Author: TSA Press

Ed.
note:
Welcome
to
our
daily
feature,

Quote
of
the
Day.

Change
is
always
good
for
the
government
relations
business,
and
this
will
be
no
different.
We
expect
a
very
aggressive
first
100
days,
both
in
the
administration
and
in
Congress,
particularly
if
Republicans
maintain
control
of
the
House.

—

Will
Moschella,
co-chair
of
Brownstein
Hyatt
Farber
Schreck’s
government
relations
department,
in
comments
given
to
the

American
Lawyer
on
the
likely
influx
of
work
his
practice
group
may
see
as
a
result
of
Donald
Trump
reclaiming
the
presidency.
“I
think,
early
on,
you’re
going
to
see
an
incredibly
fast-moving
regulatory
reform
agenda
and
in
a
number
of
different
spots,”
Moschella
added.
“You
saw
what
they
talked
about
during
the
campaign,
particularly
around
energy
and
anything
impacting
inflation.”

---

Staci
Zaretsky is
a
senior
editor
at
Above
the
Law,
where
she’s
worked
since
2011.
She’d
love
to
hear
from
you,
so
please
feel
free
to

email
her
with
any
tips,
questions,
comments,
or
critiques.
You
can
follow
her
on

X/Twitter
and

Threads
or
connect
with
her
on

LinkedIn.

A
hands-on
approach
to
learning
is
one
of
the
best
ways
to
become
competent
in
a
subject.
The
dream
would
be
for
law
school
to
produce
students
capable
of
practicing
as
soon
as
they
cross
the
stage,
but
most
states
have
a
long
way
to
go
before
diploma
privilege.
That
said,
we
are
seeing
a
growing
number
of
states
experiment
with
experiential
learning
as
a
path
to
practice,
and
Utah
could
be
the
next
up.
From

Reuters:

Utah
is
forging
ahead
with
a
proposal
to
allow
law
graduates
to
become
licensed
without
taking
the
bar
exam,
following
the
lead
of
a
handful
of
other
states
that
have
adopted
alternative
licensing
pathways
in
recent
years.

The
Utah
Supreme
Court
on
Monday
released
a
plan
to
allow
graduates
of
American
Bar
Association-accredited
law
schools
to
practice
in
the
state
after
completing
240
hours
of
practice
under
the
supervision
of
an
experienced
attorney,
along
with
other
requirements.
Law
graduates
could
still
opt
to
sit
for
the
bar
exam.

The
great
thing
about
the
proposed
plan
is
that
it
increases
opportunities
rather
than
switching
to
one
end-all,
be-all
minting
process.
Three
cheers
for
the
aspiring
lawyers
who
know
their
stuff
and
can
do
the
work
but
fight
bouts
of
test-specific
performance
anxiety!

Utah’s
Supreme
Court
is
holding
a
public
comment
period
that
will
run
until
December
19th.
Make
your
voice
heard!

No
Bar
Exam?
Utah
Considers
It.
[Reuters]

Earlier:

Is
The
NextGen
Bar
Really
Next
Up?

---

Chris
Williams
became
a
social
media
manager
and
assistant
editor
for
Above
the
Law
in
June
2021.
Prior
to
joining
the
staff,
he
moonlighted
as
a
minor
Memelord™
in
the
Facebook
group Law
School
Memes
for
Edgy
T14s.
 He
endured
Missouri
long
enough
to
graduate
from
Washington
University
in
St.
Louis
School
of
Law.
He
is
a
former
boatbuilder
who
cannot
swim, a
published
author
on
critical
race
theory,
philosophy,
and
humor,
and
has
a
love
for
cycling
that
occasionally
annoys
his
peers.
You
can
reach
him
by
email
at [email protected] and
by
tweet
at @WritesForRent.

Sammy
Alito
openly
defies
the
Constitution
with

European
knighthood.
Chicago
Law
tapes
classes
but
isn’t
interested
in
letting
students
actually

use
those
recordings.

Students
are,
unsurprisingly,
pissed.
Professor
Richard
Epstein
brags
about
replacing
scientists
with
judges.
Yes,
the
same
guy
who
said

COVID
would
only
kill
500
people
and
got
the
first
Trump
administration
sold
on
the
idea.
And
mark
your
calendars
for
the
lawyer
movie
from
Hallmark’s
holiday
season.

