The spiral continues as the WSJ takes a look at how small and mid-sized firms are taking away business from the BigLaw dinosaurs:

John Quinn, a founder of Quinn Emanuel Urquhart Oliver & Hedges, LLP, a 400-lawyer business-litigation firm based in Los Angeles, acknowledges there's been something of a switch to small firms. But he says there are limits to what sorts of work corporations would pitch to previously untapped shops. "For the major cases, clients will still be looking for the most experienced firms, who have shown that they can handle this sort," he says. "I don't think that will change."

Still, some work is going to smaller firms. Hit hard by slumping auto sales, AutoNation Inc., the largest car-dealership chain in the U.S., has had to rein in spending. So the Fort Lauderdale, Fla., company recently handed the legal work for its move across town to Angelo & Banta PA, a South Florida firm of just seven lawyers.

Jon Ferrando, AutoNation's general counsel, says he typically would have hired a larger firm for such a matter. In this case, though, he sought a firm that knew the region well and charged less than a big firm.

AutoNation saved 20% to 25% on fees by retaining Angelo & Banta, Mr. Ferrando says. Angelo & Banta managing shareholder Tom Angelo says his firm charges $200-$495 an hour for work done by senior partners.

Hey, I know Tom!

Congrats buddy, but take my advice -- get a large retainer (we're talking about AutoNation here).

I have to agree with Guest Blogger, while there is undoubtedly some shifting going on, and I know anecdotally of several cases going to smaller firms that otherwise might have went to the big boys and girls, there is also some overstatement involved.

Certain businesses will always hire larger firms, in part because of a built-in conservatism that
causes decision-makers to be risk-adverse. It's hard to question the hire when things go wrong if you pick a large, established firm to defend you. On the other hand, you expose yourself to criticism if you pick a smaller firm and something does go awry.

That's just the corporate culture at work, and that will never change.

Of course, the South Florida legal market is slightly different, in that many well-established and successful litigators lead their own firms, or are part of smaller firms, where the risk of hire is less and the lawyer can craft a fee arrangement with more flexibility than, say, at White & Case.

BTW, our friends at Riptide lay out the SexyLexus emails here -- all I can say is these people could learn a few things from Mark Sanford.

Remember, if you are sexting with someone you lust, presume your love notes will be posted online eventually so please try to bring your 'A' game.

Hey, what a surprise -- they've printed all the love notes between SC Governor Sanford and his Argentinian mistress!

I particularly like this one:

“…please sleep soundly knowing that despite the best efforts of my head my heart cries out for you, your voice, your body, the touch of your lips, the touch of your finger tips and an even deeper connection to your soul.”

Man, that dude is smooth! Even I'm getting a little turned on.

I understand the Governor -- who gave an A+ press conference BTW -- has not decided whether he will step down, even though he voted for three articles of impeachment against President Clinton based on Sanford's demand for "moral legitimacy."

Oh well, the heart wants what the heart wants, right?

So, slightly late to the party, Patrick Danner files the 315th adoring profile of Miami White & Case bankruptcy attorney Thomas E. Lauria.

One tidbit that came out of Patrick's story -- Tom bills at $1050 an hour.

Should any Miami lawyer bill that much?

Bankruptcy lawyers, help me out here -- Tom has billed millions of dollars to hard-hit pensioners in what Bruce Rogow politely describes as a "quixotic venture" to derail the Chrysler reorganization, with little tangible signs of success -- strike that, there has been a huge elevation in Tom's profile.

Listen, I'm in favor of lawyers making money as much as anybody else, but I'm having some trouble understanding what Tom has achieved in this representation. Has he improved the negotiating position for the pension funds?

What exactly is the end game here?

So I saw Judge Seitz and Raoul Cantero chatting briefly at lunch today, no doubt busily dissecting SexyLexus and the various noncomments about the story that appear in Vanessa Blum's excellent front-pager today in the DBR.

What makes me most happy about this story is that you guys have really spiced up the DBR comments section. Consider the one from "Gary" that was posted at 1:45 today -- I sure hope that makes the paper tomorrow!

Meanwhile, signs of the recovery are everywhere -- from the "Transit Service Center" near the Omni to that spiffy new "Parking Cashier" at the James L. Knight -- things sure are shaping up around here.

The WSJ gives the love to Miami White & Case bankruptcy attorney Tom Lauria, who fought in vain to derail the Chrysler-Fiat sale:

Judge D. Michael Lynn of the Northern District of Texas, who presided over the Mirant case, says Mr. Lauria "is, if anything, overly tenacious." He sometimes focuses "on the justice of his client's position to the exclusion of the merit of the opposition's arguments," the judge adds.

It is a widely shared view among lawyers who have worked with Mr. Lauria or battled against him. "I don't know many lawyers in the bankruptcy practice who take the idea of zealous representation of their client as seriously as he does," says Richard Chesley, a Chicago bankruptcy lawyer who has worked with Mr. Lauria on a couple of cases.

According to the article, Tom received $900 an hour for his work in the Mirant bankruptcy.

And, according to the DBR, the Indiana pension funds have paid White & Case over $2 million for Tom's efforts, which proved unsuccessful as the Supreme Court ultimately cleared the sale.

Now we know White & Case is struggling, and was profiled in the NYT on Sunday as a poster case for the woes of BigLaw. Indeed, they recently fired over 200 lawyers, nearly 1 in 10, including partners.

So, bankruptcy lawyers, was the $2+ million well-spent?

So let's see big-firmers, Morgan Lewis lays off 55 lawyers and 161 staffers, and White & Case drops 200 lawyers and 200 staffers.

I've gotten some feedback locally, but feel free to comment or shoot me an email.

Folks, it's time to bone up on personal bankruptcy and labor law -- there's always a growth market somewhere, right?

Meanwhile, the courts and clerks of court are battlin' it out over the scraps given to us by the Florida legislature. Here's Harvey Ruvin, writing somnabulantly in the Herald:

No such transparency or accountability is contained in the judges' proposals, only that all the funds would be placed in a judiciary-controlled trust fund to be allocated as they see fit -- with no apparent oversight. The editorial said, ''It isn't clear if these proposals are the best way to fund the courts.'' This gets it right.

In addition to the carte blanche funding transfer, the proposals would strip the elected court clerks of their complex court functions and place them under judicially appointed bureaucrats whose major experience is managing judges' community programs, personnel and procurement needs.

More important, placing clerks under the total control of the judiciary would eliminate the independent role that the framers of Florida's Constitution intended. This treasured independence of the clerks serves the public interest in countless ways, every day throughout our justice system.

Chief Judge Joseph Farina and I are proud of our current ''partnership.'' That relationship of mutual confidence and respect is dependent on the existing law that both protects and enables it. Destroying that independence, as these proposals call for, would work to the detriment of the very principles our laws are designed to ensure.

Zzzzz....

Sorry, I briefly lost consciousness reading Harvey's letter. There's got to be a better way to explain this turf war so the public can be engaged in the issue. I don't think lawyers are even engaged, so this won't cut it.

Why would the public care about this, Harvey -- that's what you need to figure out for the next letter.

Me, I'm heading over to the DAC right now for a little exercise.

Hey -- for real, this time.

Be back in a few!