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

WHAT WE'RE WATCHING

GO TIME? - One of the main reasons law firms tend to put the "suck" in succession planning is that having to broach the topic of retirement with senior partners can range from awkward to downright unpleasant. With that in mind, you might assume the solution to this problem lies in mandatory retirement policies. But many firms have found out the hard way that such policies can actually create more partnership tensions and even fractures in some client relationships. For this reason, industry analysts told Law.com's Patrick Smith, the concept of mandatory retirement has itself been retired by many firms. Still, regardless of whether a formal policy is in place, firms that procrastinate when it comes to succession planning—or attempt to avoid it completely—do everyone a disservice, experts said. "It's really hard to step back when you're a senior lawyer. Most of us are not built that way," Ira Coleman, chairman of McDermott Will & Emery, said. "Firms with really good cultures help everyone understand that this transition is in the best interest of the clients and is best for the institution. If there is a lot of trust and love in the partnership, things can work. Otherwise, watch out. We want to be the kind of firm where this happens organically, but sometimes everyone needs a little reminder."

FACING SANCTIONS - One week before facing a potentially damaging sanctions hearing, Facebook agreed to settle privacy class actions brought over the Cambridge Analytica scandal. As Law.com's Amanda Bronstad reports, lawyers on both sides of the multidistrict litigation said in a Friday notice that they had "reached a settlement in principle." The notice gave no details about the settlement, including the amount. Lawyers asked to halt the litigation for 60 days "to finalize a written settlement agreement" and U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria of the Northern District of California granted the stay. Facebook and its owner, Meta Platforms, are no doubt eager to put the matter behind them—but Chhabra indicated he's not quite ready to forgive and forget about what he previously described as "dilatory discovery conduct" on the part of the defendant and its counsel at Gibson Dunn. The judge clarified that the sanctions hearing, scheduled for this Friday, would still go forward.

WHO GOT THE WORK?℠ - Latham & Watkins partner Melanie M. Blunschi, vice chair of the firm's retail and consumer products group, has entered an appearance for Abbott Laboratories in a pending class action over the company's labeling of Similac infant formulas. The suit, brought by Fitzgerald Joseph LLP, claims that Abbott overstates how many bottles a container of the formula will make once prepped. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey S. White, is 3:22-cv-03930, Green v. Abbott Laboratories. >> 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 - Ironshore Specialty Insurance, a subsidiary of Liberty Mutual, filed an insurance coverage lawsuit against the County of San Bernardino on Monday in California Central District Court. The suit, filed by Clyde & Co., seeks a declaration that Ironshore has no duty to defend, indemnify or reimburse the county in connection with six underlying malicious prosecution lawsuits which the county settled for $69 million. Counsel have not yet appeared for the defendant. The case is 5:22-cv-01524, Ironshore Specialty Insurance Co. v. County of San Bernardino. Stay up on the latest deals and litigation with the new Law.com Radar. 

EDITOR'S PICKS