Proposed Methodology and Guidelines for Selection of LCA 2010 Highest Tier Awards

The Highest Tier Award (HTA) program is a new project of the Litigation Counsel of America.  It is intended to recognize law firm proficiency in a wide variety of litigation practice areas.  The initial program will address the largest law firms in the United States as listed by the NLJ (NLJ 250).  Among the NLJ 250, there are many overlapping litigation practices and some that are unique to less than the entire group.  In the overlapping practices, some categories, e.g. product liability, are broken down into sub-specialties, e.g. pharmaceutical product liability, so that proficiencies may be further distinguished.  The category listings will be alphabetical.  Thus, selection of firms in a particular specialty is intended to acknowledge those firms as being among the most proficient, but not rank them beyond the highest tier as a whole.

The vast majority of LCA Fellows sitting on the selection committee, designated the Blue Ribbon Panel (BRP), maintain practice specialties.  It is recognized that BRP members who are themselves highly proficient in one area of the law are not necessarily acutely aware of other firms’ reputations, competency, and excellence in other fields.  Thus, BRP members are not expected to vote in all categories, although they may.

It is recognized that selection methodology is based upon subjective criteria.  While notoriety for individual case results may be a part of the legal profession and society, quantification of the relative value of case results is seldom attainable.  That is, the very nature of our legal system, wherein each case’s individual facts make it distinguishable, makes measurement of individual case results impractical.  However, as professionals, lawyers are able to recognize and appreciate proficiency, competency, talent, and relative success within the profession. 

Given the above, BRP members listing firms in specific categories should do so based upon their knowledge of firms in such category.  Consultation is permitted with respect to clarifying for one’s ballot which firm(s) should be included. 

BRP members may list the top forty (40) firms in any, some, or no categories listed, or may list less than forty (40) firms in any particular category.  That is, while one BRP member may list the top forty (40) firms in all categories designated, another BRP member may list only a few firms in very few categories.

In assessing performance and proficiency of firms within a specific category, BRP members may rely on any source of information they may possess or gain.  In listing firms, each BRP member should consider a variety of indicators, including (1) the reputation of the firm in a particular practice area, (2) the reputation and competency of the individual firm lawyers practicing within a practice area, (3) the peer assessment of the individual firm lawyers practicing within a practice area, (4) lawyer retention within a practice area, (5) client retention within a practice area, (6) industry strength of clients in a practice area, and (7) relative geographic influence of a firm in a specific practice area (whether a firm is proficient in a practice area nationally, regionally, or locally given its presence as a national, regional or local firm).

BRP members may list their own firms in the selection process.  Where multiple LCA Fellows from the same firm have submitted ballots that include their firm in more than nine practice areas (53 practices X 40 firms = 2,120 awards ÷ 250 = 8.5 average per firm), and all 40 places in all of the practice areas in which the multiple-Fellow firm has been listed are filled, then additional contact with the voting Fellows and additional weighing of those ballots will be conducted by the society.  This is not to say that a firm cannot receive more than nine (9) HTAs, but rather that in order to balance the process fairly on behalf of unrepresented NLJ 250 firms, the LCA will seek to clarify the results so that the methodology is applied appropriately.

Online practice area ballot forms will be accessible to BRP members on or about July 15, 2010.

The Proposed Methodology and Guidelines for Selection of LCA 2010 Highest Tier Awards is subject to amendment upon review by participating Fellows.

Subject to additions, the following categories are proposed, namely:

Accountants’ Liability
Antitrust Litigation
Appellate Practice
Aviation Litigation
Bad Faith Defense
Banking and Financial Institutions Litigation
Bankruptcy and Corporate Reorganization Litigation
Business Tort Litigation
Civil RICO Defense
Civil Rights Litigation
Class Action Defense
Complex Commercial Litigation
Construction Litigation
Defamation/First Amendment Litigation
Directors’ and Officers’ Liability
Employment Litigation
Environmental Litigation
ERISA Defense
False Claims Act Defense
Foreign Corrupt Practices Act Defense
General Litigation
Governmental, Regulatory and Internal Investigations Defense
Healthcare Litigation
Insurance Defense
Insurance Litigation
Intellectual Property Litigation
International Arbitration
International Business Litigation
International Tort
Labor Litigation
Maritime Litigation
Mass Tort Litigation
Medical Malpractice Defense
Mergers, Acquisitions and Business Transactions Litigation
Natural Resources Litigation
Patent Litigation
Personal Injury Defense
Automotive Product Liability
Consumer Product Liability
General Product Liability
Medical Device Product Liability
Pharmaceutical Product Liability
Professional Liability
Real Estate Litigation
Shareholder Litigation
Tax Litigation
Toxic Tort Defense
Transportation Litigation
Trusts and Estates Litigation
White Collar Defense
Wage and Hour Defense
Workers’ Compensation Defense