The Legal Intelligencer Blog

Cozen O’Connor Wants All Its Elevators Fixed

By Gina Passarella
Of the Legal Staff

Cozen O’Connor’s suit against its landlord over allegedly faulty elevators and general building disrepair has resulted in only half of the elevators being fixed. That wasn’t enough for the firm, which has now filed a motion in the case to enforce the lease’s arbitration agreement.

Cozen O'Connor sued the landlord of its 1900 Market Street office space in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas in an effort to either be released from the five-year lease obligation it began last year or force the landlord into arbitration. The firm said the landlord has failed to properly maintain the Class A building and refused to arbitrate Cozen O'Connor's complaints, according to the court filing.

Landlord 1900 Market GP and its general partner OSEB Associates filed a response saying it has maintained the building in accordance with the lease, has modernized elevators despite having no contractual obligation to do so, and has no obligation to arbitrate disputes over elevator repairs as the firm suggests, according to the filing.

In a recent filing in the case, Cozen O’Connor said four of the nine elevators in the building have been modernized as of the filing of the motion, with one more in the works.

“Landlord, however, has refused to commit to completing the modernization of the remaining four elevators at the building, insisting that it has no obligation to do so,” Cozen O’Connor said in the filing. “Landlord has indicated, through counsel, that it is not willing to arbitrate this issue and that it believes it is not required to do so under the lease.”

According to Cozen O’Connor’s complaint, the firm’s employees and visitors have been trapped in elevators at the building on several occasions. The elevators take people to floors they didn't select or do not take people to floors they did select, the firm said. The buttons, directional lights, audible function and emergency phones have malfunctioned and the employees complain of long wait times, slow-moving elevators, bumpy rides or elevators that won't move at all, according to the complaint.

The firm said in its latest filing that, since the filing of the suit, the landlord has “attempted to address” some of the other issues the firm raised in its complaint regarding building maintenance. Some of those problems alleged in the complaint included a leaking atrium in the lobby during heavy rains, for which management placed buckets and trash cans to catch the water instead of repairing the leaks.

The firm also argued the HVAC system regularly malfunctioned, the cleaning services were inadequate, the plants in the atrium lobby were not properly cared for and there were odors from the loading dock.

Gina Passarella is the senior reporter for The Legal. She can be contacted by e-mail at [email protected] or phone at 215-557-2494. Follow her on Twitter at @GPassarellaTLI.

An Uptick in Office Visitors

By Barely Legal
Special to the Legal

The strangest thing has happened to me since they moved Hottie McBeal (obviously not his real name) into the office next door. I have become the most popular girl in the office.

I didn’t put it together at first. When the younger associate that I have said “hi” to in the elevator a couple of times stopped by just to check out my office, I just thought she was bored on a Friday afternoon and wanted to get up and stretch her legs. OK, I also thought maybe she was fishing for a happy hour invite, but I already had plans.

When she stopped by again, a few days later, to tell me all about this really hard yoga class she took the night before, about all the bending and twisting she had to do and just how sore she was that morning, I was flattered. I thought she was hitting on me. I asked her follow-up questions about the class, dropping hints that I would be happy to join her – I figured I would let her down gently after a post-workout, decaf, no-fat latte.

She didn’t take me up on the offer.

She did, however, show up at my doorway the following Monday to tell me about her awesome weekend and the big meal she prepared for all of her friends. I watched her as she told me the story and noticed she was a) speaking really loudly, and b) kept turning her head in the direction of Hottie’s office.

That is when it all started to make sense. The Friday afternoon pass-by, the yoga class story, and now a lengthy lecture on her culinary prowess. This show wasn’t for me. It was for him.

And she wasn’t the only one performing in my doorway. There were a number of women, all ages and martial statuses, telling me things I didn’t need to know.

But no matter how interesting their story, Hottie stayed put.

