Welcome to Original Jurisdiction, the latest legal publication by me, David Lat. You can learn more about Original Jurisdiction by reading its About page, and you can email me at davidlat@substack.com. This is a reader-supported publication; you can subscribe by clicking here.
On the evening of Wednesday, February 4, 2026, Brad Karp abruptly resigned as chairman of Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison, the powerhouse law firm that he had led since 2008. This was huge news in the legal world, and it was covered by, well, everyone—including The New York Times (gift link), The Wall Street Journal (gift link), Bloomberg, Reuters, The American Lawyer, Law360, and Above the Law.
I’m working on a longer piece about this news, for which I’m doing some reporting. I might not be the fastest on breaking news—but when I do cover something, I try to add value, in terms of original reporting, in-depth analysis, or both.
While I work on my longer piece, here are my answers to some Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) about Brad Karp’s resignation as chair.
Why did Brad Karp step down as chairman of Paul Weiss?
Karp’s departure from firm leadership came in the wake of new revelations about his ties to the late Jeffrey Epstein, the disgraced financier and convicted sex offender. Last Friday, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) released three million Epstein-related documents—which included extensive, friendly email correspondence between Karp and Epstein (discussed in the last edition of Judicial Notice).
Paul Weiss announced the news in a press release issued yesterday at 8:30 p.m. (ET). The firm’s statement contains the following comment from Karp, a cryptic but clear reference to L’Affaire Epstein (emphasis added): “Leading Paul, Weiss for the past 18 years has been the honor of my professional life. Recent reporting has created a distraction and has placed a focus on me that is not in the best interests of the firm.”
His departure doesn’t have anything to do with how the firm has fared under his watch. Since taking over as chair in 2008, Karp has presided over tremendous growth at Paul Weiss, which today boasts more than 1,200 lawyers and $2.6 billion in revenue (in 2024; look for 2025 to be higher, since it was reportedly a record year for the firm).
In 2008, when Karp took over, Paul Weiss was #9 in the Am Law 100 profits-per-partner ranking and #13 in the Vault 100 prestige ranking. In 2026, the firm is #6 in profits per equity partner and #8 in prestige. These gains might not seem like a big deal—but as someone who has followed these rankings obsessively for a quarter-century, I can tell you that they are. Why? The higher you get in the rankings, the harder it is to gain ground, as your competition gets fiercer.
Brad Karp, who’s 66, will remain at Paul Weiss as a litigation partner. A 1984 graduate of Harvard Law School, he has spent his entire four-decade career at the firm, aside from a clerkship on the Second Circuit with Judge Irving Kaufman (most well-known for presiding over the espionage trial of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, back when he was a judge on the Southern District of New York).
So what exactly was in Karp’s emails with Epstein?
When Karp’s name appeared in earlier Epstein emails, released in December by the U.S. House Oversight Committee, Paul Weiss issued the following statement: “Paul, Weiss was retained by Leon Black, then the CEO of the firm’s longtime client Apollo, to negotiate a series of fee disputes with Jeffrey Epstein that spanned several years. The firm was adverse to Epstein, and at no point did Paul, Weiss, or Brad Karp ever represent him.” But the emails released last Friday by the DOJ suggest a friendly rather than adversarial relationship between the two men (who met through Black):
Karp asked for Epstein’s help in obtaining a job for his son on a Woody Allen movie production, and Karp and Epstein also corresponded about members of the Karp family attending screenings of Woody Allen films.
Karp attended dinner at Epstein’s home. After one such event, he emailed Epstein, “I can’t thank you enough for including me in an evening I’ll never forget. It was truly ‘once in a lifetime’ in every way, though I hope to be invited again. You are an extraordinary host—and your home . . .!!!” After Epstein responded that Karp would be “always welcome” and “invited often” in the future, Karp replied, “You’re amazing…. and thank you!”
