< Previous“We talked for six months,” says Sulzer, who brought another former Seyfarth partner and former Stanford Law faculty member Steven Katz into the discussions, as well as Richard Bromley from Nixon Peabody, who had al- ready been on the ground with Constangy for about a year in a small office in Encino. “We made a deal and the three of us started this California venture for Constangy in February 2016.” With an agenda for growth, the firm wast- ed no time bringing in more attorneys to its star-studded team. One of the first and most important hires was Kimberly Talley, fellow Harvard Law alum and one of the top single- plaintiff defense lawyers in the market. She joined the firm in June 2016, bringing some high-profile, marquee clients and a stellar rep- utation, particularly in the African-American business community. “Kim really has an amazing set of contacts and relationships; she is a great lawyer, par- ticularly in trying arbitration cases, and one of the nicest people I have ever met,” says Sulzer. According to Talley, Constangy is a very special place to practice law. “What sets Constangy apart is the cama- raderie that exists among its attorneys,” says Talley. “There is a mutual trust and genuine friendship that exists among my colleagues with whom I spend a lot of time with each day.” Since joining the firm in June 2016, Talley personally recruited Nestor Barrero, Thy Bui and Denica Anderson, all of whom came to Constangy with a varied assortment of expe- riences and have flourished at the firm. “There is a firm-wide culture to work to ensure that everyone succeeds,” she explains. “We help each other.” Nestor Barrero arrived in 2017 after a 19- year run as in-house senior labor and employ- ment counsel at NBC Universal and Union Bank. Although he had spent several years practicing labor and employment law at Shep- pard Mullin early in his career, Barrero found himself typecast as an in-house lawyer with- out a litigation background or “book of busi- ness.” Taking the “reverse commute” later in a career by going back to a law firm is relatively uncommon and a road that most in-house lawyers don’t often take. “Many of the boutique L&E law firms that I had known and worked with over the years were polite enough when I left NBC Univer- sal, and they were all very nice and expressed some interest, but none could figure out how to monetize my skill set effectively,” explains Barrero. “And then Kim Talley, whom I had first met when she was a young associate I had retained while at Union Bank in the ‘90s called and said, ‘Nestor, you need to come talk to these people at Constangy because it’s a great place.’ “I spent the bulk of my career as an in-house lawyer and brought a real client’s perspective, having advised large employers for so many years,” he says, adding that his work often put him in both business and legal settings some- times working through situations involving senior executives, producers, talent and dif- ficult personalities. “Working as a quasi-in- house counsel for Constangy’s existing clients and developing my own was a niche I thought I could really sell.” And sell he did. His 35-year history working with legal and HR departments, along with dozens of cultivated relationships, brought in clients that the firm had never worked with before. The list includes NBC Universal, CBS, Showtime Networks, Fox Corp., Lionsgate Entertainment, the Motion Picture & Televi- sion Fund, Uber Technologies, City National Bank, Union Bank, Lemonade Restaurant Group, Bolthouse Farms, Instacart and PET- CO Animal Supplies. “Nestor is a specialist,” says Sulzer. “He’s the best advice and counsel lawyer I have seen and he’s available to all of Constangy’s clients and partners, who rely on his skill in handling compliance issues surrounding hir- ing and layoffs, updating policies and hand- books, advising on new legislation, drafting employment agreements, investigating em- ployee misconduct, training managers in the #MeToo era and advising on sensitive situa- tions, particularly in the C-suite. “Nestor has a stellar reputation in the en- tertainment, media and banking industries as well as with private equity clients such as Butterfly Equity,” he adds. “When this oppor- tunity came along, we felt the quality of his experience and ease with clients was so high that it would work out, and it has.” Practicing law at Constangy has also worked out for Thy Bui, who joined the firm in 2017 with a small base of clients, including the California State University system and na- “What sets Constangy apart is the camaraderie that exists among its attorneys. There is a mutual trust and genuine friendship that exists among my colleagues with whom I spend a lot of time with each day.” ATTORNEY AT LAW MAGAZINE · LOS ANGELES · VOL. 5 NO. 6 10tionwide property management firm Apart- ment Management Consultants. “Constangy feels like home,” says Bui. “It provides an unbeatable platform for up-and- coming diverse attorneys