I started to feel bad for these women. I wanted to give them hints on what to talk about – things I have heard him talking about with other attorneys. I didn’t though, for two reasons: 1) I was afraid I would embarrass them by pointing out their motives for suddenly friending me; and 2) I was secretly pissed it never occurred to me to talk loudly about how awesome I am.

Not that it was doing any of these women any good.

Barely Legal offers humorous monthly musings on what it's really like to work for a law firm. Hint: It's nothing like it is on TV.

The Candy Dish

My mother had it all worked out in her head. I would put the basket of candy on the front edge of my desk and all the good looking attorneys that she insists I must work with would come from all ends of the office for a piece of free confection. One of these men would be so attractive, I would forget all about my rule prohibiting me from dating someone from my office. We would then start talking, he would realize that in addition to being beautiful (remember this is my mother thinking) I was also intelligent and articulate, not to mention generous (free chocolate?) and we would fall madly in love and have lots of babies.

And the first one would be named after her.

She even instructed me to use individually wrapped candies (to prevent the spread of germs) and consider switching it up for the holidays.

I rolled my eyes and reluctantly put the basket on my desk. Not because I thought it would work or that I even wanted it to work, but because I can’t lie to my mom and I knew the next time I saw her she would ask about it.

Only one person came to my desk for candy – my disgusting co-worker with the telltale ring embossed on his wallet.

When he finally finished the candy (with a little help from yours truly) the basket sat empty. I really didn’t see a point in refilling it.
That is until he came.

He is the new associate that now sits in the office next to mine. He is tall and handsome and has an awesome voice. He is a man I could bend the rules for.
After two weeks I learned his name, (though we were never introduced) that he worked for a different department (so we weren’t likely to get assigned to any projects together) and that he likes the Phillies (who doesn’t?) and the Eagles. And that’s it.

Desperate, I ran (no, not literally. I was in four-inch heels) to the drug store to pick up some individually wrapped, Halloween-themed candy. I figured the old girl has been married forever so she must know what she is doing. Besides, it was better than anything I had come up with (which was to wear four-inch heels).

So far he hasn’t so much as looked at the basket. I didn’t take him for one of those “my body is a temple” guys that doesn’t eat processed sugar or refined carbs, but I suppose he could be. Or maybe he hasn’t seen the basket. Or maybe he doesn’t know the candy is available to anyone; especially tall, handsome, male anyones.

I wonder if an office-wide e-mail is appropriate in this situation. Too much? You think I should limit it to all office attorneys?

“Barely Legal” offers humorous monthly musings on what it's really like to work for a law firm. Hint: It's nothing like it is on TV.

Three Local Firms on 'Best Law Firms for Women' List

By Gina Passarella
Of the Legal Staff

Three Pennsylvania firms can be found among the top 50 law firms nationally for women to work.

Ballard Spahr, Drinker Biddle & Reath and Fox Rothschild were named to the list, compiled by Flex-Time Lawyers and the National Association for Female Executives.

The organizations offered quick facts about each of the winners to demonstrate how the firms support women.

Ballard Spahr: "Of the seven lawyers promoted to equity partner in 2010, three were women, and two of this firm's 13 offices are managed by female partners." Women comprise 25 percent of the firm's equity partners. The firm only has one partnership tier.

Drinker Biddle: "Women reside on every firm committee, and there are several women on the two most important, management and allocation." Women make up 25 percent of equity partners and 30 percent of non-equity partners.

Fox Rothschild: "Eighty-six percent of female lawyers returning from maternity leave in 2010 worked reduced hours for a period of time, and the firm's chief talent officer works directly with each returning attorney to ensure that the transition back is mutually beneficial." Women make up 17 percent of equity partners and 27 percent of non-equity partners.

The 50 firms are not ranked numerically, but rather are listed alphabetically. According to a press release about the awards, women at the 50 firms comprise an average of 19 percent of the equity partner tier, which is higher than the 15 percent nationally shown by the National Association of Women Lawyers.

