ILNews

BREAKING: Locke Reynolds merging with Kentucky firm

Michael W. Hoskins
December 4, 2008
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

One of Indiana's largest law firms is merging with a Kentucky-based firm in a move to become more of a regional and national player.

Indiana-based Locke Reynolds will join Frost Brown Todd of Louisville, effective Jan. 5. Both firms voted Wednesday afternoon in favor of the union, which means the end of the name Locke Reynolds that's been a part of the state's legal community since 1917.

Post-merger, the firm will take the name Frost Brown Todd.

"We expect to be as competitive in this marketplace as anyone in this country," said Locke Reynolds partner and management committee member Jim Dimos. "(Frost Brown Todd) saw not being in Indianapolis as a hole in their strategy. They see this as a vibrant city and they're excited about being here."

As one of the top 10 largest firms in the state, Locke Reynolds has about 80 attorneys in its Indianapolis and Fort Wayne offices. Frost Brown Todd describes itself as one of the largest regional firms between Chicago and Atlanta, with more than 350 attorneys in the 10 offices scattered throughout fives states - Indiana, Kentucky, Ohio, Tennessee, and West Virginia. Currently, it has three attorneys listed as working in the New Albany, Ind., location.

Post-merger, the firm will have between 90 and 100 attorneys in Indiana and more than 450 attorneys in the five-state region, making it among the Midwest's largest. The firm is expected to see more than $175 million in revenue during its first full year in 2009.

Nelson D. Alexander, who is currently managing partner at Locke Reynolds, will serve as member-in-charge of Frost Brown Todd's office in Indianapolis once the merger is finalized.

This marriage has been in the works for about two years, Dimos said. The Indiana firm has explored potential mergers for years, but nothing ever gained momentum until 2007 when partners decided to more aggressively investigate options and then the two firms found each other. They got serious about the merger earlier this year, he said.

Dimos said that by merging, the litigation-strong Locke Reynolds is able to strengthen the transactional, non-litigation practice areas that Frost Brown Todd thrives in, such as corporate and commercial law.

"We have attorneys there, but we needed more depth in those areas in addition to our litigation practice that's already strong at a regional or national level," Dimos said. "This was the best course for us."

Neither firm has been struggling in these economic times and that wasn't a factor in the merger, Dimos said. Both firms expect a smooth transition because they share a similar culture and personality, and no staff or lawyer layoffs are expected, he said.

Foster Brown Todd officials weren't immediately available for comment on the merger news, but in a news release co-managing members Richard Erikson and Ed Glasscock spoke highly of Indianapolis and the opportunity to enter this market.

This is the second Indiana firm this year to merge with an out-of-state firm and strip the established local name - Indianapolis-based Sommer Barnard became Taft Stettinius & Hollister in May. The Indianapolis Business Journal also reported this week that Indianapolis-based, 263-attorney Ice Miller is expected to soon announce a merger with 180-attorney Greenebaum Dolly & McDonald in Louisville, Ky, though both firms have declined to publicly comment on that.

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. The fee increase would be livable except for the 11% increase in spending at the Disciplinary Commission. The Commission should be focused on true public harm rather than going on witch hunts against lawyers who dare to criticize judges.

  2. Marijuana is safer than alcohol. AT the time the 1937 Marijuana Tax Act was enacted all major pharmaceutical companies in the US sold marijuana products. 11 Presidents of the US have smoked marijuana. Smoking it does not increase the likelihood that you will get lung cancer. There are numerous reports of canabis oil killing many kinds of incurable cancer. (See Rick Simpson's Oil on the internet or facebook).

  3. The US has 5% of the world's population and 25% of the world's prisoners. Far too many people are sentenced for far too many years in prison. Many of the federal prisoners are sentenced for marijuana violations. Marijuana is safer than alcohol.

  4. My daughter was married less than a week and her new hubbys picture was on tv for drugs and now I havent't seen my granddaughters since st patricks day. when my daughter left her marriage from her childrens Father she lived with me with my grand daughters and that was ok but I called her on the new hubby who is in jail and said didn't want this around my grandkids not unreasonable request and I get shut out for her mistake

  5. From the perspective of a practicing attorney, it sounds like this masters degree in law for non-attorneys will be useless to anyone who gets it. "However, Ted Waggoner, chair of the ISBA’s Legal Education Conclave, sees the potential for the degree program to actually help attorneys do their jobs better. He pointed to his practice at Peterson Waggoner & Perkins LLP in Rochester and how some clients ask their attorneys to do work, such as filling out insurance forms, that they could do themselves. Waggoner believes the individuals with the legal master’s degrees could do the routine, mundane business thus freeing the lawyers to do the substantive legal work." That is simply insulting to suggest that someone with a masters degree would work in a role that is subpar to even an administrative assistant. Even someone with just a certificate or associate's degree in paralegal studies would be overqualified to sit around helping clients fill out forms. Anyone who has a business background that they think would be enhanced by having a legal background will just go to law school, or get an MBA (which typically includes a business law class that gives a generic, broad overview of legal concepts). No business-savvy person would ever seriously consider this ridiculous master of law for non-lawyers degree. It reeks of desperation. The only people I see getting it are the ones who did not get into law school, who see the degree as something to add to their transcript in hopes of getting into a JD program down the road.

ADVERTISEMENT