Given the news that has come out about Morgan & Finnegan yesterday and today, this isn’t going to come as a galloping shock to anybody.

Morgan & Finnegan has officially filed for Bankruptcy. Chapter 7. It’s up on PACER right now.

If you are Morgan & Finnegan employee waiting on severance, it is officially time to stop holding your breath.

For those interested, here’s the 87 page document.

M&F Ch. 7.pdf

Earlier: Anatomy of a Dissolution: Morgan & Finnegan In Receivership
Anatomy of a Dissolution: Morgan & Finnegan Still Hasn’t Paid Severance

Yesterday, we reported that JPMorgan Chase was suing Morgan & Finnegan. Today, AmLaw reports that a judge has named a receiver for the defunct IP boutique:

A judge on Wednesday ordered the appointment of a receiver to defunct IP shop Morgan & Finnegan and enjoined it from selling or transferring its assets after the failed New York firm found itself the target of a lawsuit from lender JPMorgan Chase.

Locke Lord is busy washing its hands of this entire Morgan & Finnegan mess:

A spokeswoman for Locke Lord says the firm is aware of the lawsuit, but notes it is not a party to the lawsuit.

“The handling of it is totally up to the former Morgan & Finnegan lawyers and their counsel,” the spokeswoman says. Senior partner John Sweeney was not immediately available for comment.

We are about to get a good look at the books of a law firm that couldn’t make it in new economy. We already know that Morgan & Finnegan doesn’t have enough money to pay severance, but what do they have?

JPMorgan says it has seized the firm’s bank accounts, valued at $981,641. University Management, which JPMorgan hired to review the law firm’s books, found the firm had $6.6 million in billable accounts receivables through December 31. About $1.7 million were marked as disbursements.

Who do you think is going to get their money first: JPMorgan, or laid off M&F employees? In the meantime, how much soap do you think Locke Lord is trucking into the office?

Morgan & Finnegan Target of JPMorgan Suit [AmLaw Daily]
JPMorgan Chase v. Morgan & Finnegan.pdf [AmLaw Daily]

Earlier: Anatomy of a Dissolution: Morgan & Finnegan Still Hasn’t Paid Severance

Over a month ago, we reported that Morgan & Finnegan was bouncing checks to attorneys and staff that were left behind when the vanguard of M&F’s partnership jumped ship to Locke Lord. Back in February, we reported:

Is it that the firm can’t make payroll, or is that it won’t make payroll?

We know a number of former Morgan & Finnegan partners are getting ready for their new practice at Locke Lord, but it looks like those people might not be done with their old practice quite yet.

Well, here we are in March, there are Morgan & Finnegan people that have been out of work for two and a half months now. There are still no severance checks.

Where is the money? About a month ago, M&F people received this terse letter:

M & F issued WARN checks drawn on its account with J.P Morgan Chase (“Chase”) that was fully funded to cover those checks. Without prior notice to M & F, Chase froze the account and rejected the checks when they were presented for payment. The transition team has been trying to resolve this situation with Chase, both as to WARN payments and future WARN payments. But, we do not know, at this time, what the outcome of those efforts will be.

As Heller proved, blaming the bank — while doing nothing for former employees — is a good press strategy. However, in this case, the bank is fighting back.

Details after the jump.

In August, we reported on significant layoffs at Morgan & Finnegan. Two and a half weeks ago, we told you that Morgan & Finnegan would be dissolving with survivors going over to Locke Lord.

Thanks to the recent dissolution of Heller Ehrman, Thelen, and Thacher Proffitt, we have learned what to expect as a firm shuts its doors. Employees are supposed to have sixty days of paid warning, under the WARN Act.

But what is the use of a severance check if there is no money in the bank? Morgan & Finnegan employees are finding out. Last week, a tipster reported:

Morgan & Finnegan severance checks were sent to fired employees. They were drawn on an account that is frozen. The checks are not good. The signature is illegible.

