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

WHAT WE'RE WATCHING

THOUGHT BUBBLE - Through the magic of the internet, anyone can be a recording artist, a published novelist, a filmmaker or even, apparently, a legal industry "thought leader." The trouble is: with so many leaders, it can be incredibly hard to follow. As Law.com's Dan Packel reports, a recent analysis of Am Law 200 firms by U.K.-based marketing tech firm Passle found that, collectively, these firms generated more than 70,000 pieces of online insight in 2020. That makes some sense, of course, given how desperate clients were for guidance at the start of the pandemic. At some point, however, that initial rush of insight and practical advice seems to have degraded into a largely unhelpful infodump. "To throw a bunch of content out there and see what sticks is not what I would call a sound marketing strategy," said Guy Alvarez, the founder and chief engagement officer of digital marketing firm Good2BSocial. So, what would a better approach look like? Alvarez said the key is to put oneself in the shoes of the client, or the prospect, to figure out their biggest needs. Pritchard, meanwhile, advised looking for a unique, but useful, angle. Existing and prospective clients "want content that keys them into parts of the situation they might not have thought of," she said. "You don't have to be first in the inbox. Clients will look past the flurry of emails to ones they want to read."

I OWE IT ALL TO YOU -  Speaking of leaders and followers… In April, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in Hunstein v. Preferred Collection and Management Services that a plaintiff had standing to claim that a credit agency violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act's ban on third-party disclosure when it shared debtor information with a printing company. Plaintiffs lawyers rejoiced, defense lawyers (and their debt collector clients) recoiled. "The industry went crazy," Cindy Salvo, a New Jersey lawyer who represents defendants in FDCPA suits, told Law.com's Charles Toutant. "Everyone said, 'Oh my god, what do we do now?' Then people started calming down a little. It's the Eleventh Circuit. It's not binding in other places. No mandate has been issued. The whole collection industry is sitting back and saying, 'Let's see what happens.'" Still, the claims keep coming, even as some defense lawyers doubt they'll ultimately be successful. Litigation following the lead of Hunstein is abundant because it's no secret that nearly all collection agencies contract with outside companies to print and mail their letters, said John Lynch of Troutman Pepper Hamilton Sanders in Virginia Beach, another lawyer representing defendants in FDCPA suits. "In our world, once a bad opinion comes out, the copycat attorneys come out nationally," Lynch said.

TEXAS V. EEOC - The State of Texas sued U.S. Attorney General Merrick B. Garland and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission on Monday in Texas Northern District Court. The suit arises from the commission's recent interpretation of employers' obligations toward preventing discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity. The complaint contends that guidance released by the commission in June was issued without authority and misstates civil rights law regarding employee dress requirements, pronoun usage and access to restrooms and other facilities. The case is 2:21-cv-00194, State of Texas v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission et al. Stay up on the latest deals and litigation with the new Law.com Radar.  

EDITOR'S PICKS

WHILE YOU WERE SLEEPING

IS THE BLOOM OFF THE ROSE? - When 15 partners left Norton Rose Fulbright's Australian office in 2020, recently-installed local managing partner Alison Deitz said the firm was simply "rightsizing" itself and increasing profits. But, as Law.com International's Christopher Niesche reports, the exodus has continued into 2021, with six more partners leaving so far this year. While Dietz attributed the continuous stream of departures mostly to lawyers seeking other opportunities or a better fit, several of those who have left cited a host of other reasons—including autocratic leadership, low pay and poor profitability, plus a concern that none of this will change. Law.com International spoke to seven former partners at the firm who outlined their reasons for leaving. All insisted on anonymity, with some saying their departures had been acrimonious and they were concerned about provoking legal action from the firm. "The global branding's great, but what happens behind the reception desk is disgraceful," one former partner said. The firm, however, has rejected the characterization that leadership has been secretive and autocratic. And in a statement to Law.com International, Deitz, who assumed the role of managing partner in July of last year, said that over the past year she has set a new tone at the firm.

WHAT YOU SAID

"Bad companies with bad balance sheets have basically been able to take advantage of free money to punt to the future a reckoning that they will eventually have to face."