In-House Lawyers Say Bad Tech Has Forced Office Returns: The Morning Minute
The news and analysis you need to start your day.
April 06, 2022 at 06:00 AM
6 minute read
Want to get this daily news briefing by email? Here's the sign-up.
|
WHAT WE'RE WATCHING
LACK OF BANDWIDTH - If you thought "come back to the office because we don't know how to manage you remotely" was poorly received corporate messaging, behold, a new low: "come back to the office because our tech is too outdated for you to work from home." According to a survey by contract management software company ContractWorks, most in-house lawyers aren't enthusiastic about returning to the office full time, but many legal departments have been slow to adopt the technology that would facilitate fully remote work. Despite 64% of the American lawyers reporting they don't want to go back to the office on a full-time basis, 44% of survey respondents said they've already done so. Only 19% of the respondents work under a hybrid model. Thirty percent of respondents said lack of resources at their organization prevented them from adopting the technological tools that would allow them to fully work remotely. Twenty-seven percent of the surveyed lawyers pointed to budget constraints in their own departments, while another 29% said a lack of tech literacy was slowing adoption of new tools. "The results of our research may come as a wake-up call to legal department bosses, many of whom saw their teams remain in the office throughout the pandemic. Like most sectors, there is now a real appetite among in-house lawyers in the U.S. to be able to work from home for good," Mark Rhodes, managing director of ContractWorks, told Law.com's Jessica Mach.
THIRD-PARTY CRASHERS - Like malware and computer viruses themselves, the consequences of cyberbreaches have a way of spreading in unpredictable ways. As we explore in the latest Law.com Litigation Trendspotter column, a recent ransomware attack on third-party payroll and timekeeping software has led to several wage-and-hour class actions this week against everyone from PepsiCo to The Giant Company, alleging that the hack resulted in overtime pay violations for hourly workers. As of press time Tuesday evening, there had been five lawsuits surfaced by Law.com Radar in the past two days, all stemming from the December 2021 hack of timekeeping software vendor Kronos. All of the complaints were filed by either Houston-based Parmet PC, high-profile national plaintiffs firm Morgan & Morgan or both of those firms together in various federal courts around the country, and all of them allege that hourly employees were shorted on overtime pay as a result of the Kronos breach. While plenty has been written about potential cyber liability exposure for companies whose vendors are compromised, this latest crop of litigation shows how third-party cyberbreaches can also lead to other causes of action, such as labor & employment claims. I'm interested to hear from you. What are best practices for mitigating the risks posed by third-party vendor cyberbreaches. Let me know at [email protected].
WHO GOT THE WORK?℠ - Pfizer and Pharmacia & Upjohn Co. LLC have turned to Connolly Gallagher LLP partners Arthur G. Connolly III and Alan R. Silverstein to defend in a pending patent infringement lawsuit over the delivery mechanism of Pfizer's mRNA COVID-19 vaccine. The suit was filed March 17 in Delaware District Court by McDermott Will & Emery on behalf of Alnylam Pharmaceuticals Inc. and asserts a single patent related to the use of lipid nanoparticles to deliver RNA to cells. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Colm F. Connolly, is 1:22-cv-00336, Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Pfizer Inc., et al. >>Read the complaint on Law.com Radar and check out the most recent edition of Law.com's Who Got the Work?℠ column to find out which law firms and lawyers are being brought in to handle key cases and close major deals for their clients.
SERVED OVER SERVERS - Parsons Behle & Latimer and Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe filed a breach-of-contract lawsuit Tuesday against Thomson Reuters and Thomson Reuters US in Utah District Court. The complaint was brought on behalf of SUSE LLC, a distributor of Linux software products which accuses Thomson of using over 1,300 SUSE Linux Enterprise servers over a period of years without paying subscription fees. Counsel have not yet appeared for the defendants. The case is 2:22-cv-00237, Suse v. Thomson Reuters et al. Stay up on the latest deals and litigation with the new Law.com Radar.
|
EDITOR'S PICKS
Finding Judge Misread Forum-Selection Clause, 1st Circuit Revives Former Miss Universe's Lawsuit Against Puerto Rican Retailer By Marianna Wharry |
State Appeals Court Reverses $800K Judgment Against Bar, Saying Dram Shop Statute Preempts Common Law By Allison Dunn |
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 AllWill Trump Be a Boost to Quinn Emanuel's Fortunes in China?
Pa. Judicial Nominee Advances While Trump Demands GOP Unity Against Biden Picks
4 minute readTrump's SEC Overhaul: What It Means for Big Law Capital Markets, Crypto Work
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
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