At the time, we thought this was a minor clerical error. But yesterday, ATL received additional confirmation that Morgan & Finnegan employees are having trouble getting paid. Details after the jump.

Last week we brought you news of an impending partner defection from Morgan & Finnegan to Locke Lord. Today, Locke Lord made it official. A press release from Locke Lord heralds the bad news for Morgan & Finnegan:

Locke Lord Bissell & Liddell, a full-service national law firm of approximately 700 attorneys, announces that more than 30 lawyers previously with New York-based Morgan & Finnegan are joining Locke Lord. Morgan & Finnegan was one of the oldest and most well regarded Intellectual Property law firms in the country. The attorneys include 13 Partners and the previous members of Morgan & Finnegan’s Executive Committee.

This move more than doubles the size of Locke Lord’s New York office to about 50 attorneys and
leads to Locke Lord opening a San Francisco office - the Firm’s 13th office and its third in
California (Los Angeles, Sacramento and now San Francisco). Morgan & Finnegan was in
existence more than 115 years and was well-known for providing well-rounded IP services
including IP litigation, patent and trademark prosecution and IP counseling and advice.

Notice the interesting use of the word “was?” “Morgan & Finnegan was in existence more than 115 years …”

Does Locke Lord know something that has not yet been announced to the general public? Or are they just parroting the obvious along with everybody else?

Read the full press release after the jump.

Earlier: Nationwide Dissolution Watch: Morgan & Finnegan?

The law firm of Morgan & Finnegan, a leading intellectual property boutique, will be dissolving imminently, according to several sources at the firm. Some (but not all) of its lawyers, including prominent partners John Sweeney and James Gould, will join Locke Lord Bissell & Liddell.

Last month, we mentioned the possibility of a merger between the two firms. It now appears that it won’t be a complete merger, but a selective acquisition of certain lawyers (a la Sonnenschein’s absorption of Thacher Proffitt & Wood attorneys when TPW dissolved). As a result, Morgan & Finnegan lawyers who aren’t offered spots on the Locke Lord life raft will be out of jobs.

John Sweeney will become the deputy managing partner of Locke Lord’s New York office, while James Gould will assume the role of co-head of the intellectual property department. At least 11 other Morgan & Finnegan partners will also be making the move. Joining Locke Lord as equity partners are Matthew Blackburn, William Feiler, Peter Fill, Harry Marcus, and Steven Meyer. Coming aboard as income partners are Seth Atlas, Robert Goethals, James Hwa, John Osborne, Richard Straussman, and Andrea Wayda.

Rumors of dissolution have been swirling around Morgan & Finnegan for quite some time. Back in August, the firm engaged in staff and attorney layoffs.

As for how the word got out, something rather strange happened on Friday. An email from an anonymous address was sent to a large number of M&F associates, attaching the Locke Lord offer letters to Sweeney and Gould (posted below — but you may have seen them already, since they were in wide circulation over the weekend, sent to us by multiple correspondents). From one source:

Morgan & Finnegan is dissolving on Monday. They are sending termination letters to everyone. Then, a number of those people will receive offer letters from Locke Lord (so it is not really an acquisition).

Not everyone will get offers. A large number of staff and attorneys will be laid off on Monday. Rumor has it around 70 people. Most first years, and some other associates. Pretty much all staff. LLBL just wants the lease and some of the partners….

Interesting that [Sweeney and Gould] are making off with $1+ million apiece at the cost of most of the jobs of their employees. Needless to say, most people are disgusted. John Sweeney is the person who has kept saying that people should not worry and the firm is fine. Now he is cutting his losses and running.

More discussion — plus links to the James Gould and John Sweeney offer letters, which are an interesting read, especially if you don’t know what a lateral-partner offer letter looks like — after the jump.

Just because it’s after Christmas it doesn’t mean that law firms are done with their holiday shopping.