to build and expand their practice.” In her mid-thirties, Bui is the youngest of the Southern California partners, but brings an energy and passion to trial practice. “She is one of those people who is every- where, from bar associations to political events and industry associations,” says Sulzer of Bui. “And she spends significant time in both the L.A. and OC offices.” Bui currently serves on the board of gover- nors of the National Asian Pacific American Bar Association and is a past president of the Orange County Asian American Bar Associa- tion. Similar experiences abound at Constangy. Sulzer relates how one of the female partners, former Proskauer litigator Sarah Kroll-Rosen- baum, had taken a hiatus from practice and had a child before deciding to join the firm. Fifteen months later, she was made a partner and now presides over a substantial book of business principally in the health care staffing industry and she is considered a leading na- tional expert on the issues facing that indus- try. Another key senior attorney, Angela Rapko, he says, lives in Santa Barbara with her hus- band and young son. Remote work and flex- ible schedules are not issues for the firm, he says. “We try to be a little more human in the way we approach our work life, while still focusing on quality premium services” Sulzer says. Indeed, the firm has been recognized re- peatedly for its commitment to its human capital. The Los Angeles Business Journal named Constangy a top law firm and one of There is a firm-wide culture to work to ensure that everyone succeeds, we help each other.” AttorneyAtLawMagazine.com 11the top five workplaces in general to work for in the city of Los Angeles. And nationally, Constangy has made Working Mother magazine’s list of 60 Best Law Firms for Women in the last two years. Another important recognition: its diversity. The firm made history in 2015 as the first large law firm in the United States to have an African- American attorney as a “name on the door” partner when well-known labor & employment partner Don Proph- ete joined the firm. Over the past 10 years, 55% of the firm’s promotions have been women or minorities, and 62% of attorneys joining the firm have been women or minorities. Women and people of color make up 53% of Constangy’s attorney ros- ter and 42% of its partner roster. On the firm’s executive committee, 62% are women and people of color, while 37% and 46% are office heads and practice industry group leaders, re- spectively. The California offices mirror the firm’s commitment to diversity with seven out of 10 partners being wom- en, including three being women of color. Between its three California of- fices, the attorneys are 60% are female and 40% minority. Not surprisingly, Constangy Los Angeles partners Nestor Barrero, Thy Bui, Kimberly Talley and Kenneth Sulzer ATTORNEY AT LAW MAGAZINE · LOS ANGELES · VOL. 5 NO. 6 12Constangy’s Bay Area and Orange County offices are also headed up by female partners Barbara Antonucci and Carolyn Sieve, respec- tively. Was this an accident or a concerted effort? Sulzer says a little bit of both. “We are a premium provider, looking for the best people to practice at a very premium level,” he says. “Most of us are from top law schools and AmLaw100 firms. We are diverse, and we do things differently and better we think, in the both the marketplace and the workplace. The California clients expect noth- ing less.” One of the things the firm says it does dif- ferently is to keep its rates competitive. “Even though we’re a premium law firm, we don’t have to charge premium rates,” says Barrero, citing as an example a client who told him their small company was paying a firm over $800-an-hour fees for basic employment law advice work. “That type of work does not need to be charged at those rates. It is a myth, especially for day-to-day advice and counsel- ing that higher rates equate to better work or better lawyers. It’s just not true and I can at- test to it from more than two decades of hiring firms as an in house lawyer. “Unlike some of the other places I could have ended up, there is much more flexibil- ity at Constangy to accommodate the needs of clients that need high-quality attorneys and work but can’t afford Wall Street rates, which are rarely justified for the bulk of their needs,” he adds. “Diversity and rates along with our premi- um practice are things that our leaders talked about as being values in the firm that allow us to distinguish ourselves from everyone else,” agrees Sulzer. No one says it’s easy to make it big in Cali- fornia, but the state’s ever-increasing regula- tion of the employment relationship and the gig and outsourced economy, have given Con- stangy plenty of opportunity to offer services to businesses, particularly those clients that outsource workers and don’t keep supervisors on location. “Companies in that niche are the ones that have come to us to us for guidance because it’s an area fraught with potential