Anonymous wrote:So the,partners will make 10 million a year,instead of 15 million a year, and associates would hardly see any reduction in income of 500k to a mill, cry me a river.

They should have been more even and balanced withvtheir pro Bono work anyway.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Next up: Susman Godfrey, which represented Dominion Voting Systems in their gigantic settlement against Fox News. They also signed the amicus brief in defense of Perkins Coie.

Susman is pure litigation and doesn’t have a big corporate transactional practice, so they’re more likely to fight.

Yes, being banned from govt buildings and having security clearances stripped, etc won’t have any effect on them.

Of course it will, my point was they’re in a better position to fight back, sue, get a TRO on enforcing the executive order, etc. Which appears to be what they are doing instead of caving.

Everyone should not have bent the knee. They are just making more problems for themselves. When the next cases arise they should start telling judges they are unable to do proper discovery and the thorough defense as they are awaiting security clearance by the administration.

They only need look at Columbia U to realize working with Trump’s corrupt administration is harmful. Further, folks that have been suing and fighting have been winning.

Anonymous wrote:More big law firs bend the knee:

“Five more prominent law firms facing potential punitive action by President Trump reached deals on Friday with the White House to provide a total of $600 million in free legal services to causes supported by the president,” the New York Times reports.

“Four of the firms — Kirkland & Ellis, Latham & Watkins, A&O Shearman and Simpson Thacher & Bartlett — each agreed to provide $125 million in pro bono or free legal work, according to Mr. Trump. A fifth firm, Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft, agreed to provide at least $100 million in pro bono work.”

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Next up: Susman Godfrey, which represented Dominion Voting Systems in their gigantic settlement against Fox News. They also signed the amicus brief in defense of Perkins Coie.

Susman is pure litigation and doesn’t have a big corporate transactional practice, so they’re more likely to fight.

Yes, being banned from govt buildings and having security clearances stripped, etc won’t have any effect on them.

Of course it will, my point was they’re in a better position to fight back, sue, get a TRO on enforcing the executive order, etc. Which appears to be what they are doing instead of caving.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Next up: Susman Godfrey, which represented Dominion Voting Systems in their gigantic settlement against Fox News. They also signed the amicus brief in defense of Perkins Coie.

Susman is pure litigation and doesn’t have a big corporate transactional practice, so they’re more likely to fight.

Yes, being banned from govt buildings and having security clearances stripped, etc won’t have any effect on them.

Anonymous wrote:Perkins Coie had its own SCIF installed by FBI. This has been removed.

The firm should have been sanctioned for enabling campaign finance violations by Hillary Clinton. Spending on opposition research(Steele Dossier) was listed in campaign finance reports as legal expenses for Perkins Coie.

Anonymous wrote:Next up: Susman Godfrey, which represented Dominion Voting Systems in their gigantic settlement against Fox News. They also signed the amicus brief in defense of Perkins Coie.

Susman is pure litigation and doesn’t have a big corporate transactional practice, so they’re more likely to fight.