“I am here today not because I want to be. I am terrified,” Christine Blasey Ford said in prepared testimony released on Wednesday evening.

I can only imagine. Whether you think she is telling the truth, is “mixed-up” or is lying, you have to appreciate that she's upended her life and is now walking into the lion's den.

Up front, she makes an important point. “It is not my responsibility to determine whether Mr. Kavanaugh deserves to sit on the Supreme Court. My responsibility is to tell the truth.”

There's room for legitimate discussion about how to weigh the alleged actions of a drunk teenager three decades ago—that's up to the Senate. I hope they take this obligation seriously.

And for all the hand-wringing about how no man will ever be fit for public service if we go around disqualifying people based on some previously unreported incident in high school, let's not forget: This is no ordinary public service job. We're not talking about a congressman or a cabinet secretary.

This is a lifetime appointment. This is the person who will change the balance of the court and affect the lives of Americans for decades to come in ways both small and profound. And if we the people don't like his decisions? Too bad.

It calls to mind a Bible verse—judge not, lest you be judged. Brett Kavanaugh is nominated for the highest court in the land, so yes, we get to judge him too. It's a fair exchange before handing him such power.

What Blasey Ford and other accusers have to say deserves the most careful consideration.

|

The Good, the Bad and the Uber

It's been a good news/bad news week for Uber, which seems to get caught up in more than its share of notable legal fights.

On Wednesday, the ride sharing company agreed to pay a record $148 million in state and local penalties to settle allegations that it intentionally hid a data breach in 2016 rather than 'fessing up and reporting it.

But on Tuesday, Uber scored a big win before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The appeals court upheld the enforceability of Uber's arbitration agreements with drivers and decertified a class of hundreds of thousands of current and former drivers who said they were misclassified as independent contractors.

Never a dull day at work, right Tony West?

Data breach cases are now starting to live up to predictions that they'd be The Next Big Thing in litigation.

In June of 2017, Anthem reached was then the biggest ever settlement, shelling out $115 million to settle claims related to a massive 2015 cyberattack that affected 78.8 million customers.

Uber's $148 million payout is a new high. The AGsS from all 50 states plus the District of Columbia teamed up against Uber, and seemed particularly indignant about the delay in reporting the breach. Uber secretly paid a ransom of $100,000 to the hackers to destroy the information—a move that cost in-house lawyer Craig Clark and his boss, cybersecurity chief Joe Sullivan their jobs.

“This is one of the most egregious cases we've ever seen in terms of notification; a yearlong delay is just inexcusable,” Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan told The Associated Press. “And we're not going to put up with companies, Uber or any other company, completely ignoring our laws that require notification of data breaches.”

It's an important message, and one the AGs are well-positioned to deliver. Other data breach suits have been stymied when judges have found plaintiffs couldn't show cognizable injury after their personal information was compromised.

As for Uber's good news—the big Ninth Circuit win—give credit to Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher's Theodore Boutrous, Theane Evangelis, and Joshua Lipshutz.

They led the team in O'Connor v. Uber Technologies Inc. A unanimous three-judge panel reversed the district court's class certification orders, orders denying Uber's motions to compel arbitration, and orders regulating Uber's communications with drivers under Rule 23(d).

The ruling follows a previous pro-Uber decision by the appeals court in Mohamed v. Uber Technologies Inc. reversing the same district court's orders denying Uber's motions to compel arbitration.

|

Shout-Out: Sidley Scores $142M Arbitration Award

On Wednesday, a federal judge in Texas confirmed an award of $141.7 million to Kemper Corporate Servic

es in its successful arbitration proceeding against Computer Sciences Corp. (now a subsidiary of DXC Technology).

The fight stemmed from the failure of a large-scale software implementation project. Kemper says it spent six years working with CSC on a new property and casualty policy administration and billing system that never came to fruition.

In November, an arbitrator found that CSC had breached a contract for the delivery of policy administration and billing software and awarded Kemper direct damages of $84.3 million, prejudgment interest and $7.2 million for costs and expenses associated with the arbitration.

Sidley partner Paul E. Veith led the team for Kemper.

CSC, which is represented by Proskauer Rose and Dykema Gossett, said it will appeal, but has already tendered a payment of $35.7 million to Kemper.

“There has been a frenzy to come up with something—anything, no matter how far-fetched or odious—that will block a vote on my nomination.”

Mitchell, a veteran sex-crimes prosecutor in the Maricopa County Attorney's Office in Phoenix, directs an office that focus on sex crimes and domestic violence.

U.S. District Judge Beth Labson Freeman found that the defendants had “knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently” signed off on three rounds of waivers allowing for Orrick's continued representation.

She interviewed jurors, reiterated jury instructions, ordered more oral arguments and replaced a juror with an alternate, to no avail.

Pennsylvania defense lawyers note that if you fail to take responsibility and express remorse, the parole board takes note.

The case, brought more than seven years ago, concerned advice Cadwalader gave on an investment bank's fee during a proxy fight at Six Flags Inc.

In case you missed it…

When a solo practitioner called a “menace to the profession” by the Ninth Circuit has a higher Avvo score than Ted Olson, you know there are some flaws in the system.