Legal News

Pitcock Case: Are ?Benevolent Despots? Running Big Law Firms?

By Dan Slater

The LB has until now left untouched the case of Jeremy Pitcock (pictured), the former head of IP at Kasowitz Benson who filed a defamation lawsuit against the firm last week, seeking $90 million in damages (click here for the complaint). Pitcock, 35, a Simpson Thacher alumnus, joined Kasowitz in 2006, and then, two years later, decamped for IP boutique Morgan & Finnegan. Before we get to today’s news, let’s deliver a little background:

After that last move, IP Law 360, a trade pub, characterized Pitcock’s hiring at Morgan as a “nab,” which prompted Kasowitz — with the help of PR firm Sitrick & Co., also named in Pitcock’s suit — to issue a press release saying Pitcock was terminated for unspecified “extremely inappropriate personal conduct.” According to Pitcock’s complaint, that conduct was a “brief, consensual kiss” with an associate following drinking. Pitcock, who is married and calls the kiss a “mistake” in his complaint, lost his job at Morgan & Finnegan a few weeks later. (Here’s a recent AmLaw story, and here’s a story from today’s NY Post.)

According to Pitcock’s lawyer, John Balestriere of Balestriere Lanza, Pitcock couldn’t get hired following the Kasowitz press release. Kasowitz Benson calls the lawsuit “frivolous” and says his termination was handled properly.

Today, AmLaw’s Nate Raymond shines some light on a peculiarity of firm management raised by Pitcock’s firing from Kasowitz: In his complaint, Pitcock says that following an inquiry by two partners, name partner Marc Kasowitz called him into his office and fired him on the spot. “Pitcock was surprised at the decision, but he always understood that Marc Kasowitz had the authority to hire or fire anyone at [Kasowitz Benson],” the complaint says. According to Pitcock, the partnership agreement at the firm specifically provides for involuntary withdrawal of partners for no cause.

James Cotterman, a principal at legal consulting firm Altman Weil, says, “As a general proposition it is not common for a [managing partner] to have absolute authority, but we have seen it often enough before to not be surprised by it.” But more typically, AmLaw notes, firing decisions go through at least a firm committee if not a vote of the entire firm, especially at older firms where the founders have died and the power has become more dispersed among partners.

Leslie Corwin, a partnership law expert at Greenberg Traurig, says there are many other firms that allow the managing partner to fire partners. “I believe in benevolent despots running law firms,” Corwin says. “I do, I do. But the key to the whole thing is the partnership agreement and what’s agreed to. That’s the key.”

Full post as published by Law Blog - WSJ.com on June 10, 2008 (boomark / email).