ILNews

Bose lays off lawyers

Elizabeth Brockett
April 1, 2009
Keywords
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint
Economic Impact

Bose McKinney & Evans, Indianapolis’ fifth largest law firm, is cutting 25 employees, including 10 attorneys, because of the recession.

This is the first public announcement in Indiana of any lawyer layoffs as a result of the economic downturn.

Ken Crook, Bose managing partner, said the “reduction in force” would affect two paralegals and 13 support staff in addition to the attorney cuts â?? all at the downtown Indianapolis office. He announced the cuts March 26 and told Indiana Lawyer they would be effective within a week. The layoffs affected employees in the litigation, business, real estate, and intellectual property practice groups.

CrookCrook said the recession continues to affect the firm’s clients and therefore certain practices within the firm. He added, “the silver lining, if there is one” is the realign- ment will help position the firm to continue to effectively serve its clients into the future.

Firm management met with employees the day the cuts were announced to discuss how the layoffs will impact the firm. Crook said they provided some more information about the reduction beyond what was formally announced. He declined to talk more about what employees were told.

He also said there was no correlation that the reduction came near the end of the first quarter, and he declined to talk about how the firm decided which positions to cut.
These cuts are on top of the 11 administrative and operational staff positions the firm eliminated in January.

Other Indiana firms have also reduced support staff in recent months but deny those were because of the tumultuous economy.

Many other firms nationally are making similar cuts because of the economy and these measures are painful but necessary, Crook said.

Looking ahead, he anticipates the economy will be soft through 2009. However, the firm will continue its summer associate program.

Bose McKinney & Evans had 137 attorneys as of Jan. 22, 2009, according to the Indianapolis Business Journal’s list of largest Indianapolis-area law firms. The firm has two offices each in Indianapolis and Northwest Indiana and one each in West Lafayette, Washington, D.C., and Raleigh, N.C.

Every law firm

Don’t read too much into the Indianapolis attorney layoffs, said William Henderson, associate professor of law at Indiana University Maurer School of Law â?? Bloomington and director of the Law Firms Working Group, a research network devoted to the study of the law firm.

“Every corporate law firm in the country is experiencing a downturn because their clients are,” Henderson said.

Henderson said that for a mid-size, Midwest market, Indianapolis’ market is stronger than most.

Most law firms are based on a model that requires firm growth, he said, but it’s one that doesn’t work well with today’s economy. As firms build their workforce, they also incur more costs â?? more people, more space, more technology.

“Clients are hurting for cash flow so they’re looking at their legal budgets for the first time,” said Henderson, who rhetorically asked where money is going to come from to support all firm’s attorneys if there’s no increased revenue and the work isn’t there.

There’s no way of counting how many attorneys have been let go in Indiana or nationwide because many firms make cuts with no public announcements and say it’s because of performance, even if it’s really because of the economy, said Henderson. That reasoning makes it harder for those who have lost their jobs, he believes.

“I’d rather be let go because of the economy. The reason is less hurtful and painful than a stealth layoff,” said Henderson, noting that it’s easier to tell a potential employer you were let go because of the economy than for performance.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Judge Roger B. Cosbey is unethical and bias toward African American who seeks justice in Title VII claims. He disrespected and used his authority to attempt to intimidate me into taking an unfair settlement and when I refused he proceeded to get my case dismissed and to deny me my Constitutional and Civil Rights. He disobeying several rules of law; specifically, by ruling on summary judgment motions against the Fed. R. Civ. P., without authority of Judge William C. Lee, without consent of the attorneys, and with conspiracy to commit “fraud on the court,” as he conspired with my former attorney. He proved to me that he is bias, unethical, unfair and unfit to be reappointed. In my opinion, he should be disbarred in 2013, for committing fraud on the court, which would make him ineligible for reinstatement in 2014. See docket 3:07 cv 629 where he rules on dispositive motions, knowing magistrates are not vested with that power (especially without consent), grants the defendant an unconscionable number of extensions, accepts my former attorney request for extension for dispositive motion knowing he was working with the opposition, and unbelievably grants the defendant another extension after he requested an extension after he missed the deadline. I know another attorney filed charges against him for bias in race discrimination case(s). I know what he did in my case before he voluntarily recused himself, I just do not know how many other innocent people have been stripped of their rights because of him. I say shame on him and no more of the same.

  2. they are pushing these cases against lawyers too far. thought-crime.

  3. vagueness cannot challenged, so let's write all laws vaguely and throw the constitution out the window.Even if the court is operating under a particular law, if they don't it they will change it to their liking. What a joke!!!

  4. Two convictions becomes one conviction with exactly the same sentence, only it is not clear wheter or not that sentence will be 18 months, 120 months or 138 months. Actually if the guns were in a home, whether or not they were his, he is protected under the 2nd amendment. Jurors need to learn the law and the constitution before judging others. The cour5ts need to do this as well.

  5. With all due respect, Rick, I think you probably would be making a mistake by going to law school. The job market for attorneys is so saturated, you may well find yourself unemployed and with a lot of debt. You mention law would be a good supplement to your skills. True. But employers unfortunately don't value that. You will find that a law degree may well pigeonhole you into an attorney slot and limit career options. If you have a good job now I would hold onto that. As an attorney, you may well end up making less with the aforementioned debt.

ADVERTISEMENT