landmines,” Sulzer says, explaining that at least 12 class action or PAGA cases are filed every day in the state—far more than any other state. “In California, almost every large – and mid-sized company has been hit by a PAGA or class ac- tion lawsuit, and we spend a great deal of time taking preventative action to lessen the risk they will be exposed to in a PAGA or class ac- tion case.” Another niche area for the firm in Califor- nia is AB5, which Sulzer calls a crackdown on the use of independent contractors in the gig economy. “That will likely result in much more busi- ness for employment temporary agencies that will bring these people on as employees, which is what the laws seem to be requiring,” he ex- plains. “A lot of such companies have sought us out for our knowledge in these matters.” Website access and cyber security is yet one more specialty for the firm, somewhat surprisingly, says Sulzer. Senior counsel Ron- ald Sarian, former vice president and general counsel for successful dating service eHarmo- ny, is leading California in that effort. Sulzer says getting all of its attorneys, even more junior ones, involved directly with the clients is critical to building the California team. “What we do best is really working with as- sociates and junior partners to integrate them into our client relationships and create oppor- tunities for them,” Sulzer says. Building on Constangy’s strong 73-year his- tory helped, too, he says. For the firm, making the move to California has been nothing but positive. “Our existing clients and new clients re- sponded incredibly well to our coming to California,” Sulzer says. “We have a great platform and a great national reputation and brand, and we will clearly have a great one in California as well”. Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete LLP 2029 Century Park East Suite 1100 Los Angeles, CA 90067 (310) 909-7775 www.constangy.com AttorneyAtLawMagazine.com 13I’ ve been a legal recruiter and negotiated salaries on behalf of lawyers for over 25 years now. I’ve seen countless situations where attorney needed more time to consider an offer. I’ve seen such situations handled expertly and I’ve seen them handled disastrously. Here are the four critical mistakes to avoid in such situations, as well as a couple of strategies that can be employed: No. 1: Make sure your delay isn’t just analysis paralysis Ask yourself, “Am I just over-thinking this?” I’ve seen the most bril- liant people on earth do exactly that. There were no legitimate reasons (e.g. pending offers from competitors etc.) for their delays. They just over-analyzed the situation until it was lost and then found themselves trying desperately to get back, what they once had. No. 2: Don’t lie. Lies have a way of being discovered and whether they are discovered before or after the position has been obtained, doesn’t matter. They create distrust. No. 3: Don’t “ghost” a potential employer. Avoiding calls and emails sends a very clear message that you are both unprofessional and inconsiderate. I recently saw an attorney send his paperwork to a firm after not communicating with them at all for almost two months. Needless to say, the firm declined to extend an offer. No. 4: Don’t make other offers the only reason for buying This doesn’t mean you need to hide the fact you’re interviewing with multiple employers. Nor does it mean that there aren’t effective ways to use competition as a negotiating strategy. You just don’t want them to feel like they are going to be the firm you settled for, after everything else fell through. What about Rule No. 2 you ask? Again, it’s all about how you state things. Here are examples that will display the differ- ence: Don’t: “ Mr. Employer I’d love to give you an answer now but I have offers that should be coming from two of your competitors and I want to see what they come up with first.” Do: “ Mr. Employer I really appreciate this offer and I’m certainly leaning in this direction. I really like the people I’ve met, and I respect your integrity. So I hope you can respect mine. I gave my word to Competitor B that I would at least review her offer before making a final decision. Like I said, it’s a long shot but I did give my word.” See the difference? In the second example, not only is the time likely to be granted, the employer would have to ask that you violate the val- ue of integrity, in order to push for an immediate answer.When need- ing more time to consider an offer, remember it’s a two-way street. Candidates will tolerate a company taking months to make a decision but feel often guilty or unprofessional if they request even a modicum of time, to do the same. They shouldn’t. Because the gravitas of such decisions are much greater on the em- ployee than the employer. If a law firm doesn’t get a new lawyer tomor- row, not much changes in the world. But if you commit your career to the wrong firm or company, years of your life can be negatively im- pacted. If you need more time for legitimate reasons, ask for it. Just be dip- lomatic and honest. Frederick Shelton is the CEO of Shelton & Steele (www.sheltonsteele.com), a national legal recruiting and consulting firm. Since 1993, Frederick has worked with associates, counsel, partners, groups and coordinated law firm mergers & acquisitions. 