A tipster reports an intriguing possibility about Texas powerhouse Locke Lord Bissell & LIddell and IP shop Morgan & Finnegan:

Locke Liddell is acquiring Morgan & Finengan. Don’t think it’s final yet.

Tipsters from both firms have heard the news, but obviously nothing has been finalized. Firm spokespeople could not be reached for immediate comment over the holidays.

Both firms appear to have been prudent during the economic crisis. We reported that Morgan & Finnegan lost a number of partners over the summer, while Locke Lord no-offered more than half of their summer associates. But we haven’t received any reports of wide scale associate layoffs at either firm.

That could change if this merger goes through. A tipster reports:

Rumor has it that Lock Liddell will be laying off a number of Morgan & Finnegan lawyers as part of the merger.

Is this a gift that Locke Lord will cherish? Or is it one that Morgan & Finnegan will want to take back to the store? We’ll keep you posted.

Earlier: Nationwide Layoff Watch: Morgan & Finnegan
Nationwide No Offer Watch: Locke Lord’s Sub-50% Offer Ratio

A recent article in IP Law & Business suggested that rumors of the demise of IP specialty law firms have been greatly exaggerated. According to the piece, intellectual property boutiques continue to survive, despite encroachment on their turf by general-practice firms.

This is not to say, however, that everything is peachy in IP land. The article notes that Morgan & Finnegan, one prominent IP shop, “has lost 10 partners in the past year, and its overall head count is down considerably.” (We wonder if they included Jeremy Pitcock in the partner losses.)

The firm has been shedding associates and staff, too. Earlier this week, we heard from several tipsters that Morgan & Finnegan was laying off lawyers, technical and scientific advisors, and staff.

We confirmed the news with Pat Bowers, director of administration for Morgan & Finnegan. She acknowledged the layoffs (and even had the courage to use the “L” word, which many other firms shun).

The firm believes in “the importance of communication,” explained Bowers. “It’s not like we were doing it behind closed doors.” Prior to informing the affected employees, administration sent out a firm-wide email explaining that the firm was “scrutinizing our direct and indirect expenses, and looking at our staffing needs in New York and D.C.”

The affected employees were notified of the layoffs starting on Friday of last week and ending yesterday by close of business (so if you’re at the firm and haven’t heard anything, you’re in the clear). Bowers declined to provide exact numbers, citing confidentiality concerns, but said that (1) the firm “laid off less than 7 percent of attorneys and staff,” and (2) the cuts were centered on staff, not lawyers.

More details, below the fold.

Earlier this year, we wrote about a puzzling situation involving Jeremy Pitcock, a successful young IP litigator in New York. Pitcock left Kasowitz Benson, where he served as head of the intellectual property practice, and joined Morgan & Finnegan. After Morgan’s hiring of Pitcock was touted as a coup — in IP Law360, and in a Morgan press release — Kasowitz issued a statement claiming they fired him for “extremely inappropriate personal conduct.” The following month, Pitcock left Morgan & Finnegan, under unclear circumstances.

Now Jeremy Pitcock is back on the legal scene, this time as a plaintiff. From the American Lawyer:

[Pitcock] filed a defamation lawsuit against the [Kasowitz] firm Thursday seeking more than $90 million for what he calls the “malicious and unwarranted smear campaign” that followed his dismissal.

The lawsuit, Pitcock v. Kasowitz Benson, was filed in the Southern District of New York. It has been assigned to Judge John E. Sprizzo.

So what exactly was the allegedly inappropriate conduct by Pitcock?

Find out, after the jump.

Some of you may recall the strange tale of Jeremy Pitcock, a successful IP litigator in New York. As we previously reported, he recently left Kasowitz Benson, where he headed the intellectual property practice, for Morgan & Finnegan. That’s par for the course, in this age of increased lateral partner movement. The weird part was that Kasowitz issued a statement, apparently in response to Morgan’s trying to tout Pitcock’s move as a hiring coup, in which Kasowitz said they fired Pitcock for “extremely inappropriate personal conduct.”

