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

WHAT WE'RE WATCHING

GETTING TO KNOW ALL ABOUT YOU - For law firms, having a deep knowledge of your current and potential clients is beneficial for a whole bunch of reasons, not least of which is avoiding a major headache should any of those clients turn out to be fraudsters. Case in point: Pittsburgh-based Eckert Seamans Cherin & Mellot, which is in the midst of negotiating a $45 million settlement to make up for a former attorney's alleged role in helping a merchant cash loan business and an investment services firm defraud investors of nearly $500 million. Unfortunately, as Law.com's Amanda O'Brien reports, smaller firms often lack the resources and systems to effectively and efficiently conduct background research on clients. As a result, due diligence methods vary from online management systems to simply asking around the office about a client's reputation.

DANGEROUS DISCLOSURE? - A federal judge's ruling this week that ordered Covington & Burling to disclose some client names to the SEC has alarmed some legal analysts, including those who say it could erode attorney-client relations and may be used by government agencies to expand the use of administrative subpoenas. U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta of the District of Columbia's ruling Monday could have lasting consequences in "eroding the principle that the attorney-client relationship is confidential," Susan Carle, professor of law at American University Washington College of Law, told Law.com's Abigail Adcox. It could also deter companies or organizations from seeking outside counsel in the first place, Carle added. The Association of Corporate Counsel, which filed an amicus brief in opposition to the SEC's subpoena, said in a statement that the "court's decision threatens to expand the use of administrative subpoenas," noting that 300 federal agencies have this subpoena power.

ON THE RADAR - Lawyers at Clark Hill on Thursday removed a product liability lawsuit against Dick's Sporting Goods and Summit Treestands to Indiana Southern District Court. The suit, filed by Wilson Kehoe Winingham on behalf of Patricia Gibson and Paul Gibson, alleges that Paul Gibson injured himself while using the defendants' Summit Viper Elite SD tree stand for deer hunting; according to the complaint, Gibson's foot became caught in the stand, causing him to fall from the tree and break his ankle. The case is 1:23-cv-01317, Gibson et al. v. Summit Treestands LLC et al. Stay up on the latest state and federal litigation, as well as the latest corporate deals, with Law.com Radar.   

EDITOR'S PICKS