Author: TSA Press

Backing
the
Blue
is
more
than
just
a
rallying
cry
to
support
the
police
—
it
is
an
ethos
that
retroactively
makes
right
any
previous
wrongs.
Reports
say
that

people
don’t
respect
officers
as
much
as
they
used
to?
Back
the
Blue.
Studies
show
that
the
police
have
a

low
public
confidence
rating
because
of
their
cruel
treatment
of
women
and
minorities?
Back
the
Blue.
Waves
of
really
bad
PR
after
viral
video
shows
a
cop
pushing
down
an
old
man
who
cracks
his
head
on
the
pavement,
only
for
another
officer
to
prevent
the
first
cop
from
rendering
aid?

They’ll
investigate
themselves
and
find
no
wrongdoing.
BACK
THE
BLUE.

As
if
to
stop
the
Executive
from
having
all
of
the
fun,
the
U.S.
Judicial
Conference
Committee
on
Financial
Disclosure’s
recent
rule
revision
looks
like
a
prime
example
of
Backing
the
Black
(robes,
that
is).
Yes
— 
Clarence
Thomas
is
the
figure
head
offender
— 
but
this
revision
extends
to
every
robed
gavel
getting
gifts
from
billionaires.

Reuters
has
coverage:

U.S.
Supreme
Court
justices
and
federal
judges
on
lower
courts
do
not
have
to
publicly
disclose
when
they
dine
or
stay
at
someone’s
personal
residence,
even
one
owned
by
a
business
entity,
under
a
revised
ethics
rule.

The
amended
policy
was
issued
on
Monday
by
the
U.S.
Judicial
Conference’s
Committee
on
Financial
Disclosure,
which
sets
rules
followed
by
the
nine
justices
and
other
federal
judges.
Critics
said
the
move
diluted
ethics
requirements.

If
you’re
thinking
that
this
change
retroactively
rights
a
bunch
of
Thomas’s
previous
gift
controversies,
you
aren’t
the
only
one.
Gabe
Roth
took
to

Fix
The
Court
to
break
down
some
of
the
prior
expenditures
SCOTUS
&
Co.
want
you
to
believe
don’t
warrant
a
second
look:

Here
are
some
places
with
corporate
ownership
where
Justice
Thomas
has
received
gifts
since
ascending
to
the
high
court:

•  Mill
  Creek
  Farm
  (multiple
  years),
  owned
  by
  CFH
  Mill
  Creek
  Company,
  L.P.,
  located
  in
  East
  Texas
  (unsure
  of
  corporate
  structure
  but
  Harlan
  Crow
  appears
  to
  control)
• Camp
  Topridge
  (multiple
  years),
  owned
  by
  Topridge
  Holdings,
  LLC,
  located
  in
  Upstate
  New
  York
  (Crow)
• The
  Michaela
  Rose
  (multiple
  years),
  owned
  by
  Crow
  Holdings,
  LLC,
  docked
  who
  knows
  where
  now
  (Crow)

Let’s
assume
each
counts
as
a
“personal
residence”
of
Crow
under
the
regs
since
Crow
spends
the
night
at
each
over
the
course
of
the
year,
and
assume
that
none
(save
the
Michaela
Rose
from
2003-15)
is
rented
out
to
the
public.

When
Justice
Thomas
stays
for
free
at
these
places,
does
he
now
get
to
avail
himself
of
the
personal
hospitality
exemption?
Seems
like
it.

Years
ago,
Thomas
lamented
that
being
a
judge
on
the
highest
court
meant
that

he
might
have
to
give
up
his
prestigious
six-figure
gig
for
a
more
lucrative
six-figure
gig.
The
“sure
would
be
a
shame-ing”
was
followed
by
him
receiving
millions
in
underreported
goodies
from
influential
millionaires
and
billionaires.
While
he
might
not
have
the
salary
his
heart
desired,
a
surplus
of
generous
donors
and
colleagues
that
can
codify
his
dependency
on
charity
are
just
as
good!
Let’s
take
a
moment
of
silence
to
honor
Clarence
and
the
Court’s
sacrifices.
Sure,

no
one
takes
them
seriously
anymore,
but
now
hundreds
of
judges
can
flock
to
monied
Crows
and
Crow
LLCs
without
fearing
transparency
guidelines
that
let
the
public
know
where
conflicts
of
interest
may
pop
up.