All of the winning firms have written reduced-hour policies and 78 percent offer full-time telecommute policies.

Eighty percent of the firms offer mentoring programs for women, and 90 percent offer management and leadership training.

"By offering leadership and business development opportunities for women, along with generous flexibility, parental leave and childcare programs, these firms are better poised to retain and promote the brightest legal minds, with the goal of reaching parity for women in the profession," Deborah Epstein Henry, founder and president of Flex-Time Lawyers, said in a statement.

At the 50 firms, women hold 18 percent of compensation, 19 percent of executive, and 23 percent of equity partner promotion committee seats. And 78 percent of the firms offer backup childcare and 62 percent offer subsidized in-home backup childcare.

The full list of winners can be viewed here.

Gina Passarella is the senior reporter for The Legal. She can be contacted by e-mailing [email protected] or calling 215-557-2494. Follow her on Twitter at @GPassarellaTLI.

Back to School for the Legal Industry?

By Julia Claire
Special to the Legal

In the "good old days," late summer meant bright-eyed law students with stacks of books and eager, freshly suited young associates ready to play lawyer. When the New York Times or the Wall Street Journal took an interest in the legal industry, it was to glamorize large firm salary wars for top grads in terms that would make F. Scott Fitzgerald blush. In six years, much has changed.

Now, law books are downloaded ... by fewer customers. Law school enrollment has dropped 11.5 percent. And will likely drop further as publicity of poor job prospects and Enron-style accounting of employment statistics by law schools reaches a crescendo.

Big Law has cut hiring programs. With a glut of experienced lawyers seeking work, smaller firms have little incentive to invest in the inexperienced. Current headlines echo back to Steinbeck, chronicling a world of lawyers who are unemployed, working in factory conditions and suing their law schools.

Even lawyers on the top floors of high-rent skyscrapers can hear the chopping of the cherry trees as The Economist details the rise of alternative legal models, which employ lawyers trained by the very firms from which they are luring clients. These trends have created a generation of lawyers -- trained with a theoretical education dependent upon unofficial client-financed apprenticeships -- with scarce training opportunities.

Until the stream of new lawyers slows to a trickle, experienced lawyers retire, and the legal education community finally implements a long overdue practical curriculum to preserve their profitable business, we have the question:

What is to be done? Will there be a 'lost generation of lawyers'?

A profession built on ambiguity and "multi-factor" tests has had an ironically singular solution to career preparation: find a job. Out of necessity, many new lawyers are employing a multi-pronged approach. In 2009, the percentage of law school grads immediately going solo increased to 5.5 percent from 3.5 percent. Freshly barred attorneys are using technology to run practices with low overhead and billing rates.

In the best cases,  pro bono work and mentoring fills the significant training gaps, with experienced attorneys swapping practical knowledge and Twitter tips with their younger counterparts. Under- and otherwise employed lawyers are also finding benefits in pro bono work. They gain an opportunity to help others in bad economic situations, while also acquiring experience and a sense of purpose from a degree that could symbolize defeat.

New lawyers are now forced to network and make their own opportunities. This resourcefulness is an important skill for all lawyers -- one that much of the industry previously considered scrappy. Shielding new lawyers from clients and maximizing their billable hours was considered more genteel. With attorneys forced to think entrepreneurially and new legal concepts appearing monthly on site ranging from the Google-backed Law Pivot to the controversial Shpoonkle, few can deny that innovation and entrepreneurship are finally finding their way into a stubbornly static and gated industry.

I'm not claiming that bliss is around the corner for the legal industry, nor that some of the concern from the old guard surrounding these shifts is unwarranted. I'm merely suggesting that those of us who could comprise a lost generation of lawyers have few choices but to follow the advice of FDR: "Do something. If it works, do more of it. If it doesn't, do something else."

Julia Claire, Esq. is a co-founder of Hire an Esquire, which enables law firms and legal departments to locate, manage, and pay freelance attorneys with ease online. In addition to practicing law, she has taught legal writing as an adjunct professor in Temple University Beasley School of Law's International LLM Program and as an online lecturer at Quimbee.com. She can be reached at [email protected].