As noted by The Times, “The emails released by the government also show that Mr. Karp and Mr. Epstein discussed how to deal with a former mistress of Mr. Black’s and her demands for money. In one email, Mr. Epstein suggested to Mr. Karp that he recommend that Mr. Black retain a firm to surveil the former mistress. In another email, Mr. Epstein raised questions about the woman’s visa status. It is unclear if Mr. Karp and Mr. Black acted on Mr. Epstein’s suggestions.”
As reported by Bloomberg Law, the latest emails show that Karp “reviewed a 2019 draft court filing arguing that [Epstein’s] decade-old plea deal should not be reopened.” As you might recall, Epstein reached a non-prosecution agreement with the federal government that was widely viewed as a “sweetheart deal,” in which the feds agreed not to prosecute him—for numerous offenses, involving multiple victims—if he pleaded guilty in Florida state court to one count of felony solicitation of prostitution and one count of procuring a person under 18 for prostitution.
In his March 2019 email, Karp praised the draft filing as being “in great shape” and “overwhelmingly persuasive.” In the end, the position advocated by Epstein’s lawyers prevailed, and the plea deal was not reopened. A few months later, in July 2019, Epstein was arrested on new federal charges—and it was while imprisoned on those charges that he died, in what has officially been deemed a suicide.
In a statement about the latest Epstein emails, Paul Weiss said, “Mr. Karp never witnessed or participated in any misconduct. Mr. Karp attended two group dinners in New York City and had a small number of social interactions by email, all of which he regrets.”1
Who’s succeeding Karp as chair of Paul Weiss?
Last night’s press release from the firm was actually not about Brad Karp stepping down, but about his successor: Scott Barshay, former chair of Paul Weiss’s corporate department. Barshay is one of the nation’s top M&A lawyers, with a book of business in the nine figures, and his 2016 move from Cravath to Paul Weiss is widely credited with taking PW’s transactional practice to the next level.
Barshay might very well be, as one respondent told Chambers, “the very best M&A lawyer” in America. But even if clients love him, some colleagues find him challenging to work for. See, e.g., this Reddit thread—but I’m not relying on Reddit for this. I’ve heard that Barshay can be a tough boss dating all the way back to his time at Cravath (which is why, in a 2016 story about his move to PW, I wrote that some at Cravath were “not devastated” by his departure because he’s such a “complex” individual).
Speaking of Reddit, a Redditor wrote, “Saw Barshay in Le Bernardin tonight. Dude was blitzed and just said ‘life is good, gentleman.’ Genuinely out of a movie.”
Fun fact: Scott Barshay has an identical twin brother, Lawrence Barshay, who’s a partner at Fried Frank. But the two are said to be not on speaking terms. [UPDATE (7:43 p.m.): From Lawrence Barshay: “The notion that Scott and I aren’t on speaking terms is untrue and ridiculous. I congratulated him as soon as I heard the news of his elevation to chair of Paul Weiss. I am very proud of my brother and all he has accomplished.”]
(I did reach out to Scott Barshay, to give him the opportunity to comment on any of the items above—his book of business, what he’s like to work for, the alleged Le Bernardin sighting, and his relationship with his brother—but I didn’t hear back from him as of publication time. If I do hear from him, I’ll update this post.)
[UPDATE (10:32 p.m.): For more on Scott Barshay, see Meghan Tribe and Justin Henry’s Bloomberg Law piece, “Karp Ouster Tests Dealmaker Barshay’s Ability to Lead Paul Weiss.” Rick Rule, former co-chair of antitrust at the firm, described Barshay as “very business-oriented and focused on the bottom line,” as well as someone who “doesn’t suffer fools gladly.” Another source said that Barshay, who has the largest book of business at Paul Weiss, has a polarizing reputation among his colleagues.]
How exactly did Karp’s departure come about?
In a juicy article titled “A Revolt Inside Paul Weiss Over the Epstein Files Took Down Brad Karp,” Cara Lombardo, Lauren Thomas, and Erin Mulvaney reported as follows, for The Wall Street Journal (gift link):
On Wednesday, an exclusive group of 10 or so Paul Weiss partners met unbeknown to their longtime chairman, Brad Karp, to discuss whether he could continue to lead the law firm.
The partners, who manage the firm and refer to themselves as the “Deciding Group,” were grappling with the release of new emails suggesting Karp had a more extensive relationship with Jeffrey Epstein than they realized, including in the months before the convicted sex offender’s death….
By the end of that meeting, people familiar with the matter say the group agreed to replace Karp with Scott Barshay, a top rainmaker Karp brought in a decade ago to help transform the firm into an M&A powerhouse.
It fell to Barshay to break the news. He met with Karp in person late Wednesday and told him the group had concluded the Epstein ties were too much of a distraction and that he needed to resign from his role as chairman, the people said. Barshay, 60 years old, also told Karp he would be succeeding him.
It’s interesting that Barshay was willing to take over as chair because, as noted by the WSJ, he “had long told partners at the firm he never wanted the role of chairman.” And a reluctance to serve as chair makes sense to me: my guess is that Barshay’s first love is doing deals, and that would be his highest and best use at Paul Weiss. So don’t be surprised if he names some deputy chair or other second in command, who will handle the leadership and administrative responsibilities he might not love.
Could the firm’s controversial settlement with the Trump administration—which Karp both negotiated and then defended, in a firm-wide email—have contributed to his leaving leadership?
Unlikely. First, the new chair is Scott Barshay, who was a strong advocate for the deal within the firm (per Michael Schmidt of The New York Times). Second, the agreement was announced almost a year ago, in March 2025; if Karp’s partners wanted him out of leadership as a result of the settlement, he would have left long ago.
So those are the basic facts on Brad Karp stepping aside as chair of Paul Weiss. I’ll have more to come, based on some reporting, very soon.
[UPDATE (2/11/2026, 12:25 p.m.): For a much closer look at Brad Karp’s departure and the evolution of Paul Weiss as a firm, see Paul Weiss’s Firm Culture Fell Victim To The Vampire Rule.]
[UPDATE (2/13/2026, 4:21 p.m.): For a deep dive into the Epstein-Karp correspondence, see 5 Takeaways From Brad Karp’s Emails With Jeffrey Epstein.]
Earlier:
Please note the correction I appended to the latest edition of Judicial Notice: I removed a reference to Karp asking for Epstein’s assistance in getting into the exclusive Augusta Golf Club. Although The Financial Times reported on a text in which Epstein appears to seek help from former White House strategist Steve Bannon in getting Karp into the club, there’s no indication that Karp requested this—and Karp told me that he did not.
And it’s entirely possible that Epstein would have tried to get Karp into Augusta, even in the absence of a request by Karp. As noted by Goldman Sachs spokesperson Tony Fratto, “It’s well known that Epstein often offered unsolicited favors and gifts to his many business contacts.” See, e.g., the lavish gifts Epstein bestowed upon Kathryn Ruemmler, chief legal officer and general counsel of Goldman—some of them requested by her, but some not.
Thanks for reading Original Jurisdiction, and thanks to my paid subscribers for making this publication possible. Subscribers get (1) access to Judicial Notice, my time-saving weekly roundup of the most notable news in the legal world; (2) additional stories reserved for paid subscribers; (3) transcripts of podcast interviews; and (4) the ability to comment on posts. You can email me at davidlat@substack.com with questions or comments, and you can share this post or subscribe using the buttons below.
Thanks David. It’s astonishing the degree to which a criminal creep like Epstein could infiltrate high levels of business and politics as well as of our profession. Brad Karp, with whom I had brief dealings, always struck me as a straightforward, hard nosed and brilliant lawyer as well as an uber successful law firm leader. He apparently felt the need to suck up to Epstein. What kind of bubble do elites live in that this was deemed an acceptable way to conduct oneself? And it wasn’t just Karp, obviously. Ruemmler, Clinton and others. An epidemic of hubris, I suppose.
Just to make sure I understand, are you saying that there's no evidence that Trump used the files as leverage against Karp?