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

WHAT WE'RE WATCHING

PRO BONO PROBLEMS - By all key measures, Big Law firms did significantly less pro bono work in 2021 than in 2020, a development likely related to the dramatic spike in client demand that led to record industry revenue for the year as lawyers concentrated on billable hours, Law.com's Brenda Sapino Jeffreys reports. According to The American Lawyer's 2022 Pro Bono Scorecard, lawyers at 117 Am Law 200 firms reported a total of 4.59 million pro bono hours in 2021, down 15.8% from 5.45 million hours in 2020. Lawyers averaged 54.5 pro bono hours in 2021, a 12.9% decline from 62.6 hours the year before. Additionally, fewer than half of the lawyers, 48.8%, completed at least 20 pro bono hours in 2021, down from 51.7% in 2020. While strong client demand in 2021 may have affected the number of pro bono hours, other factors could apply as well. Suzanne Turner, a Dechert partner in Washington, D.C., who is chair of the pro bono practice, said general fatigue related to the pandemic and a frenetic lateral hiring market that led to a "churn" of lawyers at firms may also have depressed pro bono hours. "It's hard to keep traction going when, indeed, people are coming and going all the time and people are trying to settle into their firms," she said.

ROUNDUP WINDS DOWN - Bayer's "five-point plan" to resolve future Roundup lawsuits is now down to four points, Law.com's Amanda Bronstad reports. On July 12, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit reversed a Georgia federal judge's decision tossing a Roundup case on federal preemption grounds.  That case, had it been upheld, would have created a potential circuit split on whether federal law preempted claims that Bayer's Monsanto failed to warn about cancer risks in Roundup. Bayer, which has paid nearly $10 billion to settle Roundup lawsuits but faces at least 30,000 more cases, plus future claims, had hoped a potential ruling in its favor would entice the U.S. Supreme Court to intervene. Bayer tried to get federal preemption before the U.S. Supreme Court in two other Roundup cases, including one in which the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled against Monsanto. But the Supreme Court, on June 21 and June 27, denied review of those cases. A Supreme Court ruling on federal preemption was one of the five points Bayer outlined last year as a way to resolve its Roundup litigation. The recent appeals court decisions "really throw a wrench in the five-point plan," said David Noll, a professor at Rutgers Law School.

WHO GOT THE WORK?℠ - Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner partner Allison C. Eckstrom has stepped in to defend Walgreen Co. and Walgreen Pharmacy Services Midwest in a pending employment class action. The case, filed May 31 in California Northern District Court by Aiman-Smith & Marcy, claims that Walgreens requires employees to wear clothing items in certain colors and styles but fails to fully reimburse employees for the purchase of new or replacement items. Additionally, the suit alleges that the defendants fail to timely pay wages owed upon resignation or termination. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jon S. Tigar, is 4:22-cv-03170, Naro et al v. Walgreen Co et al. >> Read the filing 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.

ON THE RADAR - Dickinson Wright filed a copyright and trademark infringement lawsuit against Toys 'R' Us on Monday in New Jersey District Court. The complaint, filed on behalf of toy manufacturer Ontel Products, accuses Toys 'R' Us of selling bendable tracks and toy cars under Ontel's 'Magic Tracks' mark. Counsel have not yet appeared for the defendants. The case is 2:22-cv-04618, Ontel Products Corp. v. Toys 'R' Us Inc. et al. Stay up on the latest deals and litigation with the new Law.com Radar. 

EDITOR'S PICKS