Want to get this daily news briefing by email? Here's the sign-up.

WHAT WE'RE WATCHING

STAYING HOME - Someday, when we're all working for our alien overlords using drone technology to mine uranium on distant planets, we'll look back and laugh at the whole "office vs. remote" debate. But today is not that day. As Law.com's Rhys Dipshan writes in this week's Law.com Barometer newsletter, there's little consensus—and a fair share of heated disagreements—regarding whether the legal industry could and, perhaps more importantly, should continue with remote work flexibility post-pandemic. The past year has gone surprisingly smoothly in terms of remaining productive outside the traditional office, especially given how rapidly the transformation was forced to occur. But maintaining that level of productivity in the long run, while also paying attention to things like professional development, client service and corporate culture in a remote setting is going to require a more complicated calculus. As Dipshan writes: "Going remote was the easy part. Learning to live with it is another story." To receive the Law.com Barometer directly to your inbox each week, click here.

BETTER SAFE THAN SORRY - It's starting to feel like maybe the pandemic didn't magically disappear over Memorial Day weekend after all. As we explore in this week's Law.com Litigation Trendspotter column, lagging vaccination rates in some areas of the country, coupled with growing concerns around the highly contagious Delta variant, have spurred some courts to reinstate COVID-19 protocols they had hoped to leave behind just a few weeks ago. Mask mandates are back in some courthouses, while other courts are preparing to require vaccinations or regular COVID testing for judges and staff. Before we dive in, I'm interested to hear what you think: do you envision the courts in your jurisdiction reinstituting COVID-19 protocols like mask mandates if they haven't already? To the extent that they've begun to move back toward in-person proceedings recently, should courts again start leaning more heavily on virtual proceedings heading into the fall? Do you think requiring vaccinations or COVID testing for judges and court staff is a good idea? Let me know at [email protected].

UNCLEAN HANDS? - Neal, Gerber & Eisenberg filed a breach-of-contract lawsuit Thursday in Illinois Northern District Court on behalf of GFRB LLC. The complaint accuses Worthy Promotional Products of failing to pay over $1.6 million for hand sanitizer and other cleaning products ordered amid demand due to COVID-19. Counsel have not yet appeared for the defendant. The case is 1:21-cv-04051, GFRB LLC v. Worthy Promotional Products, LLC. Stay up on the latest deals and litigation with the new Law.com Radar.  

EDITOR'S PICKS

WHILE YOU WERE SLEEPING

STATE OF DIVERSITY - Weightmans, Gateley and Pinsent Masons are among the top 10 firms with the highest proportion of U.K. lawyers and partners who attended state school (i.e. government-funded school, as opposed to private school), according to Law.com International research. Data collected from diversity and inclusion surveys from over 40 firms placed Weightmans at the top of two social mobility rankings, Law.com International's Meganne Tillay reports. The firm disclosed it had 66% of its U.K. partners and 73.5% of its U.K. lawyers of all career levels who had attended state school, placing it first in both top 10 rankings for partners and for all-level lawyers. Gateley came second with also 66% of its U.K. partners and 71% of all its U.K. lawyers reporting they had not attended an independent school. Pinsent Masons came third in the partnership ranking with 65.2%, and fourth in the second ranking with 67% of all its lawyers stating they had attended a state school.

WHAT YOU SAID

"Accept the awkwardness."