The plot thickens. A source informed us that Jeremy Pitcock is no longer at Morgan & Finnegan, which we have confirmed. His bio is no longer on the firm website, which has also been scrubbed of the press release touting his hire. If you try emailing him at his Morgan & Finnegan email address, which is the one provided in his LinkedIn profile, as we did, your message will bounce back to you.

We tried calling Jeremy Pitcock at the Morgan & Finnegan phone number listed in his profile. The nervous-sounding woman who answered the phone told us that he’s no longer with the firm, that she didn’t have forwarding information for him, and that his last day in the office was “last week.”

Did Morgan & Finnegan get rid of Pitcock after investigating the alleged “inappropriate personal conduct”? One source said it would be surprising. First, Pitcock is a superstar IP lawyer. Rumor has it that “when he left Simpson, he had a $6 million book of business, as a 6th or 7th year associate. He decided he wanted to be a partner [immediately, rather than waiting a few years,] and Kasowitz took him up on that.”

Second, some claim Morgan & Finnegan has a reputation for tolerating a certain degree of inappropriate personal conduct. One source tells us that “they aren’t known for being friendly to women — or in some cases, they’re known for being too friendly. There were partners who asked female associates on dates repeatedly and others who referred to female associates as ‘pretty young girls.’ Still others simply refused to work with women.”

We contacted the firm’s spokesperson to inquire about Pitcock’s departure; she wasn’t in, so we left a message. We haven’t heard back from her yet, but if we do, we’ll let you know.

If you have the 411, feel free to email us. Thanks.

Update (2:30 PM): We just heard back from the Morgan & Finnegan spokesperson. She stated that the firm generally does not comment on internal firm matters.

Update (6/6/08): Jeremy Pitcock has filed a $90 million defamation lawsuit against Kasowitz Benson. See here.

Earlier: Musical Chairs: Kasowitz Attributes IP Head’s Departure to ‘Extremely Inappropriate Personal Conduct’

If we hadn’t already named a Lawyer of the Day, the prize might have gone to Jeremy Pitcock of Morgan & Finnegan. From the American Lawyer:

The former head of intellectual property at Kasowitz, Benson, Torres & Friedman was fired in December for “extremely inappropriate personal conduct,” according to the firm.

Not merely “inappropriate” conduct, but “extremely inappropriate” conduct. We’re guessing it was strenuously objectionable.

Jeremy Pitcock, 35, joined Kasowitz in March 2006 after being wooed from Simpson Thacher & Bartlett, where he was a senior associate. Kasowitz named him head of IP not long after. But after less than two years, Pitcock left the 200-plus-lawyer firm for 52-lawyer New York IP boutique Morgan & Finnegan.

Morgan touted Pitcock’s hiring as “an outstanding addition to our successful litigation practice” when it announced his move on January 8. But the Kasowitz firm says he was forced out following an unspecified incident.

“Mr. Pitcock was terminated for cause by Kasowitz, Benson in December 2007 because of extremely inappropriate personal conduct,” name partner Daniel Benson said in a statement.

So what prompted the firm’s statement?

Kasowitz’s statement followed the publication of an article in trade publication IP Law 360 last week, which reported that Morgan had lured Pitcock from Kasowitz. In his statement, directed toward the publication, Benson said, “It was inaccurate to use ‘nab’ in your headline, or to use ‘jump ship’ in your opening paragraph.”

“We were not looking to publicize this incident, but because of those incorrect news items, we felt compelled to set the record straight,” Benson said in a press release that the firm distributed online.

We’re intrigued — and the full article in the American Lawyer doesn’t offer much more. If you have details on the alleged conduct, please email us. Thanks.

Update (6/6/08): Jeremy Pitcock has filed a $90 million defamation lawsuit against Kasowitz Benson. See here.

Kasowitz Fired its ex-IP Chief for Inappropriate Conduct [The American Lawyer via Law.com]
Jeremy S. Pitcock bio [Morgan & Finnegan]