Law.com International

Paul Weiss Reaches Deal With Trump, White House Order Against Firm Is Withdrawn

Cut a Deal? File a Suit? Every Big Law Response to Trump Is a Blueprint

Spanish Firms Aggressively Target Latin America for Growth

Companies are relying more on psychological testing to evaluate general counsel candidates. Some of these assessments can be grueling—ranging from a simple online test to a multi-hour session with an industrial psychologist. https://lnkd.in/ei6W4bJs

Most Big Law firms, in keeping silent about the Trump administration’s actions against law firms, are concerned they could harm their clients or business if they were to speak publicly against the government. But some general counsel lawyers say they want their outside counsel to speak up. Some Big Law clients are going so far as to indicate that they’re willing to vote with their dollars and shift business around to those who speak out against the Trump administration, according to?interviews with corporate counsel and several LinkedIn posts by general counsel. One advertising company’s general counsel, speaking anonymously to ALM, said he would be shifting work away from the firms targeted by Trump’s actions. The GC said he felt sympathetic to the firms, and he would personally move work to firms speaking out, but a duty to his company means that a firm’s public action or statement wouldn't be a factor in his outside counsel section. Another GC, who serves a media-focused company, indicated that general counsel were in a “uniquely difficult” position given their fiduciary duties to the companies they serve while also remaining officers of the court and members of the legal profession. “We aren’t merely corporate officers charged with producing shareholder value…that’s part of being a general counsel, but we’re also members of the bar, officers of the court, and part of a legal profession that’s the bedrock of the rule of law,” the GC said. “We stand apart from the narrow shareholder value paradigm and have a responsibility to the legal system, to the profession, and we’re really caught between those two prerogatives.” Full story from Amanda O'Brien: https://lnkd.in/e62W9RmN

Following the election, Law.com reported that law firms were looking at a recovering M&A market in 2025 or even a meaningful increase in M&A. The expectations were based on the prior two years. Federal Trade Commission Chair Lina Khan and the Biden administration didn’t make a lot of friends in the deal world. The changes in antitrust enforcement during that time became much more stringent than any in the prior 70 years of the FTC, several M&A attorneys said. The expectation was that the new administration would revert back to previous iterations of antitrust enforcement, opening up more opportunities. But Frank Aquila, partner at Sullivan & Cromwell, said, "People were overly optimistic about the concept that deregulation would equal more merger plans." "My expectation was that this was never going to be a return to the Reagan era of M&A enforcement," he said in an interview. "This is a populist administration, and while we may not see the delays we saw from the previous administration—which seemed somewhat anti-M&A for anti-M&A's sake—specific types of transactions will be scrutinized—those involving CFIUS, or those involving tech." Aquila also noted the Trump administration’s decision to keep the same principal M&A guidelines as the Biden administration before it. Alan M. Klein, corporate partner at Simpson, Thacher & Bartlett, said he too "was perhaps not as optimistic and ecstatic as some others might have been around the idea that all the constraints are coming off, it will be any deal anywhere anytime." "That notion was based on two things. First, the trope that there were [from the Biden administration] excessive regulatory constraints and those would go away. There would be no limits. The other was the Federal Reserve would continue to lower interest rates.” Klein added that during the first Trump administration, the regulatory enforcement was similar to most others, including those in the Bush and Clinton administrations. “No radical differences.” Full story from Patrick Smith: https://lnkd.in/eBNJ34Mq

