The answer is: nobody.
When a partner leaves a law firm, the parties have to allocate various partnership rights, assets and other interests. They may allocate most of these interests in any way that they choose.
The answer is: nobody. <br/>When a partner leaves a law firm, the parties have to allocate various partnership rights, assets and other interests. They may allocate most of these interests in any way that they choose. They may not, however, allocate clients - perhaps the most valuable of partnership "assets." The client alone decides whether to remain a client of the firm, to leave with the departing partner or to choose another attorney. Law firms and departing partners have an ethical obligation to handle these situations in a way that is consistent with the principle of client choice.
The answer is: nobody.
When a partner leaves a law firm, the parties have to allocate various partnership rights, assets and other interests. They may allocate most of these interests in any way that they choose.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN LawJournalNewsletters
Already have an account? Sign In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate access, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or call 1-877-256-2473.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2026 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
Adverse Possessor Provided Insufficient Evidence to Support TackingTown’s Installation of Guardrails Did Not Constitute a TakingMortgagee Entitled to Deficiency JudgmentLandowner Adequately Alleged Trespass During Renovation
Entrepreneurship. It has such a romantic ring, doesn’t it? When we hear the word, we think of incredibly successful people who must lead a charmed life. But the truth of the matter is often far from that. Just ask Melissa Rogozinski whose recent book, Becoming Phoenix, tells a much different story.
Agentic AI introduces risks that are novel and complex, but the most effective response is a familiar one. Zero Trust answers the problem of when an AI agent misfires on its own by constraining what an agent can do rather than betting on how it will behave.
California is betting that it can accelerate AI adoption by acting as a demanding, trusted buyer, and that the governance evidence it extracts through procurement can become infrastructure the rest of the market reuses.