Talk:Law firm
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a quality rating on the assessment scale. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received an importance assessment on the assessment scale. | |
Removed this from the header:
- Some law firms are organized as professional corporations, but that arrangement is increasingly rare now that limited liability partnerships (LLPs) are available in many jurisdictions. In the United States, the LLP form is popular because law firms organized as corporations are commonly treated as personal service corporations which are subject to significant tax penalties.
This statement is an over-generalization. P.C.'s are still very common business structures in many U.S. jurisdictions. I put in a new paragraph for "organization". Ellsworth 14:59, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Notable law firm?
There is currently an interesting VfD going on in relation to a 60-lawyer law firm. What is at stake is whether this law firm is notable. Your opinion is welcome, here. Thanks. --Edcolins 09:16, May 29, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Partnership
What do the partners have to gain from promoting the associates to partners?
- The associates don't leave all pissed off that they wasted 7 or 8 years at the firm and got nothing. --Nelson Ricardo 00:46, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] The U.K. has a similar rule about keeping non-lawyers out of ownership of law firms?
Funny, I was just reading the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990 and Section 66 explicitly overturns Section 39 of the Solicitors Act 1974 (barring solicitors from entering into partnerships with non-solicitors). Unless there's some informal Law Society rule still in place I don't know about. Is the article correct? --Coolcaesar 23:43, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Small grammar error.
The title is often seen among former associates who do not make partner, or who are laterally recruited to other firms, or who work as in-house counsel and then return to the big firm environment.
I am not sure of the meaning of this sentence.
- The sentence is describing various categories of attorneys who hold the title "of counsel" or "special counsel" which is described in the immediately preceding sentence! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Coolcaesar (talk • contribs) 17:45, 15 December 2006 (UTC).
[edit] Walmart comparison
In one section, it compares the world's largest law firm to Wal Mart in terms of revenue and employment. Is it me, or is this a bit of a silly comparison to make, since a multinational retail company is always going to be larger than a law firm. A-Nottingham | Talk 14:00, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Salary
The information regarding markets outside of New York City "usually" matching New York's bonuses is simply wrong. The reference provided does not even support this proposition. Every market has a different bonus each year; few narkets, if any regularly match New York's. Occasionally, an individual firm will announce it is matching for another city (such ad Washington, DC), but that will generally put that firm as the high end of the spectrum for bonuses in that market. 15 April 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.165.1.110 (talk) 04:13, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
- I concur with your criticism. Also, the salary section smells suspiciously of original research. It's also very U.S.-centric. But it raises an interesting issue that I will have to look into when researching Attorney-at-law (my ongoing revision as usual is stalled because I am too busy). --Coolcaesar (talk) 11:44, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