My
deadline
for
this
column
is
midnight
on
election
night.
As
I
write
this,
I
don’t
know
how
the
election
is
going
to
turn
out
(though
you
can
probably
guess
my
preference
considering
that
one
of
the
candidates

talks
about
shooting
journalists).

I
do
know
that
on
November
6,
and
in
the
days
that
follow,
the
stock
market
is
either
going
to
go
up
or
go
down,
and
a
lot
of
people
are
going
to
be
attributing
it
to
the
election
outcome.
Don’t
buy
it.

If
you
follow
this
column
at
all,
you
have
probably
already
read

my
thoughts
about
a
president’s
impact,
or
lack
thereof,
on
the
stock
market.
Sure,
the
policies
of
a
presidential
administration
can,
over
time,
have
some
sort
of
an
effect
on
stock
market
returns.

Yet,
most
stock
prices
do
not
react
instantaneously
to
election
results.
In
case
you
haven’t
noticed,
politicians
lie
a
lot.
Even
the
honest
ones
frequently
over-promise
and
under-deliver,
stymied
by
checks
and
balances
embedded
throughout
all
three
branches
of
government.
Traders
cannot
react
much
to
what
a
newly
elected
politician
has
said
he
or
she
is
going
to
do,
because
all
too
often
it
does
not
actually
get
done.

When
there
is
some
level
of
certainty
about
a
president’s
ability
to
effectuate
a
certain
policy
—
tariffs,
for
instance,

can
be
unilaterally
imposed
by
a
president
so
long
as
he
or
she
can
declare
that
the
targeted
import
poses
some
vague
link
to
national
security
—
there
remains
so
much
nuance
in
what
actually
gets
implemented
as
to
make
election-week
prognostications
functionally
useless
in
terms
of
trading
equities.
What
will
the
exact
tariff
amounts
be?
To
which
products
will
tariffs
apply?
How
punitive
will
the
tariffs
be
toward
our
rivals
and
how
lenient
will
they
be
toward
our
friends?
Beyond
some
very
blunt
assumptions
in
limited
industries,
it
is
impossible
to
make
meaningful
market-wide
assessments
before
seeing
the
details
in
writing.

Like
the
weather,
the
economy
as
expressed
in
one
metric
through
the
stock
market
is
a
chaotic
system.
We
can
get
a
pretty
good
idea
of
what
the
weather
is
doing
in
our
immediate
vicinity
just
by
looking
around.
We
can
know
what
the
weather
was
doing
at
a
given
time
elsewhere
by
combing
through
the
data
after-the-fact.
Hell,
we
can
even
predict
the
weather
quite
accurately
several
days
into
the
future.
Still,
anyone
who
says
he
knows
exactly
what
the
weather
is
going
to
look
like
on
a
given
day
a
year
into
the
future
is
an
obvious
charlatan.

When
Donald
Trump
was
president,

the
stock
market
had
a
rough
2018
and
a
huge
(albeit
temporary)
drop
related
to
the
pandemic,
but
it
performed
great
overall.
With
Joe
Biden
in
the
White
House
(and
with
Kamala
Harris
as
his
vice
president)
the
stock
market
has
been
on
an
almost
uninterrupted
tear
for
some
time,

repeatedly
setting
new
record
highs.
Although
Trump
has
said
some
things
about
a
second
term
that
terrify
economists,
and
Harris
has
proposed
a
few
policies
herself
that
might
not
work
out
so
well
for
the
equities
markets,
at
least,
based
on
past
experience,
neither
candidate
can
be
assumed
to
be
an
absolute
disaster
for
the
stock
market
on
Day
One.

As
the
election
results
come
in,
markets
will
be
open
and
traders
will
be
working.
However,
whether
your
candidate
wins
or
loses,
you
really
should
not
blame
the
election
for
whatever
direction
the
ticker
symbols
are
headed
in
the
coming
days.

Now,
there
is
one
huge
individual
exception
to
this
general
market-wide
approach:
shares
of
Trump
Media
&
Technology
Group
trading
under
the
ticker
symbol
DJT.
Since
the
company
hardly
makes
any
money
at
all
and
bleeds
capital,

conventional
wisdom
is
that
DJT
shares
will
crater
if
Harris
wins
the
election
given
that
there
will
be
no
obvious
way
for
a
defeated
Trump
to
direct
funds
to
the
company
he
remains
the
majority
shareholder
of.
One
can
imagine
a
scenario
in
which
swathes
of
Trump
supporters,
enraged
by
another
“stolen”
election,
flock
to
Trump
Media’s
Truth
Social
platform
as
a
form
of
protest,
thereby
bolstering
its
bottom
line.
Yet,
the
MAGA
faithful
have
not
been
exactly
unenthused
for
the
past
few
years
and
nonetheless
failed
to
embrace
Truth
Social.
The
DJT
price
will
react
to
the
election,
and
odds
are
good
that
it
will
be
a
rout
if
Harris
wins
or
a
surge
if
Trump
wins.