Lessons I Learned During Last Month's Earthquake

By Barely Legal
Special to the Legal

As you are all more than aware, the East Coast experienced an earthquake last month, a first for many of us. I learned a lot in the minutes that followed -- most of which seem pretty obvious to me now. Still, I thought it would only be fair to share these “revelations” with you.

1.  East-Coasters Do Not Know What to Do When an Earthquake Hits.

I'm from the East Coast, born and raised, so I don't feel ashamed admitting I didn't know you weren't supposed to evacuate your building during an earthquake. Not that I did. I would never. I was too afraid of the wrath of the partners I work for had they heard that I evacuated. Instead I stood in the doorway of my office, shouting, "I'm pretty sure you are supposed to stand in a doorway during an earthquake," while my co-workers ran up and down the hallways, laughing at me.

2. Twitter is the Future.

From the doorway of my office I could see my co-workers scrambling around. There were a lot of comments along the lines of, "What happened?" and "Did you feel that?" and a couple, "Yeah, the idiot won't come out from her doorway." Assistants furiously typed on their computers, shouting, "Nothing on Philly.com." And so I carefully stepped back into my office, grabbed my BlackBerry and opened up Twitter. Got back in the doorway and announced, "There was an earthquake that affected the whole East Coast." This honestly didn't sound right to me and everyone that was near me stopped to stare at me in disbelief. I shrugged, "It's on Twitter," and immediately recognized that I sounded like an idiot. 

One of the attorneys that sits across from me smiled and said, "Oh, well, then it must be true." A few minutes later, a legitimate news source had finally caught up and we all listened to the assistant's computer as an important-sounding voice told us there had been an earthquake in Virginia that was felt from North Carolina to New York City and beyond. I felt vindicated, and by the look on my co-worker's face, I believe he felt old and unhip. 

3. Facebook Could Save Your Life.

While I had my BlackBerry, I decided to update my status from the doorway of my office. When I pulled up Facebook, I saw that every single one of my friends in Philly, New York and D.C. had the exact same idea. It occurred to me that if I was trapped in a collapsed portion of my building, my best bet wouldn't be to call 911 but to update my status with my location. All my friends would be on Facebook, one of them would read where I was, and I would be found in no time. Take that, all you haters that love to brag that you don't even have a Facebook page.

4. Finally, the last lesson I learned on Aug. 23, 2011, was: People Will Use Any Excuse to Cut Out of Work Early and Drink.

Barely Legal offers humorous monthly musings on what it's really like to work for a law firm. Hint: It's nothing like it is on TV.

10 Years Later: Where Were You on Sept. 11?

By Jaime Bochet
Of the Legal Staff

In just a few short weeks, the nation will commemorate the 10th anniversary of one of the darkest days in our recent history: September 11, 2001.

Many will mourn, many will question what has changed since that day, and many will wonder what the future still holds. One thing is for sure: everyone will look back and remember where they were that day.

We at The Legal want to put together a very special issue in remembrance of Sept. 11, and we are asking you to be a part of it. Our question is simple: "Where were you?"

We want you to tell us your story, whatever it might be. Were you in law school? Were you scheduled for a deposition that was canceled? Were you preparing for trial, or working on a big deal? Were you home sick that day, or bringing your child to school?

How did you hear the news, and what did your colleagues and your employer do in response?

Who did you call or speak to first? Was anyone that you know directly impacted by the attacks? Were you?

And finally, 10 years later, what has changed, either in your own personal or professional life, or on a broader scale? What do you take away from that day, 10 years later?

We will gather all of your responses into a special package that will appear in print and online on Friday, Sept. 9. To submit your story, send me an e-mail at [email protected]. The deadline for story submissions is Monday, Sept. 5.

