Innkeepers: A Unifying Theory of the In-House Counsel Role
Omari Scott Simmons
Wake Forest University School of Law
James D. Dinnage
Villanova University Law School
March 24, 2010
Seton Hall Law Review, Vol. 41, p. 77, 2011
Wake Forest Univ. Legal Studies Paper No. 1577907
The emergence of the in-house counsel role, or “innkeepers” in the terminology of this Article, is one of the most significant shifts in the legal profession over the past half century and this development inevitably has implications for legal scholars, policymakers, and practitioners. A concise, all encompassing, theory of the in-house counsel role has proven elusive for legal scholars, as well as a comprehensive analysis of in-house counsel impact on business enterprises. In order to fill this significant gap in the legal literature, this Article articulates a unifying theory of in-house counsel value creation positing that the strategic in-house counsel role, embodying consistent interaction with corporate operations and actors (e.g., management and employees), enables the modern corporation to significantly enhance its creation of value. Paradoxically, this theory further illustrates that being an innkeeper (i.e., an embedded employee with a single client) is not a vice, as often assumed by many legal observers, but rather is a virtue promoting more pragmatic resolutions to a range of corporate issues. The strategic tasks that in-house counsel undertake add value, when completed by competent professionals with well-honed ethical sensibilities, because they are fundamentally different from the largely tactical role of outside law firms. Beyond providing a novel descriptive assessment of the in-house counsel role, our theory has significant implications for corporate governance, the legal profession, and legal education.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 76
Keywords: general counsel, in-house counsel, corporate governance, corporations, business, transaction, compliance, ethics, legal professionAccepted Paper Series
Date posted: March 26, 2010 ; Last revised: September 19, 2011
© 2013 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo5 in 0.313 seconds