For
the
most
part,
you
should
probably
ignore
the
stock
market
for
a
few
days
as
you
digest
the
election
results.
The
stock
market
is
not
going
to
be
dramatically
affected
by
the
election
results,
and
we
are
all
going
to
have
more
important
things
to
worry
about
this
week.

---

Jonathan
Wolf
is
a
civil
litigator
and
author
of Your
Debt-Free
JD


(affiliate
link).
He
has
taught
legal
writing,
written
for
a
wide
variety
of
publications,
and
made
it
both
his
business
and
his
pleasure
to
be
financially
and
scientifically
literate.
Any
views
he
expresses
are
probably
pure
gold,
but
are
nonetheless
solely
his
own
and
should
not
be
attributed
to
any
organization
with
which
he
is
affiliated.
He
wouldn’t
want
to
share
the
credit
anyway.
He
can
be
reached
at [email protected].

When
I
wrote
“Repeat
After
Me,
‘Partnership
Without
Equity
Is
Not
A
Partnership’”
back
in
2019,
my
complaint
with
the
growing
and
shady
effort
to
recast
what
were
once
senior
associates
and
counsel
as
non-equity
“partners”
was
that
it
was
a
dubious
title
trading
short-term
vanity
for
cheap.
Little
did
I
realize
there
was
an

even
cheaper
way
to
sell
out.

Worse,
the
nonequity
partner
route
gets
used
as
a
dumping
ground
for
diverse
candidates
that
the
firm
can
sell
to
clients
and
the
public
as
“partners”
without
diluting
the
existing
partnership’s
equity.

But
I
never
realized
the
absolute
worst
of
it:
some
firms
treat
these
employees
as
partners
for
all
the
partnership
expenses
without
any
of
the
corresponding
revenue.

Justin
Henry’s
piece
in
Bloomberg
Law
News
is

horrifying:

The
meteoric
growth
in
law
firm
nonequity
partners
often
comes
with
a
side
effect
attorneys
dislike:
thousands
of
dollars
in
health
and
tax
costs
without
the
large
profit
payouts
full
partners
get.

Several
Big
Law
firms
treat
nonequity
lawyers
as
full
partners
for
tax
purposes.
That
means
they
saddle
them
with
Medicare,
Social
Security
and
health
levies
the
lawyers
didn’t
face
as
associates.

Wait,
what?
That’s
so,
so
much
worse
than
anything
I’d
imagined.
It
was
bad
enough
slapping
a
misleading
title
on
lawyers
to
cover
for
the
firm’s
unwillingness
to
share
the
wealth.
But
then
to
tax
them
as
partners
to
increase
the
pot
of
gold
for
the
equity
team
is
downright
dirty.

In
2024,
[Balanced
Capital
founder
Corey]
Noyes
said
firms
could
save
7.65%
of
Social
Security
and
Medicare
taxes
for
K-1
partners
on
their
first
$168,600
of
salary,
and
1.45%
on
income
over
that.
These
savings
would
collectively
top
$2
million
for
a
firm
with
about
140
nonequity
partners.

Aside
from
the
increased
tax
burden,
a
greater
cost
for
rising
nonequity
partners
comes
from
having
to
fully
subsidize
their
own
health
care.
For
a
high-deductible
family
plan,
this
could
mean
an
additional
$14,400
a
year
out
of
pocket,
Scruggs
said.
However,
self-employment
insurance
deductions
for
a
partner
with
a
marginal
tax
rate
of
35%
could
subtract
about
$10,000
a
year,
he
said.

By
listing
income
partners
as
partners
with
“0%
equity,”
the
firm
can
save
millions
of
dollars
a
year.

Some
firms
have
at
least
figured
out
that
they’re
the
baddies
in
this
exchange.
McDermott
Will
&
Emery
has
transitioned
nonequity
partners
to
W-2
employees.
Meanwhile,
Bloomberg
reports
that
Kirkland
&
Ellis
offers
a
comp
boost
to
offset
the
increased
charges.