Jaime Bochet is the Magazines & Supplements Editor for The Legal. Follow her on Twitter at @JaimeBochetTLI or e-mail [email protected].

Oddly Enough, Emily Post Has Nothing to Say on This Situation

By Barely Legal
Special to the Legal

One of the unique things about working for a large law firm is that you can go weeks, even months without seeing a particular colleague. This is great when you are trying to avoid that creepy co-worker, but not so awesome when you are desperate to accidentally bump into that hot, funny senior associate.

I'm telling you this not as an admission that I did little work this past summer, instead devising failed plan after failed plan to bump into the aforementioned hottie, but as a way of setting the stage for what happened to me one day after work recently.

I was headed to happy hour (and since I was on my way, I was still sober) when I saw a partner from my office standing about 20 feet away. Now, most partners at my office have no idea who I am or what I do for the firm, but since I had worked with this partner a few months back, and we had developed a rapport, he immediately recognized and called out to me.

And since I hadn't seen him since we had worked together but have very fond memories of the experience, it didn't at first register that he was a boss, and instead I thought of him as an old friend. Which is probably why I returned his hug and let him kiss me on the cheek in lieu of a more formal greeting. We then talked, I told him I was on my way to happy hour, and it wasn't until I was walking away that it occurred to me that I don't even greet most old friends with a hug and a kiss. 

So, now, here's my dilemma. What do I do the next time I see him -– as now that I don't want to see him I am sure to see him all the time? (Because that's always how these things go -- it's Murphy's Law.)

Am I expected to hug and kiss him every time I see him? Can we go back to the impersonal handshake? Have we gone too far to start high-fiving?

Should I send him an e-mail explaining that the other night was a mistake and that I really like and respect him and so I think we should just go back to the way things were?  

Or should I simply ignore the situation -- the way I do with all the other relationship mistakes I make -- I hope it (or he) just goes away?

Barely Legal offers humorous monthly musings on what it's really like to work for a law firm. Hint: It's nothing like it is on TV.

Will Uncertain Client Demands Continue to Fuel Turbulence in IP Marketplace?

By Anthony S. Volpe
Special to the Legal

We have seen an increase in the amount of movement, both locally and nationally, of IP attorneys in and out of general practice firms and out of IP boutique firms into smaller IP boutiques with a more limited focus on certain practice areas.

The question raised by these movements is whether they reflect client needs or the shifting needs of the attorneys in view of what they perceive to be the new order in IP practice.

There has been a continuous increase in the demand for lower costs, while at the same time there has been an increase in the demand for value-added IP services. Many of the clients searching for new firms or a new arrangement within an existing firm are stressing the need for the selected IP firms to have a firm grasp of their business models and to deliver IP services, especially patent and trademark prosecution, at commodity pricing. 

These client demands are more frequently finding their way into discussions of the firm's licensing support and litigation services, where clients are increasingly demanding defined cost controls.
So, how does the shifting client demand influence or translate into the movement of IP attorneys between and among existing firms with IP practices and newly created IP firms?

Some of this movement may be driven by the often-repeated statement that a particular lawyer moved to gain a larger/smaller platform that is a better fit for the demands of existing clients.  The size of the practice group the lawyer required to meet client needs seems to be determined by the size of the group available at the successor firm; this size is almost always the size that best fits the public relations story accompanying the move. 

My guess is that these moves are being driven more by personal views of the desired practice management than by client demands. If the attorney or group does not have the necessary level of influence within the firm's management group, the move is more often driven by the attorney's need/desire for more control in billing arrangements, or the realization that others with more influence are driving conflict decisions that hamper new client development or cross selling opportunities. I see these movements as being more attributable to the circumstances within a firm than to client demands for change.

Some of the movement may be driven by the more recent trend among some clients to view everything as a commodity that can be competitively priced by market pressures on supply and demand.

