Why Law Firms May Be Better Prepared for Another Recession: The Morning Minute
The news and analysis you need to start your day.
July 06, 2022 at 06:00 AM
5 minute read
Want to get this daily news briefing by email? Here's the sign-up.
|
WHAT WE'RE WATCHING
RECESSION READY? - After two years of record-setting financial results, Big Law is facing headwinds as the economy teeters toward a potential downturn. But law firms may be better prepared to weather a recession this time around. Analysts told Law.com's Andrew Maloney that the economic tumult of the late 2000s put focus on liquidity, and law firms generally responded by fortifying their balance sheets. Now, firms are significantly less leveraged than they were before the Great Recession, said Michael McKenney, a senior client adviser and business development officer at Citi Private Bank Law Firm Group. Their balance sheets are stronger, the quality of the funding is higher, and to the extent they need credit, they have more guaranteed now than before, according to McKenney. Meanwhile, the pandemic also offered an important learning experience for firms. Having survived and thrived during such a monumental shift in 2020 has arguably made firms and their people more resilient for challenges in 2022 and beyond. "You're not going to fix a recession by working from home," said Kay Hoppe, a legal recruiter based in Chicago. "But the notion of survival, agility — it seems to me [firms] were empowered by having that experience."
NEW SCHOOL - As students return to law schools next month, they will be facing a very different landscape, both personally and professionally, now that the U.S. Supreme Court has overturned Roe v. Wade and demonstrated a shifting attitude toward constitutional issues. As a result, Law.com's Christine Charnosky reports, law schools will be forced to juggle supporting students emotionally while teaching new laws. Meanwhile, some schools also may have to reckon with their future enrollment numbers taking a hit because of the high court's decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization. "Some colleagues across the country are organizing Zoom calls about how we can teach reproductive rights post-Dobbs," Sital Kalantry, associate dean for international and graduate programs at Seattle University School of Law, told Charnosky. "We are talking about where we go from here," she said, "How do we teach the subject now?" Law school leaders, Kalantry said, are also asking, "How can we help students cope with this decision—what does the decision say, what does it mean, what are the implications?"
ON THE RADAR - Ben & Jerry's filed a breach-of-contract lawsuit Tuesday against its parent company Unilever to block an agreement that would restore the sale of its ice cream products in the West Bank. The lawsuit, filed by Ahmad, Zavitsanos & Mensing and Cohen & Gresser, seeks an injunction preventing Unilever's U.S. subsidiary Conopco Inc. from selling Ben & Jerry's products in the West Bank through a third-party distributor in contravention of a 2021 decision by Ben & Jerry's Independent Board of Directors. The suit was prompted by a June 29 announcement from Unilever that it has sold its Ben & Jerry's business interests in Israel to the owner of its Israel-based licensee. Counsel have not yet appeared for the defendant. The case is 1:22-cv-05681, Ben & Jerry's Homemade, Inc. v. Conopco, Inc. Stay up on the latest deals and litigation with the new Law.com Radar.
|
EDITOR'S PICKS
West Virginia Judge Rules Against Drug Distributors in Opioid Case By Amanda Bronstad |
NCCU Appoints Interim Dean Following Browne Lewis' Death By Christine Charnosky |
Plaintiffs Awarded $1.2M in Attorney Fees Under Settlement of Insurance Fraud Class Action Suit By Marianna Wharry |
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 ‘Deep Sadness’ to Little Concern, Gaetz’s Nomination Draws Sharp Reaction From Lawyers
7 minute read‘What’s Up With Morgan & Morgan?’ Law, Advertising and a Calculated Rise
10 minute readConservative Boutiques That Backed Trump Reap Their Rewards
What Will Happen to the Nominees in Florida's Southern and Middle Districts?
3 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Immigration Under the Trump Administration: Five Things to Expect in the First 90 Days
- 2'Radical Left Judges'?: Trump Demands GOP Unity Against Biden's Judicial Picks
- 3NY District Attorneys Are Still No Fans of Revamped Misconduct Watchdog
- 4ICC Issues Arrest Warrants for Israel's Prime Minister Over Alleged War Crimes in Gaza
- 5Attorney Responds to Outten & Golden Managing Partner's Letter on Dropped Client
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