There is an understanding among many lawyers that going to litigation is an admission of failure with the inevitable result being that everyone (except the representing lawyers) loses. With this in mind, is the recently publicized dispute (see the article in law.com) between the New York office of Akin Gump and the legal recruiters at Sivin Tobin Associates a disaster for both sides, or is it a blessing in disguise?
On the face of it, the economic and reputational risks are obvious. But worst of all is the publicity, with all of its inherant inaccuracies working to feed the mutual mistrust already so prevalent between legal recruiters and their clients .
On the other hand - that two such prominent players are taking these risks suggests that the lateral recruitment business, in the US at least, has reached a maturing point, and that the result of the litigation might actually promote some real thinking as to how the relationship between recruiters and their clients might be improved. An free and efficient market in legal talent is, after all, in everyone's interests, and one or two clarifying judicial rulings could go a long way in giving recruiters and their clients some effective common ground rules. Now that would be a win-win result that everyone could be happy with...