Still,
this
leaves
a
bunch
of
firms
on
the
wrong
side
of
this.
The
article
identifies
Shearman
&
Sterling,
Duane
Morris,
and
Thompson
Hine
using
the
K-1
angle.

There
very
well
could
be
more.

Big
Law
Seizes
on
Promotions
That
Bring
Big
Tax
Bill,
No
Profits
[Bloomberg
Law
News]

Earlier:

Repeat
After
Me,
‘Partnership
Without
Equity
Is
Not
A
Partnership’

---

Joe
Patrice is
a
senior
editor
at
Above
the
Law
and
co-host
of

Thinking
Like
A
Lawyer.
Feel
free
to email
any
tips,
questions,
or
comments.
Follow
him
on Twitter or

Bluesky
if
you’re
interested
in
law,
politics,
and
a
healthy
dose
of
college
sports
news.
Joe
also
serves
as
a

Managing
Director
at
RPN
Executive
Search.

In
today’s
modern
age,
many
law
firms
are
moving
business
intelligence
(BI)
solutions
from
the
nice-to-have
category
to
a
clear
differentiator
in
their
firm’s
success. 
Still,
there
are
many
questions
regarding
the
true
benefits
of
BI
for
law
firms,
and
whether
it’s
worthy
of
the
hype.

We’re
here
to
set
the
record
straight
about
BI
in
this
CLE-eligible
webinar.
 You’ll
learn
how
BI
can
revolutionize
your
law
firm’s
approach
to
data,
driving
efficiency
and
informed
decision-making. 
Sign
up
today
and
join
us
on

November
20th
at
1
p.m.
ET.

The
panel
will
explore:

• The
  untold
  story
  hiding
  in
  your
  data
  and
  how
  a
  BI
  solution
  can
  bring
  it
  to
  light
  for
  proactive
  strategy
  development
• The
  art
  of
  data
  customization,
  ensuring
  that
  every
  role
  within
  your
  firm
  has
  access
  to
  role-specific,
  actionable
  insights
  tailored
  to
  their
  specific
  needs
• How
  having
  an
  eyeline
  into
  streamlined
  reporting
  helps
  law
  firms
  cut
  through
  complex
  analysis,
  saving
  time
  and
  elevating
  productivity
• Advanced
  techniques
  to
  bolster
  data
  privacy
  and
  security,
  safeguarding
  your
  firm’s
  and
  clients’
  sensitive
  information
• How
  establishing
  a
  single
  source
  of
  truth
  with
  a
  BI
  tool
  can
  enhance
  the
  accuracy
  and
  trustworthiness
  of
  your
  firm’s
  data,
  all
  while
  strengthening
  teams
  under
  a
  unified
  goal

Halloween
was
a
terrific
time
for
members
of
the
legal
community
—
especially
law
students
—
who
were
able
to
celebrate
the
day’s
festivities
with
costumes
of
note.
As
usual,
we
want
to
see
your
creativity
in
action.

For
the
fifteenth
year
in
a
row,
we
here
at
Above
the
Law
are
soliciting
legally
themed
costumes
for
our
annual
Halloween
contest.
We’re
continually
impressed
with
how
creative
lawyers
and
law
students
can
be
when
they
take
their
noses
out
of
their
books.

Here
are
some
of
the
winning
looks
from
the
past
few
years
of
the
contest:
the Donald
J.
Trump
College
of
Law (2016), Brett
Kavanaugh’s
calendar
and
his
beer (2018), Ruth
Baby
Ginsburg (2020),
and Warhol’s
Soup
Law (2023).

Please email
us or
text
us
(646-820-8477)
your
pictures
and
then
we’ll
vote
on
the
winner
of
our
annual
competition.
Please
send
us
your
submissions
as
soon
as
you
can.
We’re
all
looking
forward
to
judging
you!

---

Staci
Zaretsky is
a
senior
editor
at
Above
the
Law,
where
she’s
worked
since
2011.
She’d
love
to
hear
from
you,
so
please
feel
free
to

email
her
with
any
tips,
questions,
comments,
or
critiques.
You
can
follow
her
on

X/Twitter
and

Threads
or
connect
with
her
on

LinkedIn.