US
Supreme
Court
Justices,
Other
Judges
Can
Stay
At
Corporate-Owned
Homes
Without
Disclosure
[Reuters]

Judicial
Conference
Issues
New
Financial
Disclosure
Rule.
Who
Benefits?
[Fix
The
Court]

Earlier:

Paragon
Of
Virtue
Clarence
Thomas
Has
Been
Given
Half
Million
In
Value
Off
The
Record
And
It
Totally
Hasn’t
Impacted
His
Judging.
Not
One
Bit.
Nope.

Clarence
Thomas
Thinks
He
Was
Practically
Forced
To
Take
All
That
Under
The
Table
Money

Clarence
Thomas
Took
EVEN
MORE
Free
Trips
On
Private
Planes
That
He’s
Still
Not
Disclosed!

Clarence
Thomas
Turned
Supreme
Court
Service
Into
An
ATM
Machine

Harvard
Law
Professor
Argues
That
The
Supreme
Court
No
Longer
Cares
About
Its
Own
‘Legitimacy.’
What
Now?

---

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.

Legal
dramas
aren’t
just
confined
to
the
courtroom
or
our
favorite
TV
shows.
The
tech
startup
world,
brimming
with
secrecy,
scandal,
and
high-stakes
decisions,
provides
its
own
theater
of
legal
intrigue.
But
what
if
those
real-life
stories
—
often
whispered
behind
closed
doors
—
were
brought
to
the
stage?
Enter
“Dirty
Legal
Secrets:
Based
in
True
Startups,”

a
play
having
its

NYC
premiere
from
October
17
through
October
27,
2024.
The
show

marries
the
adrenaline
rush
of
startup
life
with
the
drama
of
legal
battles.
In
this
exclusive
interview,
I
sat
down
with
Sarah
Feingold,
co-creator
of
the
production
and
former
startup
GC,
to
dive
into
how
law
and
theater
collide,
creating
an
experience
that
entertains,
informs,
and
resonates
with
both
legal
insiders
and
tech
industry
veterans.

Olga
V.
Mack:
The
Legal
Twist:
What
inspired
you
to
combine
law
and
theater,
especially
the
tech
startup
world?
What
is
it
about
this
space
that
lends
itself
to
such
a
compelling
narrative?

Sarah
Feingold:
The
play
was
inspired
by
conversations
with
Michael
Weinberg.
Michael
and
I
are
both
former
startup
GCs,
and
we
share
a
love
of
the
theater.
We
love
diving
into
the
entertaining
and
heartbreaking
stories
that
startup
in-house
attorneys,
like
us,
are
forbidden
to
share.
We
wondered
if
we
could
combine
our
interests
and
create
something
unique.
We
put
out
a
call
for
anonymous
startup
legal-themed
stories,
and
we
were
floored
by
what
was
disclosed
to
us.
The
tales
were
theatrical!
That
spark
of
an
idea
led
to
the
play,
“Dirty
Legal
Secrets:
Based
in
True
Startups.”

OVM:
Art
Meets
Law:
You’ve
spent
years
as
an
attorney
and
legal
innovator
—
how
did
that
experience
influence
your
writing?
Did
you
find
yourself
processing
any
of
your
own
legal
career
through
this
project?

SF:
The
show
was
inspired
by
my
time
at
legal
departments
at
startups
(Etsy
and
Vroom)
and
my
years
of
laughing
and
commiserating
with
other
startup
attorneys.
When
things
go
wrong,
like
super
wrong,
the
lawyers
step
in.
Writing
is
cathartic
even
when
the
stories
are
not
mine.
I
feel
responsibility
to
those
who
trust
me
with
their
tales.

OVM:
Startup
Realities:
The
tech
startup
world
is
rife
with
drama,
secrecy,
and
scandal.
What
kind
of
real-life
situations
are
reflected
in
your
play?
How
much
of
this
production
is
based
on
your
own
experiences
or
things
you’ve
heard
in
the
industry?

SF:
The
show
is
based
on
real-life
startup
secrecy,
drama,
and
scandal.
Due
to
attorney-client
privilege,
my
startup
stories
must
stay
in
my
vault.
But
I
can
share
anonymous
tales
that
came
to
me
from
the
legal
industry.
And
those
stories
…
wow!

OVM:
The
Audience
Reaction:
You’ve
already
had
some
initial
shows.
How
have
audiences
responded
so
far?
Any
surprising
or
particularly
memorable
reactions
from
those
who
work
in
the
tech
or
legal
world?

SF:
The
audience
fuels
me.
After
the
last
production,
I
received
generous
feedback
from
people
who
saw
the
show.
I
assumed
that
the
louder
and
more
absurd
stories
would
stick.
I
was
surprised
that
some
of
the
more
subtle
moments
have
staying
power.