4 Mistakes to Avoid When You Need More Time After Receiving an Offer By Frederick Shelton ATTORNEY AT LAW MAGAZINE · LOS ANGELES · VOL. 5 NO. 6 14If used properly, LinkedIn can be used to target your audience, as well as generate leads and new cases for your law firm. LinkedIn is so powerful because of its vast reach of more than 610 million users (source: 99firms.com). Recently, videos are more impact- ful on social media, and social me- dia channels also reward those who incorporate videos or live streaming into their social media marketing by giving them more exposure and page views. Statistics show that videos are shared more than static content. Fur- thermore, people also spend three times longer watching LinkedIn video ads in comparison to regular ads. To get started, follow these steps. STEP 1: Create A Strategy for New-Client Acquisition This step requires you to identify short- and long-term goals for your law firm. Is the long-term goal of your marketing to create a funnel of consistent leads that come in? Or is it more about building brand awareness for your law firm? Perhaps it is even a combination of both of those aspects. STEP 2: Identify the Campaign’s Key Performance Indicators You should now define your target audience and come up with video content that will resonate with them. This may require some research on your part to determine what their hot buttons are and how to best relate to them. If you plan on doing any paid promotions on LinkedIn or hiring a professional video crew, it is essential to create a budget for your market- ing campaigns. It is also important to evaluate if you can do one broad cam- paign or if it is better to break up your campaigns into different segments in order to reach different target demo- graphics. STEP 3: Identify What Type of Linkedin Video Option Is Best for Your Purpose Currently, LinkedIn has two differ- ent types of video options. The first option is native videos. Native videos will auto-play in Linke- dIn and grab more attention because they are organically posted. The second option is LinkedIn video ads, which are sponsored vid- eos that appear in the feed. Sponsored LinkedIn video ads can be used for brand awareness and lead generation. The main difference between native videos and LinkedIn video ads (spon- sored videos) is that native videos can be up to 10 minutes long, whereas LinkedIn video ads can be up to 30 minutes long. So, depending on how long your video is, you can determine the best format that works for your goal. The three stages of your LinkedIn video funnel: Stage 1: Awareness If your goal is to create brand aware- ness, then the type of videos that work best for that are short ones that focus on your distinct practice areas or ser- vices rather than your law firm on a general basis. You can also use any clips from an event where you made a speech or perhaps a community event that your law firm hosted. Both of these clips can be used to create awareness of your firm as well as your personal brand. Stage 2: Consideration The goal of the consideration stage is to enhance the customer experi- ence. The best type of videos to use for the consideration stage are law firm story videos that show the hu- man side of the business that helps the audience connect with you. A good example would be to showcase your firm attorneys speaking about their experiences working for the firm and the satisfaction that they get from helping client’s day in and day out. Another type of video is called an explainer video. In this type of video, you can explain a problem and then present a solution to the problem. Stage 3: Conversions Testimonial videos are great for sharing actual experiences that can help build trust within potential cli- ents. As you may have to consider attorney-client confidentiality, you may need to conceal identity or follow state regulations set forth by state bar that you are licensed in. Simply posting a video to Linke- dIn is not enough. You must learn how to optimize your video for SEO purposes. To optimize your video to reach a wider audience, it is impor- tant to use LinkedIn hashtags in your video. However, don’t use too many. You should also consider putting sub- titles in your videos in case your audi- ence is watching from work and has to mute the volume. Done right, LinkedIn video is a great marketing tool to add to your law firm marketing plan! DIMPLE DANG | Legal Marketing Dimple Dang is a marketing director at Activist Legal, which provides a nationwide network of experienced at- torneys who handle foreclosure files. Her experience in marketing includes website design, email marketing, SEO, blogging, PPC, social