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

WHAT WE'RE WATCHING

TRYING TO KEEP UP - Talk to most litigators and they'll tell you they're thrilled to be back in the swing of regularly trying cases after an agonizing few years in a state of pandemic-induced stasis. But what trial lawyers in Philadelphia are experiencing at the moment is indicative of just how tough it can be to get caught up after reopening the valve on the case pipeline. As Law.com's Aleeza Furman reports, the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas' push to clear backlogged cases has meant crammed schedules for lawyers, with some attorneys saying they're booked for back-to-back or even overlapping trial dates through 2024. "We're trying to take the soonest trial dates as soon as we get them and worry about how to cover it when we get there," Joseph Messa Jr., founder of personal injury firm Messa & Associates, said, estimating he has an average of five trials a month booked through the summer of 2024—a pace he said started approximately eight months ago.

LAYOFFS STAVED OFF? -  Billing rate increases continue to cause agita for clients (and partners in certain practice areas), but it turns out they could also be saving jobs as we head into 2024. During a period of relatively flat demand, rate hikes continue to drive Big Law revenue, as law firms on average rose rates by 7.9% by Q3, the highest mark since at least the Great Recession period. That's according to a nine-month survey by Wells Fargo's Legal Specialty Group, which echoed other recent findings that a healthy 2023 will depend "more than usual on a successful year-end collections push," but added that billing rates and revenue gains have arguably helped firms stave off more cuts next year and emboldened leaders to keep their foot on the accelerator when it comes to rates. "I don't think the term 'layoff' will come into play," Owen Burman, senior consultant and managing director with the Wells Fargo Legal Specialty Group, told Law.com's Andrew Maloney.

ON THE RADAR - John Goldmark and MaryAnn T. Almeida of Davis Wright Tremaine have stepped in to defend Amazon.com in a pending antitrust class action. The action, filed Oct. 3 in Washington Western District Court by Cotchett, Pitre & McCarthy, alleges that Amazon has coerced and induced its third party sellers and wholesale suppliers to enter into anti-competitive agreements on price and has improperly bundled its services, resulting in higher, unavoidable fee. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge John H. Chun, is 2:23-cv-01523, Hopper v. Amazon.com Inc 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