Private Equity Coming for Biglaw?

[Anonymous]

I know trends come and go, and there are a number of hurdles to actually bringing something like this to fruition. Between things like this, multiple-tiered opaque layers of partnership and AI disruption, are any younger partners or associates worried that older partners will cash out and leave the desolate remains to private equity value extraction machine?

The article says McDermott is already exploring the model.

https://www.ft.com/content/9f0033b5-8481-4d3f-8e1b-af6751a6b494

When Cohen & Gresser, known for defending white-collar criminals such as Sam Bankman-Fried and Ghislaine Maxwell, hired bankers to sell a stake in itself to private equity, it turned heads in the US legal profession.

Outside investors are barred from owning law firms in most US states, including New York where Cohen & Gresser is based, under professional ethics rules designed to prevent commercial considerations from tainting legal advice.

But similar rules are on the books in other professions, such as doctors’ and dentists’ surgeries and accountancy firms, which have nonetheless become staples of private equity portfolios.

The complex financial structure that provides private equity with a workaround is inevitably coming to law, Larry Gresser said, and he wants the law firm he co-founded to be the most prominent so far to snag a deal from a buyout group

[Anonymous]

I belive there are ethical restrictions at play here.

[Anonymous]

This would be the final nail in the coffin of our democracy.

[Anonymous]

Law is the one profession that can legislate its own interests.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Law is the one profession that can legislate its own interests.

Curious. How?

[Anonymous]

I get why current equity partners would like this deal, they get to cash out and then retire. I dont see why any other partner would want to stick around for this deal that basically finances the retirement of the equity partners and hamstrings profits for future years due to the MSO fees.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I get why current equity partners would like this deal, they get to cash out and then retire. I dont see why any other partner would want to stick around for this deal that basically finances the retirement of the equity partners and hamstrings profits for future years due to the MSO fees.

The young partners will just wait out the 3/5 years until they get their retention bonuses and leave to another similar sized firm with their clients if they’re good enough.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I belive there are ethical restrictions at play here.

This. It would be a conflicts minefield.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I belive there are ethical restrictions at play here.

They're planning on making the lawyers and the non-legal staff/infrastructure separate entities. PE would own the infrastructure part and then the partners would own the lawyer part.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Law is the one profession that can legislate its own interests.

Curious. How?

All of the legislators are lawyers or assisted by lawyers in drafting legislation. If the legal industry is in peril, they can pass laws with actual teeth to protect themselves and their post-politics exit options.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I belive there are ethical restrictions at play here.

They're planning on making the lawyers and the non-legal staff/infrastructure separate entities. PE would own the infrastructure part and then the partners would own the lawyer part.

This is what PE is doing in medical, dentistry and physical therapy. Anything with a license is simply split up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I belive there are ethical restrictions at play here.

They're planning on making the lawyers and the non-legal staff/infrastructure separate entities. PE would own the infrastructure part and then the partners would own the lawyer part.

This is what PE is doing in medical, dentistry and physical therapy. Anything with a license is simply split up.

Same with accounting firms. PE has a recipe for doing this, and should be able to do this pretty fast with a law firm.

[Anonymous]

I see so many people stepping down off of some really high horses. Welcome to the turf on planet earth!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I belive there are ethical restrictions at play here.

They're planning on making the lawyers and the non-legal staff/infrastructure separate entities. PE would own the infrastructure part and then the partners would own the lawyer part.

There is very little non-legal staff in law firms these days. They’ve been shedding paralegals and secretaries for years now. And all the revenue is from lawyers billing hours. How does the PE entity make any money?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Law is the one profession that can legislate its own interests.

Curious. How?

All of the legislators are lawyers or assisted by lawyers in drafting legislation. If the legal industry is in peril, they can pass laws with actual teeth to protect themselves and their post-politics exit options.

Better than that, the state supreme courts unilaterally create the legal ethics rules for their states.