FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W1524108396> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W1524108396 startingPage "249" @default.
• W1524108396 abstract "I hold, right here in my hand, the legal profession's playbook. All on one sheet of paper--an insert to the AmLaw 100 issue of The American Lawyer (1)--it is all summed up, revealed in a stark fashion, the profession's bragging rights and the profession's shame. Consider the listed achievements, beginning with law firm revenue-per-lawyer. The American law firm has broken through a barrier not unlike a three-minute, thirty-second mile. And it did it as if it were not there. Currently, there are four law firms with revenues of $1,000,000 per lawyer, and in the top 100 the revenue-per-lawyer averages $650,000. Just think what it takes to break that barrier, to achieve these results. You not only have to be charging a lofty hourly rate across an entire law firm, but you have to be generating an unfathomable number of hours. Finally, you have to convince clients that your lawyers are entitled to exalted rates not for a brilliant inspiration or a breakthrough idea, but for 2,000 or 2,500 or 3,000 hours per year spent sifting documents, digesting depositions, and right-clicking in front of a computer screen. What an achievement! Next, consider a second metric, the most important of them all. What are the profits-per-partner of the top 100 law firms in America? For thirty-two of them that number exceeds $1,000,000. These are not the earnings of a couple of superstars or firm leaders, the greatest of the rainmakers. This figure represents an average across of 100, 200, or in some cases, even 300 lawyers. An average! Undoubtedly, firms play some games in trying to report higher figures. They do not count dollar partners whose incomes are lower. They also play with expenses. But even after these adjustments, the numbers are truly stunning. Where, I ask you, is it written that you can have a business where that many people make that much money each year? Yet that is the health and wealth of the great American law firm. These statistics reflect real achievement. Moreover, I have no quarrel with well-paid lawyers. Indeed, I celebrate the economic success of this tier of the profession. I have been a happy beneficiary of this extraordinary turn of events. So what is the shame? You would think with such bounty, with such munificent wealth, with such financial achievement, the contribution of the lawyers at these firms--above all other lawyers in America--to pro bono services would also be measured by stratospheric statistics. They've got the talent, they've got the wherewithal, they've got the legions of lawyers, they could afford--each of these firm families--to have quite a few priests. But, alas, in spite of the rhetoric, the metrics for pro bono tell a far different tale. Only forty-five of the AmLaw 200, less than one-quarter of these great firms, achieved fifty hours of pro bono services per lawyer in the most recent year. Only twenty-seven, just a little over ten percent, of them had more than half of their lawyers undertake any pro bono services at all. The most committed firm in the bottom fifty had less than fifteen hours of pro bono per lawyer. And seventeen firms were so embarrassed by their pro bono commitment, they refused to share pro bono statistics with The American Lawyer at all, even though they proudly shared their income and revenue figures. There are other apparent contradictions when examining the pro bono of America's most financially successful firms. Look at some of the dismal statistics about the pro bono services offered by top law firms, and compare them with the literature these same firms send to law students; with the prominent pledges of commitments they make about their commitment to pro bono on their websites; and with the emphatic statements they undoubtedly make to inquiring law students about their fealty to their professional obligation to the poor. A few examples will demonstrate the point. Just in the top five highest grossing law firms in America, an elite group indeed, we have three that rank either at or very near the one-hundred mark in pro bono commitment. …" @default.
• W1524108396 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W1524108396 creator A5070362692 @default.
• W1524108396 date "2005-11-01" @default.
• W1524108396 modified "2023-09-23" @default.
• W1524108396 title "Should We Mandate Doing Well by Doing Good" @default.
• W1524108396 hasPublicationYear "2005" @default.
• W1524108396 type Work @default.
• W1524108396 sameAs 1524108396 @default.
• W1524108396 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W1524108396 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W1524108396 hasAuthorship W1524108396A5070362692 @default.
• W1524108396 hasConcept C10138342 @default.
• W1524108396 hasConcept C144133560 @default.
• W1524108396 hasConcept C162324750 @default.
• W1524108396 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W1524108396 hasConcept C190253527 @default.
• W1524108396 hasConcept C195487862 @default.
• W1524108396 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W1524108396 hasConcept C2775884135 @default.
• W1524108396 hasConcept C2781426361 @default.
• W1524108396 hasConceptScore W1524108396C10138342 @default.
• W1524108396 hasConceptScore W1524108396C144133560 @default.
• W1524108396 hasConceptScore W1524108396C162324750 @default.
• W1524108396 hasConceptScore W1524108396C17744445 @default.
• W1524108396 hasConceptScore W1524108396C190253527 @default.
• W1524108396 hasConceptScore W1524108396C195487862 @default.
• W1524108396 hasConceptScore W1524108396C199539241 @default.
• W1524108396 hasConceptScore W1524108396C2775884135 @default.
• W1524108396 hasConceptScore W1524108396C2781426361 @default.
• W1524108396 hasIssue "1" @default.
• W1524108396 hasLocation W15241083961 @default.
• W1524108396 hasOpenAccess W1524108396 @default.
• W1524108396 hasPrimaryLocation W15241083961 @default.
• W1524108396 hasRelatedWork W142338686 @default.
• W1524108396 hasRelatedWork W1453097699 @default.
• W1524108396 hasRelatedWork W1599828808 @default.
• W1524108396 hasRelatedWork W16809417 @default.
• W1524108396 hasRelatedWork W175763617 @default.
• W1524108396 hasRelatedWork W1978491497 @default.
• W1524108396 hasRelatedWork W2086540539 @default.
• W1524108396 hasRelatedWork W214488906 @default.
• W1524108396 hasRelatedWork W2167568725 @default.
• W1524108396 hasRelatedWork W222360025 @default.
• W1524108396 hasRelatedWork W2287537099 @default.
• W1524108396 hasRelatedWork W2323415905 @default.
• W1524108396 hasRelatedWork W2329065063 @default.
• W1524108396 hasRelatedWork W2993833584 @default.
• W1524108396 hasRelatedWork W2994560712 @default.
• W1524108396 hasRelatedWork W302559450 @default.
• W1524108396 hasRelatedWork W3123182210 @default.
• W1524108396 hasRelatedWork W317684008 @default.
• W1524108396 hasRelatedWork W320527361 @default.
• W1524108396 hasRelatedWork W47367868 @default.
• W1524108396 hasVolume "33" @default.
• W1524108396 isParatext "false" @default.
• W1524108396 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W1524108396 magId "1524108396" @default.
• W1524108396 workType "article" @default.