There
weren’t
a
ton
of
bright
spots
for
Democrats
after
yesterday’s
election.
Sure,
the

“Black
Nazi”
lost,
we’re
getting
the

first
Korean
American
senator,
and
there’ll
actually
be

two
Black
women
senators,
but
the
pallor
cast
by
Donald
Trump’s
victory
is
nearly
overwhelming.
But,
stepping
away
from
the
national
stage,
there
were
some
reasons
to
cheer.

Like
the
fact
that
progressive
Florida
state
attorney
Monique
Worrell
got
her
job
back.
Last
year,
she
was

suspended
from
the
position
by
Governor
Ron
DeSantis
in
a
move
criticized
as
“purely
political.”
In
fact,
Worrell
went
quite
a
bit
further,
calling
it
“tyranny”
and
“simply
a
smoke
screen
for
Ron
DeSantis’
failing
and
disastrous
[presidential]
campaign.”

Voters
in
Orlando

resoundingly
repudiated
DeSantis’s
call
—
Worrell
picked
up
57%
of
the
vote,
defeating
Independent
Andrew
Bain,
who
had
been
appointed
by
DeSantis
to
fill
the
position.
In
a
statement
following
her
victory
Worrell
said,
“Tonight’s
results
underscore
the
resilience
of
our
democracy
and
a
powerful
message
from
the
people:
No
governor’s
petty
political
maneuvers
and
no
amount
of
dark
money
can
silence
the
voices
of
thousands
who
demand
a
fair,
smart
approach
to
justice
over
the
failed,
outdated
policies
of
the
past.”
Worrell
continued,
“Despite
a
flood
of
over
$2.5
million
in
Republican
attack
ads
lying
about
my
record,
our
community
stood
strong
and
united,
declaring
that
enough
is
enough.
We
are
ready
to
restore
integrity
and
experience
to
the
State
Attorney’s
office.”

Up
until
last
month,
it
had
been
a
three-candidate
race.
As

reported
by
HuffPost,
the
political
maneuvers
that
led
to
a
two-candidate
race
resulted
in
a
lawsuit.

The
race
came
down
to
Worrell
and
Bain
after
the
winner
of
the
Republican
primary,
Seth
Hyman,
dropped
out
last
month.
Hyman’s
primary
challenger,
Thomas
Feiter,
filed
a
lawsuit
accusing
Hyman
of
working
with
DeSantis
and
Bain
—
essentially,
of
dropping
out
to
hand
Bain
the
Republican
vote.

Hyman
and
Bain
have
denied
the
allegations,
and
Worrell
has

called
for
an
investigation.

---

Kathryn
Rubino
is
a
Senior
Editor
at
Above
the
Law,
host
of

The
Jabot
podcast,
and
co-host
of

Thinking
Like
A
Lawyer.
AtL
tipsters
are
the
best,
so
please
connect
with
her.
Feel
free
to
email

her
with
any
tips,
questions,
or
comments
and
follow
her
on
Twitter

@Kathryn1 or
Mastodon

@[email protected].

It’s
not
just
you:
every
lawyer
is
stressed
about
depositions.

You
have
one
chance
to
capture
the
testimony
that
could
make
or
break
your
case.
You
have
to
digest
a
mountain
of
research
and
set
out
clear
goals.
But
you
also
have
to
think
on
your
feet,
consider
how
each
moment
will
feel
in
written
form,
and
pivot
to
new
opportunities
as
they
arise.
And
often
you
have
to
do
all
of
this
for
hours.

Anxiety
can
eat
at
you
before,
during,
and
after
a
deposition.
And
even
worse,
deposition
mistakes
can
draw
out
litigation,
sour
settlement
talks,
or
generally
damage
case
outcomes.

Depositions
are
some
of
the
key
building
blocks
of
your
case.
If
they’re
weak
or
flawed,
the
whole
thing
can
fall
down.
What
can
you
do
to
make
each
one
as
strong
as
possible?

The
End
of
Post-Deposition
Dread

You
know
that
person
who
always
seems
like
the
smartest
attorney
in
the
room?
Usually
they’re
not
doing
it
alone.
They
just
have
the
right
talent
and
tools
at
their
disposal.

In
the
past,
this
has
meant
an
army
of
underlings
pouring
over
every
discovery
document
to
help
prepare
for
depositions
and
then
tirelessly
taking
notes
as
they
happen.

But
now
there’s
another
option,
and
it’s
one
that
can
be
used
by
any
lawyer,
not
just
the
top
brass:
AI-powered
legal
technology.

