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

WHAT WE'RE WATCHING

GOODWIN'S LOSSES - A fuller picture of Goodwin's layoffs last week is beginning to emerge, including estimates of how many people were affected and which positions were targeted, Law.com's Jessie Yount reports. Goodwin's rapid hiring in the past few years also is becoming more clear. Indeed, legal industry sources, both inside and outside the firm, described the balancing act Goodwin faced in recent years: meeting capacity for the good of the partnership and profits, without alienating associates when an overcorrection was necessary. Goodwin cut 5% of its associates, professional track attorneys, paralegals, science advisors and operations team members last Thursday, according to a memo viewed by The American Lawyer. Ultimately, the layoffs call into question how law firms can and should respond to ebbs and flows in client demand, given that associate and partner preferences aren't always aligned.

CHECK YOUR PRIVILEGE -  At least three justices seemed wary of creating a test that would expand attorney-client privilege for communications that have both a legal and business purpose, Law.com's Avalon Zoppo reports. A law firm that advises on tax matters is asking the U.S. Supreme Court to adopt a test that would require courts to ask if a significant purpose of a document is to give legal advice, and if so, deem it confidential. But Justices Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson were concerned the test is overly broad and would keep most dual-purpose communications secret. Currently, many courts use a so-called primary purpose test, which requires them to grant attorney-client privilege if a communication is mainly legal in nature. "This is a big ask, and it's an ask that's not particularly consistent with the underlying nature of what the attorney-client privilege is supposed to be protecting," Kagan said.

ON THE RADAR - HSN Inc., HSNi, Inc. and other defendants were slapped with an employment lawsuit Monday in Pennsylvania Eastern District Court. The suit was brought by Cohen Fineman LLC on behalf of Martino Cartier, a host and hair brand ambassador at HSN. The complaint contends that Cartier was wrongfully terminated due to false allegations against him that he made unwanted physical contact with multiple team members and exhibited 'signs of being intoxicated.' Counsel have not yet appeared for the defendants. The case is 2:23-cv-00087, Cartier v. Qurate Retail Group, Inc. et al. Stay up on the latest deals and litigation with the new Law.com Radar. 

EDITOR'S PICKS