media, HubSpot and Facebook marketing campaigns. She is a law firm marketing specialist and entrepreneur and speaks at many professional groups and organizations all over the United States. To connect with Dimple, send her a message on LinkedIn. How to Use LinkedIn Video for Your Law Firm AttorneyAtLawMagazine.com 15Written by Sarah Torres Photographed by Hugh Williams Attorney of the Month The Voice of Reason Mitchell M. Tarighati S ome advocates say that they felt a pas- sion for the law from a young age. They point to a specific unpleasant or unfair experience igniting within them a desire to advocate for victims or for a cause. Others are drawn to stand for justice, whether on the playground, in the classroom or in the courtroom. Mitchell Tarighati, a private mediator at ADR Services Inc. since 2017, and founding partner of Sepassi & Tarighati LLP in 2012, had a very different entryway into the law. “I wish I had an inspiring story to tell,” he says. “For me, it all started with a fireside chat with my father.” But that doesn’t mean Tarighati’s rather unique life experiences haven’t shaped his career. The Origins Born in Iran in 1976 in the shadows of an uncertain political climate, he moved with his family to Germany in 1979 due to the revolution, returning to Iran in 1981. He left again for England with his mother and brother in 1984 because of the war. In 1989, he began attending what he calls an “old-fashioned” English Preparatory school, where he excelled in rugby (captaining the team his senior year), played tennis and ultimately graduated with the highest rank among his peers, company sergeant major. “It was a military-style school that stressed discipline, work ethic and a degree of competitiveness,” Tarighati says. “While it wasn’t an edict of the school, at times it felt like we entered as boys and left as (young) men, whether by choice or by force. It was a very maturing experience.” A pivotal moment in his life came in February 1995 during a visit to England by his father, a renowned psychiatrist. Tarighati was studying Environmental Science at King’s College, London, “with little interest or success.” The topic of conversation coming back from dinner was, “What are you going to be (when you grow up)?” “I was 19 and I had no idea about my professional future,” Tarighati says. “I’ll never forget: My father was getting ready to “I distinctly remember the worry I felt in making the decision to move to the United States, by myself, and to, yet again, be a first- generation immigrant. But I stood for the possibility of doing it and making the best of it.” sleep and was taking off his socks, and at that moment he said, ‘I think you’ll make a great lawyer.’ At that time, a legal career, let alone one in the United States, was not even in the realm of possibility.” In fact, this was the first time anyone had suggested to him a career in the law. However, the idea stuck and gained traction in his mind, and six months later he was USA-bound with the proverbial one-way ticket in hand to Los Angeles, three suitcases in tow, and approximately $3,000 in his pocket. “I distinctly remember the worry I felt in making the decision to move to the United States, by myself, and to, yet again, be a first-generation immigrant,” Tarighati says. “But I stood for the possibility of doing it and making the best of it.” The seed that his father had planted was nurtured by family in Los Angeles, who helped his goals take root, but not without a few hardships along the way. “I rented a tiny one-bedroom apartment, had no car for the first year or so, and lived on a total monthly budget of less than $1,000,” he says. “Not quite a starving student, but very close!” Even though he didn’t think of becoming an attorney or a mediator in his early years, Tarighati says his “inner- AttorneyAtLawMagazine.com 17mediator” was lying dormant all along. “I either inherited or assumed the role of mediator within my family dynamics years before I did it for a living,” Tarighati says. “Peacekeeping, relaying positions and negotiating were constant themes in my family life, so maybe I was destined to become a mediator.” The Early Years Tarighati describes the ensuing years as a bit of a blur. Between 1995 and 2004, he completed his bachelor’s degree, a Juris Doctorate and an MBA, during which time he says he was either in class, studying, working or interning. “While I am sure I had fun along the way,” he says, “most of my memories of that near-decade predominantly involve things to ‘build my career.’” Tarighati had first thought that his career would be in criminal law, then while in law school in Albany, New York, he thought corporate law was his future. But ultimately, he decided that he wanted to be a litigator. So he moved back to Los Angeles in 2003, again with a one-way ticket in hand. “I hit the pavement to get as much litigation experience as possible, and I did not limit myself to the kind of cases I was working on,” he