OVM:
From
Vision
to
Reality:
What
has
been
the
biggest
challenge
in
bringing
“Dirty
Legal
Secrets”
to
life?
As
someone
who
has
successfully
navigated
the
legal
world,
did
you
face
any
unique
legal
or
business
challenges
with
this
production?

SF:
Bringing
a
script
to
the
stage
feels
similar
to
bringing
a
startup
to
market.
You
must
believe
in
your
product
and
in
its
future.
Also,
you
need
thick
skin.
There
are
few
theaters
and
few
opportunities
for
new
playwrights.
Rejections
come
with
the
territory.
I
learned
so
much
about
the
entertainment
industry
and
the
ways
that
decisions
are
made.

OVM:
Looking
Ahead:
What
are
your
hopes
for
the
future
of
“Dirty
Legal
Secrets”?
Do
you
envision
it
expanding
beyond
New
York?
And
how
do
you
hope
it
will
impact
conversations
about
the
tech
startup
world
and
the
legal
profession?

SF:
I’m
hopeful,
delusional,
or
both.
Yes,
let’s
expand
this
production
beyond
our
run
from
October
17
–
October
27,
2024.
Let’s
expand
the
show
beyond
New
York.
I
hope
this
play
leaves
a
lasting
positive
impact
on
those
who
see
it.
I
hope
that
industry
insiders
help
to
propel
the
show
to
the
next
level.
We
are
also
having
talkbacks
to
dive
into
some
of
the
themes
in
the
show.
I
became
a
lawyer
because
of
my
belief
that
the
law
could
create
social
change.
I
learned
that
the
law
tends
to
be
clunky
and
slow.
Art
has
the
ability
to
break
through
the
noise
for
a
positive
impact.

“Dirty
Legal
Secrets”
runs
from
October
17
through
October
27
at
Room
52
in
New
York
City.
It
offers
more
than
just
a
glimpse
behind
the
curtain
of
tech
startups
—
it
challenges
us,
as
lawyers
and
professionals,
to
reconsider
the
untold
stories
lurking
in
our
own
industries.
It’s
a
reminder
that
law,
while
steeped
in
rules
and
confidentiality,
is
also
deeply
human
—
full
of
emotional
highs,
ethical
dilemmas,
and
moments
that
shape
careers
and
lives.
As
attorneys,
we
often
protect
the
most
delicate
narratives,
but
Sarah
Feingold’s
work
encourages
us
to
reflect:
What
would
happen
if
we
told
more
of
these
stories?
What
might
we
learn,
and
more
importantly,
how
might
we
grow?
The
law
isn’t
just
a
profession
—
it’s
a
stage,
and
each
of
us
has
a
part
to
play.
Are
you
ready
to
step
into
the
spotlight?

---

Olga
V.
Mack


is
a
Fellow
at
CodeX,
The
Stanford
Center
for
Legal
Informatics,
and
a
Generative
AI
Editor
at
law.MIT.
Olga
embraces
legal
innovation
and
had
dedicated
her
career
to
improving
and
shaping
the
future
of
law.
She
is
convinced
that
the
legal
profession
will
emerge
even
stronger,
more
resilient,
and
more
inclusive
than
before
by
embracing
technology.
Olga
is
also
an
award-winning
general
counsel,
operations
professional,
startup
advisor,
public
speaker,
adjunct
professor,
and
entrepreneur.
She
authored Get
on
Board:
Earning
Your
Ticket
to
a
Corporate
Board
Seat, Fundamentals
of
Smart
Contract
Security,
and  Blockchain
Value:
Transforming
Business
Models,
Society,
and
Communities. She
is
working
on
three
books:


Visual
IQ
for
Lawyers
(ABA
2024), The
Rise
of
Product
Lawyers:
An
Analytical
Framework
to
Systematically
Advise
Your
Clients
Throughout
the
Product
Lifecycle
(Globe
Law
and
Business
2024),
and
Legal
Operations
in
the
Age
of
AI
and
Data
(Globe
Law
and
Business
2024).
You
can
follow
Olga
on



LinkedIn


and
Twitter
@olgavmack.

