COVID: Innovation in the Face of Adversity
It has been over six months since most of the region shut down due to COVID-19. For many of us, the middle of March of 2020 is a period…
October 14, 2020 at 12:45 PM
7 minute read
It has been over six months since most of the region shut down due to COVID-19. For many of us, the middle of March of 2020 is a period that is etched in our memories because that is when many law firms transitioned to a total work from home arrangement. Anecdotally, we know that many colleagues have had great experiences, while others have struggled to try to adjust to this transition. We believe it is the right time to look back at the past few months to understand what we learned, what we need to do right going forward, and how the pandemic may alter the legal profession in the future.
The impact of shutting down physical offices had an immediate and prolific effect on our lives. One of the most obvious changes was adjusting to a commute-free workday. For some of us, this likely meant gaining a large chunk of our day back. But some of us experienced the somewhat unexpected effect of working longer hours in the time previously occupied by commuting. For those of us without homeschooling demands or other shifting responsibilities during the pandemic, having more time to bill was a rare positive glimmer in this otherwise dark and trying time. However, having more time to bill is only useful if the workloads remained the same. Unfortunately, many of us have had difficult conversations with clients or co-workers about projects being slowed down, budgets being tightened or matters being outright canceled. Work may begin to pick up as we all better understand the impact of the pandemic and clients feel more comfortable taking on new projects, but the impact on billable hours will undoubtedly lead to tough decisions at the end of the year. In addition to juggling many roles during our time at home, we have also had to endure many frustrating technology issues and quickly adapt to an entire new set of etiquette parameters that govern video conferences. While many of us became accustomed to using remote platforms such as Zoom, regular use has revealed glaring technological limitations.
This content has been archived.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
© 2025 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 AllCommonwealth Court Overturns Award of Damages Assessed Against Landlord on Claims of Unlawful Discrimination
6 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Products Liability: The Absence of Other Similar Claims—a Defense or a Misleading Effort to Sway a Jury?
- 2529 Accounts Are Not Your Divorce Piggybank
- 3Meta Hires Litigation Strategy Chief, Tapping King & Spalding Partner Who Was Senior DOJ Official in First Trump Term
- 4Courts Beginning to Set Standards for Evidence Relying upon Artificial Intelligence
- 5First-Degree Murder Charge May Not Fit Mangione Case
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