Paul Weiss Restricts Travel, Orrick Postpones Partner Retreat Over Coronavirus Fears
Major law firms are postponing or canceling events in the U.S. and further limiting international travel as the virus spreads.
February 26, 2020 at 02:36 PM
4 minute read
Echoing moves by their corporate clients, major national and international law firms are altering travel plans and reevaluating events because of coronavirus outbreaks in several countries, including canceling firm meetings in the United States.
Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe has told partners it will not be holding a planned retreat in Texas due to coronavirus concerns, multiple sources said. The partnership retreat had been scheduled for this week in San Antonio. The retreat has been postponed and will be held at a later date, the firm confirmed, but declined to comment further.
Norton Rose Fulbright also made adjustments to its partners meeting in Austin this week because of the spreading illness, excluding partners from certain locations including China from traveling to the event, firm chair Andrew Robinson said.
Duane Morris canceled its Asia partners meeting, which was scheduled to take place within the next month, a source within the firm said, but it still expects to hold a planned firmwide partner meeting in Atlanta next month.
Baker Botts is still planning to hold a partner conference in Scottsdale, Arizona, next week, but partners from Asian offices will not be attending, a firm spokesperson said. The firm has also prohibited travel to mainland China for all personnel, and it is limiting travel to Hong Kong—those trips must be for essential business purposes only and must be approved by management.
And according to an internal memo obtained by Law.com, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison is suspending non-essential business travel to and from Mainland China, Hong Kong, South Korea, Japan and Italy.
The Jan. 25 memo also noted that anyone who is traveling to or from those countries, or who is in close contact with someone traveling to or from those places, is required to work from home for at least 14 days after traveling and may only return to the office if they are symptom-free.
The latest law firms' responses to the quickly spreading virus come after other international firms have taken measures abroad to limit transmission. In Shanghai, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan and Squire Patton Boggs are paying for employees to take taxis rather than public transport if it is necessary for them to travel to the office, Law.com reported late last month.
As of early February, Dentons temporarily closed its office in Wuhan, China, where the virus originated, while firms including Reed Smith and Orrick advised all staff to avoid traveling to mainland China.
A major event for the intellectual property community has been put on hold as well. The International Trademark Association announced earlier this month that its annual meeting, which had been scheduled for April 25 to 29 in Singapore, has been postponed. It is planning to reschedule the 2020 meeting for May or June somewhere in the U.S., and to hold the annual meeting in Singapore sometime in 2022.
Michael Delikat, an employment partner at Orrick, said his firm is no longer holding its partnership retreat in San Antonio this week, and partners will instead meet through video conference. This parallels the advice that lawyers are giving firm clients—to avoid large group meetings that require travel from different locations, even domestically, said Delikat, who is based in New York.
"This is not something we came up with on our own. This is the advice we are giving to clients," Delikat said. "The focus has shifted to preventing transmission."
He said clients, similarly, are canceling management retreats, banning all travel and rethinking other large gatherings of employees, except for mission-critical travel. Companies are no longer just limiting travel to China, he said, mentioning the possibility of employees, during a work trip, possibly coming in contact with travelers who may have been exposed to coronavirus in a number of countries.
"The No. 1 goal is to protect employees," he said.
Brenda Jeffreys contributed to this report.
Read More
As Coronavirus Spreads, Legal Industry Shifts into Crisis Management Mode
Notes from China: Keep Calm and Carry On
International Law Firms Respond to the Coronavirus Outbreak
Dentons Vacates Wuhan Office as Law Firms Restrict Travel to Mainland China
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllAs Profits Rise, Law Firms Likely to Make More AI Investments in 2025
'So Many Firms' Have Yet to Announce Associate Bonuses, Underlining Big Law's Uneven Approach
5 minute readVersatility and 'Fearlessness' Drive Sullivan & Cromwell's Corporate Practice
5 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250