Litigation
continues
to
serve
as
much
of
the
legal
profession’s
bread
and
butter,
with

demand
trending
up
for
all
but
the
Am
Law
50.
Despite
the
fact
that
this
practice
area
is
moving
away
from
the
top
firms,
clients
still
want
the
very
best
when
it
comes
to
the
quality
of
work
on
their
litigation
matters.
According
to
a
ranking
from
BTI
Consulting
Group,
certain
firms
seem
to
be
doing
better
than
others
in
clients’
eyes
when
it
comes
to
their
grasp
on
complex
litigation
matters.
From

BTI’s
Mad
Clientist
blog:

More
litigation
complexity
equals
more
opportunity.
Today’s
market
is
filled
to
the
brim
with
complexity.

BTI
research
reveals
a
select
group
of
43
law
firms
boosted
their
reputation
—
and
delivery
—
to
move
upmarket
in
litigation.
This
is
down
from
54
BTI
Upmarket
Movers
last
year.
It’s
harder
to
move
up
the
market
than
last
year.

These
upmarket
firms
increased
their
status
as
clients
first
choice
and
preferred
providers.

These
BTI
Upmarket
Movers
know
clients
want
ideas
–
new
approaches
to
novel
matters
–
and
for
old
matters
as
well.
These
firms
are
becoming
more
aggressive
as
clients
face
more
demanding
opponents.
It
is
far
from
an
easy
world.

So,
which
firms
are
at
the
top
of
their
game
from
the
most
important
point
of
view
of
all,
that
of
their
clients?
The
list
is
still
quite
long
—
43!
—
but
any
firm
that
made
the
list
is
likely
thrilled
to
be
here:

1. A&O
   Shearman
2. ArentFox
   Schiff
3. Axinn
4. Baker
   McKenzie
5. Benesch
6. Blakes
7. Bryan
   Cave
   Leighton
   Paisner
8. Buchanan
9. Burns
   &
   Levinson
10. Cleary
    Gottlieb
11. Coblentz
    Patch
    Duffy
    &
    Bass
12. Cozen
    O’Connor
13. Davis
    Wright
    Tremaine
14. Debevoise
15. Dechert
16. Dorsey
17. Fasken
18. Hinshaw
19. Levenfeld
    Pearlstein
20. Lewis
    Brisbois
21. Mayer
    Brown
22. Maynard
    Nexsen
23. McCarter
    &
    English
24. Morgan
    Lewis
25. Osler
26. Patterson
    Belknap
27. Poyner
    Spruill
28. Quinn
    Emanuel
29. Reminger
30. Sheppard
    Mullin
31. Sidley
32. Squire
    Patton
    Boggs
33. Thompson
    Hine
34. Trenam
35. Troutman
    Pepper
36. UB
    Greensfelder
37. Warner
    Norcross
    +
    Judd
38. Williams
    Mullen
39. Wilson
    Elser
40. Winston
    &
    Strawn
41. Womble
    Bond
    Dickinson
42. Woods
    Rogers
43. Zwillgen

Congratulations
to
all
the
firms
that
made
the
cut,
and
best
of
luck
to
them
as
they
stake
out
their
course
in
new
litigation
horizons.

43
Law
Firms
Moving
Upmarket
in
Richest
Litigation
Market
in
Years
[BTI
Consulting
Group]

---

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.

You
were
taught
many
skills
in
law
school,
like
how
to
think
like
a
lawyer
and
conduct
legal
research.
But
many
topics
were
likely
excluded
from
your
law
school
curriculum,
including
effective
client
communication
and
law
firm
management

After
you
hung
a
shingle,
these
gaps
may
have
become
more
evident,
requiring
significant
time
and
financial
investment
to
bridge
the
learning
curve.
From
marketing
and
client
intake
to
tracking
expenses
and
getting
paid,
you’ll
need
to
address
many
issues
to
unlock
law
firm
revenue
and
expansion
drivers.
Fortunately,
there
is
no
shortage
of
information
on
running
a
streamlined
law
firm,
from
CLE
courses
to
books
to
online
resources.

The
Value
Of
Industry
Benchmark
Data

One
way
to
get
up
to
speed
is
by
comparing
your
firm
to
industry
benchmarking
data.
By
understanding
how
other
lawyers
are
running
their
practices
and
achieving
success,
you
can
apply
what
you’ve
learned
to
your
law
firm’s
operations
to
increase
marketing
and
growth
opportunities.

For
this
type
of
data,
look
no
further
than
two
Benchmark
Reports
released
this
year
from
MyCase
and
LawPay:

Benchmark
Report
Part
1:
Law
Firm
Finances
and

Benchmark
Report
Part
2:
Getting
Clients.
These
reports,
based
on
anonymized
law
firm
data,
provide
a
wealth
of
marketing
and
financial
insights.

