I am going to tell you a story that was told to me by a law firm partner who cannot risk telling it herself.
Somewhere in the world of Common Law, a rainmaker partner in a huge firm did dreadful things and was pushed out. A scandal ensued. The details were sketchy. Among those trying to figure out exactly what happened were hundreds of the partners of the now disgraced lawyer.
The Executive Committee could have had the firm’s excellent employment lawyers handle the mess, but instead they hired another firm to represent them.
Why did they do that?
I naively thought that it was because, as Abraham Lincoln is reputed to have said, “he who represents himself has a fool for a client.” (As an aside, I had a partner who did represent himself on the theory that he was the smartest lawyer around, and he said, “better a fool for a client than a fool for a lawyer.”)
Someone smarter than me explained to me, using small words so that I could understand, that obtaining objective advice is not the reason that law firms go outside of their own firm when bad things happen. She explained that if a member of the firm handles the matter, all communications are discoverable, but if outside counsel does the work, secrecy can be maintained by legal privilege.
So far, so good. I respect smart lawyers who handle things well. But since the firm is the client, one would think that outside counsel could report to all the partners, without risking a breach of privilege. So how is it that the partners did not seem to know much more than what they read in the press?
Could it be that at least one of the reasons that the Executive Committee hired outside counsel was to control the flow of information internally and keep partners in the dark? And if so, was that wise because you cannot trust hundreds of partners not to leak the information? Or was it because ordinary partners in law firms are only a small step above the Associates in the hierarchy? Sure, they have tax benefits, prestige, money, and unlimited personal liability, but when it comes to being told what is really going on, are they expected to just shut up and keep on billing?
So, if you are a partner in a large firm but cannot really be trusted to know the nitty gritty of what is happening, what unknown risks are you subject to? I suppose that it does not matter as long as the good times keep on rolling. And if you trust the Executive Committee to know what is best for you, why should you care?
If I am right that there is culture of secrecy in large law firms that extends to most of the partners, and you are a partner reading this and thinking, “not in my firm,” how would you know?
About that law firm partner who told me the story that this article is based on? It happened at her firm some time ago, and she still has not figured out exactly what the bad guy did.
This article was originally published by Law360 Canada, part of LexisNexis Canada Inc.