To hear Fried, Frank, Harris & Jacobson chair Ken Rosh set the table for the year the firm had in 2024, one would think it was rough goings. “Our strongest groups are asset management, M&A, private equity and real estate,” he said in an interview. “The overall fundraising market was down. M&A was slower than expected, private equity was down. Real estate faced headwinds. It was an election year.” But the firm didn’t have a difficult year. “So it is nice to see that the core of what makes Fried Frank what it is set records in every single way,” he said. “It was a fantastic year.” Fried Frank saw its revenue jump by 12.6% to an all-time high of $1.14 billion, while its profits per equity partner surged 19% to $5.18 million, the first time the firm has crossed the $5 million threshold for that metric. The firm’s revenue per lawyer was up 8% to $1.58 million, while average compensation for all partners was up 13.6% to $3.61 million. The firm’s net income was up 14.6% to $567 million, while its nonequity compensation moved up slightly (0.9%) to $96.71 million. “What is interesting about our asset management practice is that it is agnostic with what is going on with the economy,” Rosh said. “Not just buyouts, but hedge, distressed, mezzanine, senior lending. We cover the fund gamut. We have really sophisticated clients who adapt to what their investors are looking for to form an investment strategy and allow us to remain busy regardless of what is going on in the market.” Good work, if you can get it. Full story from Patrick Smith: https://lnkd.in/ekPNDTeK

After cracking the $1 billion gross revenue mark in 2022 and dipping slightly below it last year, O'Melveny & Myers LLP once again surpassed $1 billion in gross revenue in 2024. The top line figure of $1.07 billion in gross revenue represented an 8.4% increase over 2023 and coincided with a 10.9% increase in profits per equity partner to $3.05 million, marking the first time PEP exceeded $3 million in firm history. O’Melveny also managed to boost net income by 15.4%—for a three-point improvement in profit margin at 46%—amid a 1.3% increase in lawyer head count. Firm chair Bradley Butwin attributed the financial success to a firmwide effort toward client service and the culmination of a strategic plan that saw the firm add 90 lateral partners in the past five years in growth areas. “As we pursue our thoughtful growth, we’re concentrating on integrating new talent and leveraging the strengths of our platform to deepen our most important client relationships and deliver outstanding results,” Butwin said. Of the firm’s major practice areas, Butwin said both M&A and litigation posted strong performances as the firm handled more private equity deals than ever before and represented a number of “marquee” clients in litigation. Full story from Dan Roe: https://lnkd.in/eTNSKpqU

Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner lawyers have been informed that the firm is to review of its diversity and inclusion initiatives, amid the continuing U.S. federal crackdown on law firms’ DEI programmes. The law firm has also removed parts of its website on diversity, including information on its “aspirational goals” for partner diversity for gender, race, ethnicity, and sexuality, as well as an annual report on its inclusion and diversity efforts. Earlier this week, BCLP lawyers were told that the firm would be reviewing its position on inclusion and diversity, according to a person with knowledge of the firm. The review, which was announced by the firm's leaders, is not confined to the U.S., and includes the firm’s non-U.S. operations—a decision which one source said has caused some consternation among partners and associates in London, which is the firm’s largest office by headcount. There are concerns among some of the firm’s London lawyers that the changes could impact on the firm’s government work, which requires the firm to provide information about its diversity record. Additionally, there is concern about decisions being made in the U.S. that affect non-U.S. offices with little consultation. Full story from Jack Womack: https://lnkd.in/enRsRe8n

Freshfields is advising Google's parent company Alphabet on its $32 billion acquisition of American-Israeli cybersecurity firm Wiz, which has sought counsel from Cravath Swaine & Moore. The Freshfields team is being led by Ethan Klingsberg, who joined the firm from Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton in 2019. Other partners on the deal include Steven Li and Denny Kwon. The deal is emblematic of Freshfields' significant gains in the U.S. in recent years, where nowadays it stands toe-to-toe with several industry leaders, according to both recent rankings and market sources. Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLP has fielded a team led by partners Noah Phillips, Andrew Finch, Faiza J. Saeed, Dan Cerqueira, Alexander Greenberg, Lauren Angelilli, Andrew T. Davis and Eric Hilfers. Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP acted as antitrust counsel to Google, led by partners Leah Brannon and Blair West Matthews (Kuykendall) in the U.S., Robbert Snelders and Conor Opdebeeck-Wilson in the EU, and Paul Gilbert in the U.K. Full story from Louis Altmann: https://lnkd.in/eU_99KMw