Client
Intake
Conversion
Data

One
important
client
intake
metric
addressed
in
these
reports
is
conversion
rates.
Comparing
your
firm’s
conversion
rates
with
those
of
firms
with
the
same
practice
areas
can
be
very
instructive
and
help
you
to
better
determine
whether
your
client
intake
processes
are
running
as
smoothly
as
possible.

Data
from
the
reports
indicates
that
the
practice
area
with
the
fastest
conversion
rates
is
personal
injury
law,
with
just
three
days
between
lead
intake
and
conversion
to
client,
while
bankruptcy
and
immigration
share
the
slowest
conversion
timelines
at
16
days.
These
disparities
highlight
the
varying
complexities
in
practice
areas
and
the
differing
expectations
of
potential
clients.
By
understanding
these
benchmarks,
you
can
set
realistic
goals
for
improving
your
firm’s
intake
processes
based
on
the
specific
needs
and
timelines
of
your
practice
areas.

Consultation
Appointments

Another
key
factor
influencing
conversion
rates
is
the
percentage
of
consultation
appointments
held
for
each
of
your
firm’s
practice
areas,
as
well
as
the
revenue
generated
from
consultation
fees.

Data
from
the
reports
showed
that
across
various
practice
areas,
an
average
of
14%
of
prospective
clients
attend
consultations
before
retaining
a
law
firm.
Trust
and
estate
clients
top
the
list,
with
27%
attending
consultations,
followed
closely
by
immigration
clients
at
21%.
In
contrast,
personal
injury
and
criminal
law
practices
see
the
lowest
rates
of
consultation
attendance,
at
7%
and
8%
respectively.

These
numbers
suggest
that
in
certain
practice
areas,
clients
are
more
likely
to
seek
legal
advice
before
deciding
to
hire,
making
consultations
an
important
touchpoint
in
the
conversion
process.
Firms
operating
in
high-consultation
areas
could
capitalize
on
this
by
offering
structured,
paid
consultation
packages,
while
firms
in
low-consultation
areas
may
want
to
focus
on
streamlining
intake
and
initial
contact
to
expedite
conversion.

Tracking
Consultation
Fee
Revenue

Tracking
consultation
fee
revenue
is
critical
to
optimizing
a
law
firm’s
marketing
strategy.
It
provides
insight
into
how
initial
client
interactions
directly
contribute
to
a
firm’s
profitability
and
highlights
areas
where
the
firm
may
be
leaving
money
on
the
table.
This
data-driven
approach
not
only
boosts
immediate
revenue
but
also
supports
long-term
business
growth.

When
it
comes
to
tracking
revenue
from
consultation
fees,
the
benchmark
data
showed
that
more
than
3,000
reports
analyzing
consultation-related
revenue
were
generated
within
a
two-week
period.
This
large
number
highlights
the
importance
of
understanding
how
these
initial
meetings
contribute
to
overall
profitability.

Referral
Sources
And
Lead
Forecasting
Reporting

Meanwhile,
analyzing
lead
referral
sources
allows
firms
to
pinpoint
which
marketing
channels
or
relationships
are
driving
the
most
business.
By
focusing
on
these
data
points,
law
firms
can
refine
their
marketing
efforts,
ensuring
resources
are
invested
in
the
strategies
and
channels
that
yield
the
highest
return.

Data
from
the
reports
also
indicates
that
lead
referral
sources
were
a
major
focus
for
firms,
with
over
1,000
reports
run
over
the
course
of
a
year
to
track
lead
origination.
In
comparison,
lead
forecasting
reports,
which
track
potential
future
revenue,
were
less
commonly
generated,
with
only
250
reports
run.
Nevertheless,
both
sets
of
reports
offer
valuable
insights
for
long-term
strategic
planning.
By
analyzing
these
trends,
you
can
better
allocate
resources
and
refine
marketing
strategies
to
plan
for
improved
growth
and
revenue
generation.

Expense
Tracking

Lastly,
when
examining
the
financial
landscape
across
practice
areas,
the
data
reveals
notable
differences
in
the
number
of
expenses
incurred
by
law
firms
in
one
year.
Family
Law
matters
lead
with
the
highest
expenses,
totaling
312,550,
followed
by
Personal
Injury
matters
at
181,064,
and
Trusts
and
Estates
at
164,817.

These
numbers
reflect
the
resource-intensive
nature
and
complexity
of
these
practice
areas.
In
contrast,
Employment
Law
and
Bankruptcy
matters
incurred
far
fewer
expenses,
at
33,624
and
28,713,
respectively.
Among
other
things,
these
lower
figures
suggest
less
overhead,
providing
important
insights
for
firms
looking
to
manage
costs
more
effectively.

