Top-paid general counsel

July 20, 2011
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A list released by Corporate Counsel,  an ALM National publication, ranks the compensation of general counsel around the U.S. and there are some highly paid attorneys out there. The top-paid in-house attorney is Denise Keane of Altria Group Inc., the parent company of Phillip Morris USA and other companies. For the first time in the history of this list, a woman was the top-paid general counsel. She was listed as having more than $6.4 million in compensation.

It’s interesting to see that Keane went from being ranked 34th in 2010 to first this year. Donald de Brier with Occidental Petroleum Corp. went from 63rd last year to second this year.

Robert Armitage, the general counsel at Eli Lilly and Co., ranked No. 33, with more than $1.78 million in total compensation. He was ranked at No. 24 last year. Armitage’s salary is listed at just under $848,000. John Cannon II, general counsel at WellPoint Inc., came in at No. 63. He didn’t even make last year’s list. His salary is listed at around $550,000, but he took home more than $1.3 million.

The list breaks down compensation to show salary, bonus/nonequity incentive compensation, total cash, option exercises and stock value realized, total cash plus stock value realized, stock awards, and option awards. The rankings are based on the total cash the general counsel received.

The publication noted that this survey shows more of an “undoing of damage of the previous year than any great leap in compensation levels.” It writes that the worst seems to be over regarding the economy, and corporations are rewarding executives for getting them through the tough days of the recession.

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
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. As one of the many consumers affected by this breach, I found my bank data had been lifted and used to buy over $200 of various merchandise in New York. I did a pretty good job of tracing the purchases to stores around a college campus just from the info on my bank statement. Hm. Mr. Hill, I would like my $200 back! It doesn't belong to the state, in my opinion. Give it back to the consumers affected. I had to freeze my credit and take out data protection, order a new debit card and wait until it arrived. I deserve something for my trouble!

  2. Don't we have bigger issues to concern ourselves with?

  3. Anyone who takes the time to study disciplinary and bar admission cases in Indiana ... much of which is, as a matter of course and by intent, off the record, would have a very difficult time drawing lines that did not take into account things which are not supposed to matter, such as affiliations, associations, associates and the like. Justice Hoosier style is a far departure than what issues in most other parts of North America. (More like Central America, in fact.) See, e.g., http://www.theindianalawyer.com/indiana-attorney-illegally-practicing-in-florida-suspended-for-18-months/PARAMS/article/42200 When while the Indiana court system end the cruel practice of killing prophets of due process and those advocating for blind justice?

  4. Wouldn't this call for an investigation of Government corruption? Chief Justice Loretta Rush, wrote that the case warranted the high court’s review because the method the Indiana Court of Appeals used to reach its decision was “a significant departure from the law.” Specifically, David wrote that the appellate panel ruled after reweighing of the evidence, which is NOT permissible at the appellate level. **But yet, they look the other way while an innocent child was taken by a loving mother who did nothing wrong"

  5. Different rules for different folks....

ADVERTISEMENT