BusinessReport.com

Gordon Pugh has forgotten more about business law than some will ever learn.

Pugh joined Breazeale, Sachse & Wilson as an associate in 1965 and became a partner in 1968, specializing in banking law, commercial litigation and employment discrimination law as business in Baton Rouge became more diversified.

Soft-spoken and articulate, Pugh has many stories to tell—people, places and how the Baton Rouge business community came together piece by piece. Pugh remembers when the only specialization attorneys could achieve was in tax law. He remembers the contractors that first began construction on the interstate system in Baton Rouge in the 1960s. And he remembers how the rise of unions caused increases in litigation for the construction and chemical industries in the ’70s and ’80s.

1. What are some of the larger changes to business law practice that you’ve seen in your career?

When I started practicing, business was corporations, partnerships and individual practitioners. Business law was business governance and business’s relationships with their employees and their customers, how they dealt with customers in terms of contracts arriving, settling issues or litigation. There was very little governmental regulation in the late ’50s and early ’60s on either the federal or state level. There was very little specialization at that time. In the late ’60s, ’70s and ’80s, federal and state governments started adding regulations over businesses, and that’s how specialization started. It’s changed completely since I began practicing 44 years ago. You used to have general practitioners, and now you have specializations in every field.

2. Is specialization a good thing?

It’s a necessary thing. There’s no way a lawyer could know the details of both tax law and health care law, for example. There’s just no way that you could keep up with all of those details.

3. In-house counsels are relatively new among corporations and large businesses. Are they a natural progression from specialization?

Not necessarily. There are areas of the law that, as corporations get bigger, they’ll certainly want to handle in house, and that’s just a natural part of growth in their business. There will always be things that in-house counsel will not handle. I don’t think any inside counsel would be in a position to handle everything. Routine matters, they would handle, but not the larger cases in specialized fields.

4. Large law firms across the nation have laid off employees or slowed recruitment because of the economic recession. How has that impacted Breazeale, Sachse & Wilson?

Our firm has never laid off anyone, ever, and I hope we never do. We’ve been very conservative in how we operate and in planning our growth. I hope we will continue to be that way.

5. Do you have any advice for someone fresh out of law school and in the job market right now?

My advice would be to look at the law firms that they are interviewing with and look at their history. Be choosy, as choosy as you can be. It’s a difficult time for students, but in Baton Rouge we’ve been fortunate. I don’t know any Baton Rouge firms that have laid people off or reduced salaries. I’ve read about other places in the country, but not here.

6. Where do you stand on attorney advertising?

When I started practicing law, there was no such thing. It was taboo. Now, the Supreme Court regulates it and all firms advertise. There’s no question about it. The question is how do you do about it within the regulations that the Supreme Court lays down. Every firm in this city advertises, including this one.

7. Where do you think business law is headed?

Business law has a very bright future. The more regulation you have, the better it’s going to be for business law. All of [President Barack] Obama’s plans are going to call for more regulation. I think that’s unfortunate in many respects for businesses, but there are reforms for health care, energy, environmental issues, consumer issues and finance. Those five areas are going to impact business greatly. That’s going to mean more legal issues.

8. Do you think that more regulation is good in terms of your clients’ well-being?

I’ve got to say that the more federal regulation, the more legal issues will come up. The more legal issues come up, the more clients are going to have to turn to lawyers to resolve those issues. That’s just the truth.

9. If a law firm gives legal advice to a client, such as Stanford Group, which engaged in activities that are not aboveboard, is that firm held liable for the advice given?

You always give advice to clients on what to do in accordance with the law. If clients don’t take your advice and you know that they are violating the law, then you don’t represent them. You don’t represent clients that you know are violating the law. I wouldn’t. If I was representing a client that was not taking my advice and I knew in my conscience that they were violating the law, I would not represent them, period.

10. You’ve practiced law for 44 years. What made you decide to stay with law for your whole career?

The reason I love law is that I love working with people. I like helping them resolve issues. That’s it.