012 07:45:51 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: hdiwgbnlpdi http://volokh.com/2006/03/02/the-expansion-of-the-supreme-court-bar/comment-page-1/#comment-104879 hdiwgbnlpdi Mon, 30 Oct 2006 13:18:10 +0000 http://208.43.137.32/~volokhc/wp/?p=6853#comment-104879 <strong>nbvrovdylmu</strong> ltgkpjxgai kpvpqnlhi gscwfww msuecfpjw nbvrovdylmu

ltgkpjxgai kpvpqnlhi gscwfww msuecfpjw

]]> By: JustaThought http://volokh.com/2006/03/02/the-expansion-of-the-supreme-court-bar/comment-page-1/#comment-104877 JustaThought Fri, 03 Mar 2006 04:49:50 +0000 http://208.43.137.32/~volokhc/wp/?p=6853#comment-104877 I think you guys are missing the boat on why NY firms don't get involved in the sweepstakes. And it's because you are assuming that firms are operated like profit-seeking business. They are, sort of, but they are also employee (partner) cooperatives and the prestige of being a firm with a big supreme court practice redounds to the benefit of partners socially and they are the ones that make the decisions. <BR /> <BR />The NY firms don't have Supreme Court practices because it doesn't make money and it doesn't have social benefits in New York. Having practiced in a big NY firm, it just isn't what partners think is cool -- hanging out with big businessmen and making money are. <BR /> <BR />The reason that I think going for a sociological explanation is necessary is that the business justification for ANY firm to have a Supreme Court practice is inane. The cases, for the most part, aren't worth that much -- big business disputes just don't make it to the court all that often. So, for such a practice to make sense, it has to be a loss leader -- either it brings in business or it makes it easier to recruit young attorneys. The first idea requires assuming that business clients are morons. The second makes sense, but it doesn't mean all that much. Wachtell, Cravath and the other NY big boys don't have any trouble recruiting talent and they don't offer attorneys the false hope that they'll be writing Supreme Court briefs. I think you guys are missing the boat on why NY firms don’t get involved in the sweepstakes. And it’s because you are assuming that firms are operated like profit-seeking business. They are, sort of, but they are also employee (partner) cooperatives and the prestige of being a firm with a big supreme court practice redounds to the benefit of partners socially and they are the ones that make the decisions.

The NY firms don’t have Supreme Court practices because it doesn’t make money and it doesn’t have social benefits in New York. Having practiced in a big NY firm, it just isn’t what partners think is cool — hanging out with big businessmen and making money are.

The reason that I think going for a sociological explanation is necessary is that the business justification for ANY firm to have a Supreme Court practice is inane. The cases, for the most part, aren’t worth that much — big business disputes just don’t make it to the court all that often. So, for such a practice to make sense, it has to be a loss leader — either it brings in business or it makes it easier to recruit young attorneys. The first idea requires assuming that business clients are morons. The second makes sense, but it doesn’t mean all that much. Wachtell, Cravath and the other NY big boys don’t have any trouble recruiting talent and they don’t offer attorneys the false hope that they’ll be writing Supreme Court briefs.

]]> By: Tyrone Slothrop http://volokh.com/2006/03/02/the-expansion-of-the-supreme-court-bar/comment-page-1/#comment-104876 Tyrone Slothrop Thu, 02 Mar 2006 21:55:39 +0000 http://208.43.137.32/~volokhc/wp/?p=6853#comment-104876 I suspect that's true for most of the firms chasing this work. I suspect that’s true for most of the firms chasing this work.

]]> By: snowball http://volokh.com/2006/03/02/the-expansion-of-the-supreme-court-bar/comment-page-1/#comment-104875 snowball Thu, 02 Mar 2006 21:45:41 +0000 http://208.43.137.32/~volokhc/wp/?p=6853#comment-104875 I think the reason the big NY firms aren't chasing this kind of work is that it isn't as profitable as other work they do, and they need high-margin work to justify the high costs of doing business (and retaining talent) in NY. <BR /> <BR />Appellate work doesn't require the ridiculous partner to associate leverage as, say, a nasty internal investigation with 50 witness interviews. And it doesn't generate the steady stream of billable hours as would a big antitrust litigation with 10 million documents to review. Even a complicated Supreme Court brief can be put together with a fairly small group of lawyers. I think the reason the big NY firms aren’t chasing this kind of work is that it isn’t as profitable as other work they do, and they need high-margin work to justify the high costs of doing business (and retaining talent) in NY.

Appellate work doesn’t require the ridiculous partner to associate leverage as, say, a nasty internal investigation with 50 witness interviews. And it doesn’t generate the steady stream of billable hours as would a big antitrust litigation with 10 million documents to review. Even a complicated Supreme Court brief can be put together with a fairly small group of lawyers.

]]> By: Tyrone Slothrop http://volokh.com/2006/03/02/the-expansion-of-the-supreme-court-bar/comment-page-1/#comment-104874 Tyrone Slothrop Thu, 02 Mar 2006 21:08:42 +0000 http://208.43.137.32/~volokhc/wp/?p=6853#comment-104874 I assumed no such thing. I assumed no such thing.

]]> By: qwerty http://volokh.com/2006/03/02/the-expansion-of-the-supreme-court-bar/comment-page-1/#comment-104873 qwerty Thu, 02 Mar 2006 20:49:39 +0000 http://208.43.137.32/~volokhc/wp/?p=6853#comment-104873 your assumption that non-NY firms don't have prestige and name recognition is strange. your assumption that non-NY firms don’t have prestige and name recognition is strange.

]]> By: Tyrone Slothrop http://volokh.com/2006/03/02/the-expansion-of-the-supreme-court-bar/comment-page-1/#comment-104872 Tyrone Slothrop Thu, 02 Mar 2006 20:18:28 +0000 http://208.43.137.32/~volokhc/wp/?p=6853#comment-104872 Interesting. I would propose that large firms see collateral benefits to doing this sort of work -- in particular, prestige and name recognition -- even though these practices are highly dependant on individual stars who are prone to leave for whatever reason (e.g., government service), a feature that makes them unlike other sorts of work that big firms want to develop. And so perhaps the reason that the big NY firms aren't chasing this work is that they do not see the need to chase prestige and name recognition, already having it. Interesting. I would propose that large firms see collateral benefits to doing this sort of work — in particular, prestige and name recognition — even though these practices are highly dependant on individual stars who are prone to leave for whatever reason (e.g., government service), a feature that makes them unlike other sorts of work that big firms want to develop. And so perhaps the reason that the big NY firms aren’t chasing this work is that they do not see the need to chase prestige and name recognition, already having it.

]]> By: Moonage Spacedream http://volokh.com/2006/03/02/the-expansion-of-the-supreme-court-bar/comment-page-1/#comment-104878 Moonage Spacedream Thu, 02 Mar 2006 19:53:52 +0000 http://208.43.137.32/~volokhc/wp/?p=6853#comment-104878 <strong>The real cause for global warming?</strong> Livescience observes:Antarctica Losing Ice, Contrary to Expectations While simultaneously Orin Kerr observes: The Expansion of the Supreme Court Bar:If no one else has it figured out, I think I do. Technorati global warming The real cause for global warming?

Livescience observes:Antarctica Losing Ice, Contrary to Expectations While simultaneously Orin Kerr observes: The Expansion of the Supreme Court Bar:If no one else has it figured out, I think I do. Technorati global warming

]]>