A Call to Action
Pro bono work is no longer just an option--it's our responsibility.
August 31, 2007 at 08:00 PM
4 minute read
A few weeks ago one of our antitrust lawyers walked into my office with a big smile and an energetic gait. He had just returned from court, fresh from a decisive victory and happy to share his story.
Interestingly, his case that day had nothing to do with antitrust law. He and another Microsoft lawyer had just won a pro bono case, securing political asylum for a young refugee from Eritrea. Before fleeing that country, their client had been beaten and imprisoned for five months. Why? He had merely gone to a prison to inquire about his father, who had been taken away by the government after speaking out on behalf of political dissidents.
The victory opened the door to a new and better life for this client. It was the type of legal service that was meaningful, rewarding and representative of one of the legal profession's greatest traditions.
The nation's bar associations and leading law firms have long championed the responsibility to provide legal representation for those who cannot afford it. Many in-house counsel have done their share as well–but the need for pro bono service remains great. The time has come for corporate legal departments to work together and better contribute to fulfilling this important responsibility.
Legal departments have matured into large, diversified and sophisticated providers of legal services. We now attract some of the best and brightest lawyers in our profession. In short, we are in a position to do more than ever before to contribute pro bono resources.
Pro bono work also enriches the experiences we offer our staff lawyers and rounds out the departments in which we work by connecting lawyers with new people, issues and the broader community.
There's no doubt that the creation of a strong pro bono program requires careful thought. At Microsoft we've been working on this for more than five years, and we're still learning important lessons.
For example, we've found it useful to strike a balance between diverse opportunities and a “signature program” that makes sense for our company. In the latter area we've focused on political asylum cases for refugees, especially refugee children–a fitting cause, given our own internationally diverse employee population. This signature program also builds on the expertise of our in-house immigration legal group, which is one of the largest such groups in corporate America.
We've also found it helpful to partner with other legal providers. We founded a program that pools resources from local law firms, the ABA and others to coordinate our legal services for refugees.
The good news is that there is now a national vehicle through which we can all advance corporate pro bono work. With the support of the ACC and the Pro Bono Institute, a number of chief legal officers last year launched the Corporate Pro Bono Challenge.
The Challenge is a simple, voluntary statement of commitment to pro bono service. It sets aspirational goals to encourage and promote pro bono service throughout a company's legal department, using a metric–breadth of participation–that is easy to track and meaningful to in-house lawyers.
Already 56 legal departments have joined the Challenge. Our hope is to top the century mark before the end of the year.
At Microsoft I continue to be excited by the pro bono opportunities our lawyers pursue. Given our situation, it's not surprising that we have one of the country's largest in-house antitrust groups. What is surprising, perhaps, is that each of our antitrust lawyers decided to take on a pro bono refugee case this year. They're just as proud of their refugee work as they are of their antitrust counsel. And I couldn't be prouder of them for this dedication.
If you're interested in learning more about what pro bono work can do for your legal department, check out the information at www.corporateprobono.org. Working together, we can all contribute more to this important cause.
Brad Smith is the senior VP, general ?? 1/2 counsel and corporate secretary of Microsoft Corp.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
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 AllSo You Want to Be a Tech Lawyer? Consider Product Counseling
How Qualcomm’s General Counsel Is Championing Diversity in Innovation
6 minute readRepublican FTC Commissioner: 'The Time for Rulemaking by the Biden-Harris FTC Is Over'
4 minute readFTC Lauds Withdrawal of Proposed Indiana Hospitals Merger After Leaning on State Regulators
4 minute readTrending Stories
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