Depo
CoPilot
by
Filevine
harnesses
AI
to
help
you
nail
every
deposition.
It’s
designed
to
be
your
second
chair
throughout
the
process,
giving
you
better
insight,
greater
confidence,
and
superior
case
outcomes.

How
does
Depo
CoPilot
Work?

Write
up
your
goals
before
the
deposition.
During
the
process,
Depo
CoPilot
creates
a
real-time
transcript,
so
you
can
review
any
moment
from
the
testimony
right
away.

Beyond
that,
the
tool
tells
you
whether
you’ve
achieved
your
goals,
where
there
might
be
inconsistencies,
and
where
you
might
want
to
follow
up
with
more
questions.

Every
conclusion
is
linked
to
the
transcript.
You
don’t
have
to
trust
the
AI
—
you
can
see
for
yourself
what
the
record
shows.

Sign
up
for
a


Depo
CoPilot
demo

and
see
for
yourself
why
Joe
Patrice
with


Above
the
Law


called
Depo
CoPilot

“one
of
the
best
use
cases
for
generative
AI
in
legal.”

“Even
an
AI
skeptic
would
be
hard
pressed
to
dismiss
the
idea
of
a
guardian
robot
monitoring
the
transcript
and
providing
real-time
feedback
based
on
your
guidance,”
wrote
Patrice.

Whether
you’re
a
skeptic
or
not,
give
Depo
CoPilot
a
try
and
see
how
it
feels
to
have
cutting-edge
technology
laser-focused
on
helping
you
perform
your
very
best
at
every
deposition.

U.S.-based
Biglaw
firms
are
continuing
to
leave
China,
closing
offices
there
left
and
right
—
but
the
latest
firm
to
do
so
hails
from
across
the
pond,
making
it
the
first
U.K.-based
firm
to
exit
mainland
China.

As
noted
by

Law.com
International,
Eversheds
Sutherland
is
shutting
down
its
Beijing
office,
but
not
for
the
reasons
the
majority
of
U.S.-based
firms
are
leaving
in
droves.
It
seems
that
the
office’s
managing
partner
has
been
hired
away
by
another
firm.
Here
are
some
additional
details:

Jay
Ze
joins
Stephenson
Harwood,
having
most
recently
led
Eversheds’
Beijing
office
as
managing
partner
and
head
of
the
corporate
practice
for
China.
He
was
the
office’s
sole
remaining
partner.

Ze,
who
focuses
on
cross-border
M&A
work,
will
be
joining
Stephenson
Harwood
in
Hong
Kong
once
the
regulatory
processes
have
completed,
the
firm
said.
…

Ze
joined
Eversheds
as
a
partner
in
2013
from
the
Beijing
office
of
Spanish
firm
Uria
Menendez,
where
he
was
a
counsel.
Prior
to
working
at
Uria
Menedez
for
almost
a
year,
he
worked
as
an
associate
at
Skadden,
Arps,
Slate,
Meagher
&
Flom
as
well
as
Gibson
Dunn
&
Crutcher.

An
Eversheds
spokesperson
told
Law.com
International:
“Partner
Jay
Ze,
previously
the
firm’s
sole
partner
based
in
Beijing,
has
left
the
firm
with
our
thanks
and
best
wishes
for
the
future.”

As
the
firm
plans
its
Beijing
closure,
it’s
also
hoping
to
reenter
Singapore.
According
to
an
Eversheds
spokesperson,
“The
firm
remains
committed
to
Asia
and
a
formal
application
to
create
a
branded
presence
in
Singapore
will
shortly
be
submitted
to
the
local
regulator.”

Eversheds
will
maintain
its
offices
in
Hong
Kong
and
Shanghai
during
this
time,
as
a
“critical
part
of
[the
firm’s]
Asia
strategy.”

Which
Biglaw
firm
will
be
the
next
say
zàijiàn
to
its
offices
in
China?
You
can email
us or
text
us
(646-820-8477)
if
you
have
any
intel.
Thank
you.

Eversheds
Shuts
in
Beijing,
Targets
Singapore
Re-Entry
[Law.com
International]

---

Staci
Zaretsky is
a
senior
editor
at
Above
the
Law,
where
she’s
worked
since
2011.
She’d
love
to
hear
from
you,
so
please
feel
free
to

email
her
with
any
tips,
questions,
comments,
or
critiques.
You
can
follow
her
on

X/Twitter
and

Threads
or
connect
with
her
on

LinkedIn.