Brokeback Lawfirm: Riding Off Into the Sunset?
We don't post that much on the weekends -- but this item is time-sensitive. We have some big news to share, and we don't want to get scooped.
So remember, you heard it here first:
Charney v. Sullivan & Cromwell is on the brink of settlement!!!
We realize that we've prematurely predicted settlement before. But this time around, we have the news on very reliable authority.
Aaron Charney and S&C have been engaged in marathon settlement talks for most of this weekend. And, according to a source close to the discussions, they're very close to an agreement. The parties are said to be "zeroing in on a figure just north of $1 million."
Exciting stuff! We're glad to see the parties working things out -- but we will obviously miss writing about this story.
More details, after the jump.
HAPPY APRIL FOOLS' DAY!!!
Comments
Thanks. So, what are the details of settlement?
Posted by: Loyola 2L | April 1, 2007 03:13 PM
Details = April Fool's joke (no settlement in sight).
I think S&C is going to the mat on this. If they were going to settle, they would have done so a long time ago.
Posted by: Anonymous | April 1, 2007 03:32 PM
If true, this is sickening. The next time I'm offended, I'll try to extort $1M out of the offender. Actually, this story kind of offends me, so maybe I can sue Charney. He'll apparently be able to pay me off.
Posted by: Anonymous | April 1, 2007 04:16 PM
Like Loyola 2L, I was taken in by the joke. I haven't felt so worthless in recent memory.
Posted by: 4:16 | April 1, 2007 04:17 PM
I'm a law student. I was in a coffee shop today and I started talking to a woman who is a grad student at the school of social work at my university. I told her I was a 2L. She said her ex-boyfriend is a 2L. At Loyola. And he broke up with her this winter, over Christmas. She said he concluded that she wasn't good enough for a, well, Loyola 2L on the way up.
She hadn't heard of the US News rankings, but she has now and feels a lot better about the whole thing. Tierism is such a beautiful thing.
Posted by: T14-2L | April 1, 2007 06:25 PM
Can I please get credit for suggesting a $500k settlement before Charney got lawyers and a $1M settlement after Charney got lawyers?
I'm glad this time S&C was smart enough to take my advice. I hope they also gave Charney amicable "move on with your life" provisions.
Posted by: Loyola 2L | April 1, 2007 08:02 PM
Pah. Lat, you could have tried to make this April Fool's joke a LITTLE bit convincing. C'mon.
Posted by: Anonymous | April 1, 2007 08:33 PM
Most boring April Fool's joke. EVER.
Posted by: Zzzz | April 1, 2007 09:13 PM
north of 1M? c'mon, that totally gave it away!
Posted by: Anonymous | April 1, 2007 09:18 PM
This post is EPIC FAIL.
Posted by: Carol Yang Wong Choi | April 1, 2007 09:57 PM
Charney should agree to a settlement now, while there is still a chance that the court will not dismiss his action. Although it is likely that the damages to S&C of Charney's leak to the WSJ are well above $1 million, S&C is not in it for the money, so they would likely settle now if Charney offers them $100,000 or $200,000. But if the court dismisses Charney's action and allows S&C's action to go forward, then S&C at that point will have no reason to settle, and they will probably continue the suit until they get the full verdict in their favor.
Posted by: Anonymous | April 1, 2007 11:15 PM
wow 11:15
you missed the boat on this one
Posted by: anon | April 1, 2007 11:42 PM
i thought it was funny. well maybe not exactly funny, but cute.
Posted by: anonymous | April 1, 2007 11:51 PM
I want to work at S&C, but I don't have big bushy, Brezhnev-style eyebrows. What are my chances of getting hired?
Posted by: Anon | April 2, 2007 11:21 AM
Lat, was it a joke or not? Please let us off the hook, we're dying here.
Posted by: Friend of the Ukuleleist | April 2, 2007 12:29 PM
Of course it's a joke. Did you miss the "HAPPY APRIL FOOLS' DAY!!!" at the bottom of the post?
Posted by: anonymous | April 2, 2007 12:38 PM
can anyone tell me whether a settlement of the charney lawsuit would be taxed? i'd gladly take $1 mil and give up my legal career forever if no taxes were due.
Posted by: boner | April 2, 2007 01:56 PM
They would be taxed. If his lawyers are on contingency (I doubt Charney could afford all those lawyers by the hour) they would also get a 33% cut.
Posted by: anon | April 2, 2007 02:11 PM