Former Dewey & LeBoeuf London managing partner Peter Sharp has claimed that the firm’s New York chiefs “ignored” his plans to save the City office as he moved to refute allegations that he left his former colleagues high and dry.

Peter Sharp
Sharp, who resigned to join Morgan Lewis & Bockius’s City office at the height of the crisis, has launched an attack on the firm’s US management, following claims that the litigator looked after his own interests and broke a promise to go down with the ship.
“In mid-March I told [staff] I was not about to disappear. The situation changed,” Sharp told The Lawyer in an interview published today.
“There’s so much to this. We got to a point by mid-April where it became impossible to hold together any sort of London practice at Dewey & LeBoeuf. I’d also put a proposal to New York to try and hold together a team - I surveyed the office and put forward what I thought was possible, how that could be a viable practice. It was completely ignored.”
Sharp has become a villain among much of Dewey’s remaining staff, with four sources claiming that well before he left he went round vowing not to jump ship as hordes of partners globally were leaving.
A current Dewey associate said: “Peter had met with each of the floors in the building and his message was, there’s a rumour going round that I may be leaving, and I can tell you that that’s not going to happen. [He said] you will not see that headline. Of all the parallels with Captain Schettino […] He fell into the lifeboat, and he’s leading the rescue from the shore.”
But Sharp claimed that a meeting with partners on 20 April, when a number of them told him they were leaving, meant that the situation was no longer salvagable.
“That’s the point when I decided the only constructive thing I could do was try and find a safe home for as many people as possible,” he said.
“You have to make an on-the-spot decision. By that point it became clear to me that the firm was doomed. Everyone who made London what it was was planning to leave immediately.”
Sharp, who quit on 3 May, also blamed the situation on the significant financial pressure partners were under, with some London partners understood to have been forced into selling their houses to pay their tax bills following months of reduced pay.
He added: “Meanwhile, the bank that provided capital loans had notified us that no future facilities would be made available to Dewey partners.”
Today’s feature also reveals that two senior Dewey partners clinched a $3m (£1.9m) bonus on top of their $2.5m fixed profit share cap when the firm renegotiated its controversial guarantee packages in March this year. One star lawyer on $6.4m ended up with a $6.9m deal following the negotiations, despite an apparent intention to limit the widely-criticised scheme of guaranteeing pay to certain partners.
Meanwhile, remaining London staff are being left in the dark over the firm’s plans, with one current staff member telling The Lawyer that no communication has reached them about their situation as the UK LLP verges on administration.
Despite a source telling The Lawyer last week that staff had been told this was their last week, it has emerged that this only applies to those whose close contacts with partners meant they were well-informed. Nothing official had been sent out to staff at the time of writing.
Dewey called a meeting for partners and former partners who had left recently last Wednesday (22 May) to discuss the latest situation, with the UK LLP expected to have gone into administration last Friday (24 May) (22 May 2012).
A current Dewey employee told The Lawyer: “It’s a horrible time. It’s heartbreaking. I’ve been here a long time. It’s like a family here. It’s hard, to see so many people strewn across the City. It’s heartbreaking.”
Readers' comments (31)
Anonymous | 28-May-2012 5:59 pm
^ haha, simple but effective
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 28-May-2012 6:56 pm
It all started going wrong from the day Peter Sharp joined LeBoeuf Lamb Greene & MacRae - one bad egg......
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 28-May-2012 7:55 pm
What sort of due diligence did White & Case do on Mort Pierce? Did they look beyond his claim to bill 10,000 hours pa?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Arthur | 29-May-2012 8:59 am
Just to give you a bit more insight into this guys involvement and business acumen.
A few months ago he suggested turning one of the empty floors at Stalag Minster Court into a coffee bar! I mean come on.
London also quite recently (1 yr ago) signed new leases on all floors. Shocking bearing in mind the financial indicators available (that were ignored by all).
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 29-May-2012 9:18 am
So yesterday afternoon they called all the employees together in London and sacked everyone but a small team needed to wind things up. The London office is in administration, and the US firm is in Chapter 11. And where is Peter Sharp? Leading from the shore, with a healthy paycheck from Morgan Lewis. Thanks, Peter.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Peter | 29-May-2012 11:24 am
This is going to be truly horrific for the partners. Overdrawn current accounts leading to recovery action with a liquidator looking at every conceivable avenue available to him.
BDO do of course already have a blueprint following their involvement with Halliwells and will have learnt from this.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 29-May-2012 11:52 am
While it is very easy to make a scapegoat of Peter Sharp, he was not responsible for the demise of Dewey. If you have to point the finger try New York. Peter Sharp was not a member of the Executive Committee whereas other London partners were. London was a well managed office, but given its ties to New York, unable to extract itself from the carnage. Yes Peter Sharp left but he took other partners, associates and support staff with him and since leaving has also found homes within his new firm for other support staff, haven’t seen any other ex D&L partner doing the same. If they did some more of us might have jobs to go to.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 29-May-2012 12:55 pm
To 29-May-201 @ 11:52 - Hi Peter! Or is that your mum?
If Peter wasn't on the Executive Committee, then why did he attend every meeting? He certainly was a de facto member at the least.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 29-May-2012 9:06 pm
Could Peter or his puppet tell us how many 'partners, associates and support staff' he took with him and how that works? Other partners blindly following him?
Seems unlikely.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 30-May-2012 10:37 am
Peter's hands were tied by what happened in New York and he did his best to try and prevent this from happening. No doubt he feels terrible for what has happened but is not solely to blame.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment