How Bar Exam Uncertainty Impacts Law Firms; Some Firms Reverse Coronavirus Cuts; The Fight Over Curbing COVID Liability: The Morning Minute
The news you need to start your day.
July 23, 2020 at 06:00 AM
4 minute read
Want to get this daily news briefing by email? Here's the sign-up.
|
WHAT WE'RE WATCHING
NO FIRM PLANS - It's not just law grads riding the wild roller coaster that is the July 2020 bar exam—law firms are on there too, and everyone's getting a little queasy. David Thomas, Brenda Sapino Jeffreys and Christine Simmons report that while some firms have already committed to pushing back start dates and implementing study leaves when Class of 2020 graduates are finally able to take the bar exam, many others are still trying to get a handle on a plan as states continue fumblin', stumblin', bumblin' through attempts to develop COVID-19 contingencies.
LIVE AND UNCUT - A number of law firms are still staring down the prospect of additional COVID-19 cutbacks, but a few have weathered the storm well enough to be able to roll back some of the austerity measures they implemented early on in the pandemic. Lowenstein Sandler, Cozen O'Connor, Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner and Munck Wilson Mandela have reversed at least some of their compensation cuts, in some instances thanks to stronger-than-expected demand and financial performance, Samantha Stokes reports.
CORONAVIRUS AND LAWSUIT-ITIS - It looks like U.S. businesses could develop COVID-19 immunity long before the rest of us do. As Amanda Bronstad reports in this week's edition of her "Critical Mass" briefing, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky, is set to unveil the next COVID-19 relief package, a key element of which is a proposed five-year liability shield for all businesses. The Chamber of Commerce and 21 Republican governors have written letters to Congress in support of immunity legislation, but Democrats, led by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Shumer, D-New York, and the plaintiffs bar are, of course, pushing back hard.
|
EDITOR'S PICKS
Mask Rematch Set Between Georgia Governor, Atlanta Mayor By Katheryn Tucker
Holland & Knight Sued Over Botched Wire Transfer By Dylan Jackson
$117.5M Yahoo Breach Settlement Was Reasonable, But Legal Work Was 'Not Novel,' California Federal Judge Says By Amanda Bronstad
Apple Co-Founder Steve Wozniak Sues YouTube Over Cryptocurrency Scheme By Alaina Lancaster
|
WHILE YOU WERE SLEEPING
ZOOMED OUT - Remember back when video calls seemed novel? Exotic even? Yeah, that's over now. Law.com International recently reached out to U.K. attorneys to ask whether web calls had worn out their welcome. The consensus? Heck yes. While attorneys initially appreciated the ability to maintain a level of personal contact that would have otherwise been lost during lockdown, FaceTime fatigue has officially set in. Seven lawyers told Hannah Roberts that they had been on a single video call for four hours or more, with many saying that they had to go on a second video call almost immediately after hanging up, all of which has considerably amped up their exhaustion.
|
WHAT YOU SAID
"I know we will face criticism from established attorneys who think we shouldn't be granted a license without taking the bar. I can see, from their perspective, how it might seem that we are getting off easy. But the reality is that we were told, 'There's a global pandemic. People in your community are dying. There's a social uprising. And you need to study for the bar anyway.' And you know what? We did. In a lot of ways, we're more qualified than any class before or after us in terms of emotional intelligence. We have learned how to overcome adversity."
— Kelly Gismondi, a May graduate of Loyola University New Orleans School of Law, on why Louisiana's just-adopted diploma privilege should not create a stigma for the Class of 2020.
➤➤ Sign up here to receive the Morning Minute straight to your inbox.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllFrom 'Confusing Labyrinth' to Speeding 'Roller Coaster': Uncertainty Reigns in Title IX as Litigators Await Second Trump Admin
6 minute readNew Class Action Points to Fears Over Privacy, Abortions and Fertility
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Judge Denies Sean Combs Third Bail Bid, Citing Community Safety
- 2Republican FTC Commissioner: 'The Time for Rulemaking by the Biden-Harris FTC Is Over'
- 3NY Appellate Panel Cites Student's Disciplinary History While Sending Negligence Claim Against School District to Trial
- 4A Meta DIG and Its Nvidia Implications
- 5Deception or Coercion? California Supreme Court Grants Review in Jailhouse Confession Case
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250