says. “For me those first few years were about going to as many hearings, drafting as many motions, and taking as many depositions as possible. Let’s just call it a self-imposed litigation boot camp.” Tarighati spent the next seven years working as a defense attorney, and since 2012, his own firm has represented both plaintiffs and insured defendants in a variety of general liability and personal injury cases. “Having a balanced law practice keeps me on my toes,” he says. “I look at a defense case that I am handling from the perspective of a plaintiff’s attorney, and I look at a plaintiff’s case from a defense attorney’s vantage point.” “I think that my clients are entitled to realistic and well-rounded analysis of their case, and my approach raises to the surface the good, the bad and the unknown about the case,” he says. “This approach and training has helped me tremendously in becoming an effective mediator, and I believe that both sides of the Bar are more receptive to me, in part, because of my background.” A True Calling While Tarighati was still paying his dues, so to speak, as a litigator, he was also attending mediations as an advocate. At first, he says, he negotiated with strict instructions from his principals, but with time he became comfortable with the process and began to use a degree of autonomy and sometimes creativity in negotiating his settlements. “It was during a mediation in 2010 to 2011 that I thought for the first time whether I can become a mediator,” he says. ATTORNEY AT LAW MAGAZINE · LOS ANGELES · VOL. 5 NO. 6 18Tarighati recalls that his confidants and mentors were quite resistant to, and apprehensive about, the notion of his becoming a mediator, let alone its being a realistic possibility. To them, his career was going better than he should have anticipated. “I was in my mid-30s, I had my own book of business, and I was prospecting imminent partnership at my firm,” he says. “While I took their insights to heart, I was sure that becoming a mediator was not a fad or a temporary detour.” “I was not burnt out nor running away from the practice,” he says. “Rather, becoming a mediator had the aroma of a passion, or a ‘true’ calling, to do something extraordinary with my career—a notion which I’d never experienced before.” After much contemplation, and with the Rocky soundtrack playing loudly in his mind, Tarighati resigned from his firm in 2012, walked away from equity partnership, and established his current firm. “Now I had the flexibility of practicing law and mediating cases, and just like before, I had to hit the pavement again to get as many mediations under my belt, and as soon as possible,” he says. “I did not fall into mediation work. I actively pursued it and planned for it, and I had to overcome a fair amount of challenges. It didn’t feel like a huge gamble at the time, though in hindsight it absolutely was.” Tarighati has observed that some mediators are evaluative, preferring to share or insert their thoughts and opinions—the what-to-dos and not-to-dos—as their go-to approach. Others are facilitative, he says, and most don’t fall under any particular category. He says he takes a different tack, what he calls a “diplomatic approach” in matching and merging his skills to form a mediation style that works for him, and most importantly, one that works for his clients. “Unless or until necessary, I try to not get myself involved too much in the mediation process,” he says, explaining that the mediation is less about him or his views, and more about the interests in play between the adversaries. That doesn’t mean that Tarighati will not give an opinion when asked, but when he does, he says, he is mindful to do so carefully because anything a mediator does or says can have serious consequences. “I am constantly framing and reframing the issues of the case, and from time to time, when messages or positions that are perceived as insulting are exchanged during a mediation, I work hard to smooth out the edges and otherwise keep the negotiations on track,” he says. “That’s what I mean by diplomatic.” “I must be the reasonable person in each room” he adds in explaining why he sometimes refers to his role as being “the voice of reason.” “If I’m viewed as being unreasonable or judgmental, or having a motive other than settlement, then I’ve become part of the dispute as opposed to being part of its resolution,” he says. “Ultimately, I aim to provide a fair process and a fair outcome. That’s my primary job as a mediator, but I never lose sight of why I am hired—to be a closer.” The Big Leagues Tarighati’s strategic and, at times, self-described over-ambitious career choices as a mediator, culminated in his being invited to join ADR Services Inc. as a private mediator in 2017. “While I’d earned a slot in the big leagues,” he says, “I like to think that I’ve remained focused on doing my utmost to settle cases and being the best mediator that I can be.” AttorneyAtLawMagazine.com 19Next >