Facts & Figures: 5 sets of newsworthy data
An inside look at the numbers that count
May 11, 2012 at 05:35 AM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Shrinking Spending
In-house lawyers foresee an increase in class action litigation this year, but they don't expect the trend to break the bank. In fact, many companies intend to spend less money defending class action cases, according to a new study by law firm Carlton Fields.
Respondents plan to accomplish this apparently incongruous goal by relying more heavily on alternative fee agreements.
5.4 Class action matters that the average legal department will handle in 2012, up from 4.4 in 2011
$645,000 Amount that firms plan to spend per class action in 2012, down 17 percent from last year
$1.89 billion Projected 2012 U.S. legal spend on class actions, the lowest total since 2006
Public Perceptions
It isn't as unpopular as the executive or legislative branches, but the Supreme Court evidently hasn't escaped the American public's disdain for government. Public opinion of the court is at its lowest point in 25 years, according to a new survey from the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press.
52% Respondents with a favorable opinion of the Supreme Court, down from 58 percent in 2010
29% Respondents with an unfavorable view of the court, one point off 2005's all-time high
56% Republicans with favorable views of the court, down from 70 percent in 2009
52% Democrats with favorable views of the court, down from 63 percent in 2009
52% Independents with favorable views of the court, down from 64 percent in 2009
Tempting Technology
Judge Peck's recent decision in Da Silva Moore v. Publicis Groupe et al. has put technology-assisted review (TAR) in the spotlight. Now a recently released study by the eDJ Group shows that many law firms are interested in pursuing or increasing TAR use, specifically predictive coding.
36.8% Law firms that currently use predictive coding
35.8% Firms that do not use predictive coding, but plan to start within the next year
87.9% Businesses already using predictive coding that plan to increase their usage
68.4% Respondents who think predictive coding is defensible
34% Respondents who would be comfortable using predictive coding without linear review (though 48 percent would be uneasy)
This content has been archived.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 All
Ballooning Workloads, Dearth of Advancement Opportunities Prime In-House Attorneys to Pull Exit Hatch
The Reason a GC Abruptly Departs May Not Be What You Think
Trending Stories
- 1How Legal Aid and Tech Collaboration Can Bridge the Justice Gap
- 2The Rise of AI-Generated Deepfakes: A New Cybersecurity Threat for Law Firms
- 3Litigation Leaders: Labaton’s Eric Belfi on Running Case Investigation, Analysis and Evaluation In-House
- 4Spoliation Sanctions
- 5At FDA, Flavored Vape Products Go Up In Smoke
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
