A Mayer Brown Supreme Court Duo Leaps to McDermott

Michael Kimberly and Paul Hughes first met 13 years ago at the Yale Law School Supreme Court Advocacy Clinic. They were hired by Mayer Brown on the same day in 2009 and became partners at the firm in 2015.

Today, they are jumping together to join McDermott Will & Emery. It’s a blow for Mayer Brown and a coup for McDermott as it grows a Supreme Court and appellate practice with two young up-and-comers.

McDermott invited the duo to join the firm and lead the practice in Washington, and Kimberly and Hughes wouldn’t have wanted it any other way.

“We’ve practiced law, effectively now, for 13 years together and I couldn’t imagine having a better partner or practicing law without Michael,” said Hughes, 36, in an interview with NLJ.

Kimberly, 38, said: “As we were both contemplating a transition away from Mayer Brown, we both early on made the commitment to do it together.”

Ira Coleman, chairman of McDermott, said in a statement, “Paul and Michael don’t just deliver, they invest deeply in every case and work passionately in pursuit of their clients’ objectives. Our new colleagues are among the most elite appellate advocates in the country today, and we’re proud they have chosen McDermott as their new home.”

Both Hughes and Kimberly have five Supreme Court arguments under their belts, as well as more than 200 appellate matters each in federal and state courts.

In March when Hughes prepared to argue in the high-profile regulatory case Kisor v. Wilkie, and Kimberly prepared for the gerrymander case Lamone v. Benisek, they served as “second chair” for each other. At the time, Kimberly said in an interview with NLJ that “we could have swapped” and argued each other’s cases.

The two are still awaiting decisions in those cases as well as Manhattan Community Access v. Halleck, a “state actor” dispute. Last week, Kimberly won a unanimous decision in another case he argued: Smith v. Berryhill, which involved Social Security.

And they already have a case lined up for the court’s next term: Kansas v. Garcia, an immigration dispute in which they represent three individuals convicted on state charges of identity theft for using the Social Security numbers of others.

“We very much plan to hit the ground running with one Supreme Court argument in the fall, and we hope more to follow,” Hughes said.

Hughes and Kimberly praised Mayer Brown and said it was difficult to leave behind the “great professional collaborators” of the firm.

Until now, McDermott has not had a Supreme Court practice as such, although partner M. Miller Baker has worked on Supreme Court cases as co-chairman of its appellate practice group. Baker’s nomination to become a judge on the U.S. Court of International Trade is pending before the Senate. Baker reported earning $587,000 at McDermott in 2017, and $557,000 in 2016, according to a financial disclosure that was submitted as part of the confirmation process.

Hughes said he envisions “a robust appellate practice that touches on a variety of areas, including civil rights, immigration work, criminal defense, as well as a full panoply of business cases affecting the interests of our clients.”

The duo will continue as co-directors of the Yale Supreme Court clinic, along with Mayer Brown partners Andrew Pincus and Charles Rothfeld, and former New York Times Supreme Court correspondent Linda Greenhouse, a senior research scholar at Yale.

Asked about Hughes and Kimberly, Greenhouse said, “Teaching with Paul and Michael these past eight or nine years, it’s been a thrill watching them both come into their own as major Supreme Court players.”

Read more:

Shanmugam Exits Williams & Connolly to Launch Paul Weiss Appeals Practice

Lisa Blatt Rejoins Williams & Connolly, This Time as Supreme Court Practice Head

Roberts Straddles the Middle as Gorsuch Questions Federal Regulatory Power

Don’t Overturn Key Regulatory Rulings, US Solicitor Tells Supreme Court