If prosecuting firms need a certain volume of work to achieve efficiencies that produce profits, unit pricing can be negotiated against a given volume of active cases. This type of economic model has lead to the creation of low-overhead firms that offer unit pricing without regard to subject matter. In these arrangements, there is often very little attention paid to a particular matter until it has demonstrated value within the IP rights portfolio.

This belated determination of value is a major problem associated with this volume/price model, and it may be a direct result of the model. If the attorney or firm has decided to price services on the basis of volume, there is not likely to be much time for consideration of anything that is not focused on the immediate task. Since the basis of the bargain is price for volume, and volume demands throughput to achieve profits, there is an operational dynamic that works against added value. This may be acceptable to the client, but it seems to be against the client’s best interest.

Because companies are increasingly aware of the importance of securing and protecting IP rights and are increasingly under pressure to control cost, there will be a continuing tension between spending on IP services and the creation of added value in the portfolio as a result of those services.  Companies will continue to search for the right model and IP attorneys and firms will continue to modify their approaches to address their perception of the clients' needs.  Since there is currently no uniform direction of the demand from clients, the currents will continue to shift according to the client's philosophical approach to cost and value. Reaction to those currents will produce continued turbulence.

Anthony S. Volpe is a founding partner of Volpe & Koenig. He can be reached at [email protected].

Had A Couple of Drinks? There Should Be An App for That

By Barely Legal
Special to the Legal

  I was at happy hour with some work friends last Friday, and after a couple of drinks, when we ran out of things to talk about, we pulled out our BlackBerrys and iPhones and started checking our e-mail and Facebook and Twitter accounts.

We all had an e-mail from a colleague that I can't help but find handsome, smart and funny. One of the girls I was with rolled her eyes at his e-mail and I, a little loose from the wine, immediately jumped to his defense. We went back and forth for a bit, until she eventually accused me of having a crush on him. Of course, I denied it.

Skipping all the boring details, next I'm in a cab. Just me and my BlackBerry and an e-mail from my work crush (about work, sent to multiple contacts). I contemplated all the cute, funny, flirty things I could respond back, but eventually made the decision to just put my mobile away.

The next morning I woke up, and in that early still-half-asleep haze I freaked out that I had actually sent him an e-mail. As I scrambled out of bed, located my work bag, and dumped all of its contents onto the floor, I actually started to wake up. I remembered that my phone wasn't in my bag, but plugged in to the charger, and that I never sent that e-mail.

I grabbed my phone anyway and discovered a quarantined message: a possible spam message about replica luxury watches.

That is when it hit me. If my e-mail can automatically prevent messages from being delivered, why can't they prevent them from being sent?

Obviously, not all of them -- that would defeat the purpose of e-mail. But maybe you could set up settings -- similar to the way you set up an out-of-office reply -- preventing any e-mail being sent, say, after 9 p.m. with more than two spelling errors in it, or something. Those messages would be held over until the next day when you can confirm that you really mean to send it.

I mean, what if I had sent exactly what I was thinking in the back of that cab -- spelling errors and all?

What if I had accidentally "replied to all"? (Because that never happens.) Instead of reading through a bunch of "all attorney" messages that have nothing to do with me that next morning, I would have been reading through responses to my carelessness, including at least one from my happy hour cohort celebrating the fact that she was right about my crush all along. Not to mention my boss asking me what the hell I was thinking. One from HR, I'm sure, and possibly several from the girlfriend of my crush, who I assume is the jealous sort that often sneaks out of bed at night to snoop through his BlackBerry.

But if my smartphone were equipped with this new technology, I wouldn't always have to rely on my own good sense. Which, let's be honest, has failed me in the past. I would see the e-mail sitting in my "confirm" bin, laugh, delete it and then make myself coffee, toasting my close call.

Sadly, I am not smart enough to develop the technology. But if one of my readers could write the program and then let me know where it is available for downloading -- it could save me a lot of future embarrassment.

Barely Legal offers humorous monthly musings on what it's really like to work for a law firm. Hint: It's nothing like it is on TV.