If
your
firm
is
seeking
ways
to
enhance
growth
and
profitability,
these
reports
offer
a
valuable
roadmap
for
improving
financial
performance
and
strategic
decision-making.
By
analyzing
this
data,
you
can
refine
your
firm’s
marketing
strategies,
adjust
pricing
models,
and
allocate
resources
more
efficiently
to
optimize
profitability,
firm
growth,
and
overall
client
satisfaction.

---

Nicole
Black


is
a
Rochester,
New
York
attorney
and
Director
of
Business
and
Community
Relations
at



MyCase,
web-based
law
practice
management
software.
She’s
been



blogging


since
2005,
has
written
a



weekly
column


for
the
Daily
Record
since
2007,
is
the
author
of



Cloud
Computing
for
Lawyers,
co-authors



Social
Media
for
Lawyers:
the
Next
Frontier,
and
co-authors



Criminal
Law
in
New
York.
She’s
easily
distracted
by
the
potential
of
bright
and
shiny
tech
gadgets,
along
with
good
food
and
wine.
You
can
follow
her
on
Twitter
at



@nikiblack


and
she
can
be
reached
at




[email protected].

Last
night,

news
broke
that
New
York
City
Mayor
Eric
Adams
was
indicted.
And
today,
a
57-page
indictment
(available
below)
was
filed
by
Southern
District
of
New
York
prosecutors
alleging
a
decade’s
worth
of
corruption.
That
news
has
just
about
everyone
talking,
and
leaves
all
of
us
lawyerly
types
wondering…
who’s
going
to
represent
him?

Quinn
Emanuel
partner

Alex
Spiro
has

joined
the
mayor’s
legal
team.
Spiro
is

no
stranger
to
well-known
clients
(including

Elon
Musk,

Megan
Thee
Stallion,
and

Alec
Baldwin)
—
and
even
Adams
himself.
Spiro

reps
Adams
against
allegations
he
sexually

assaulted
a
woman
in
1993
(and
Adams
gave
taxpayers
the
Biglaw
bill,
arguing
since
he
was
a
cop
at
the
time
of
the
allegations,
the
city
should
foot
the,
admittedly

discounted,
bill).

This
morning,
the
FBI
searched
the
mayoral
residence,
Gracie
Mansion,
and
Spiro
was

quick
to
slam
the
action.

“Federal
agents
appeared
this
morning
at
Gracie
Mansion
in
an
effort
to
create
a
spectacle
(again)
and
take
Mayor
Adams
phone
(again).
He
has
not
been
arrested
and
looks
forward
to
his
day
in
court,”
Spiro
said.
“They
send
a
dozen
agents
to
pick
up
a
phone
when
we
would
have
happily
turned
it
in.”

Adams

denied
the
allegations,
saying
in
a
video
message
last
night
they’re
“entirely
false,
based
on
lies.
But
they
would
not
be
surprising.
I
always
knew
that
If
I
stood
my
ground
for
all
of
you
that
I
would
be
a
target—and
a
target
I
became.”

24CR556
SEALED
INDICTMENT
(1)

---

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].

Biglaw
firm
Jones
Day
will
have
to
defend
their
parental
leave
policy
at
trial.

Back
in
2019,
the
firm
was
sued
by
former
associates,
married
couple
Marc
Savignac
and
Julia
Sheketoff,
alleging
a
variety
of
discriminatory
practices.
Many
of
those
claims
were
dismissed
during
summary
judgment,
including
Sheketoff’s
allegation
she
was
paid
less
due
to
a
discriminatory
performance
review
from
a
male
partner
and
Savignac’s
claim
that
firing
him
while
on
parental
leave
violated
the
D.C.
Family
and
Medical
Leave
Act.
However,
on
Wednesday,
Judge
Randy
Moss
made
a
sealed

ruling
that
the
claims
the
firm’s
newborn
parental
leave
policy
discriminates
against
biological
fathers
and
retaliation
claims
based
on
the
couples
complaints
about
the
policy
can
move
forward.

As

reported
by
Bloomberg
Law,
the
allegations
that
the
firm’s
policy
“imposes
and
reinforces
harmful
stereotypes
and
archaic
gender
roles”
will
head
to
trial.

Savignac
can
go
forward
with
a
claim
under
Title
VII
of
the
1964
Civil
Rights
Act
that
Jones
Day’s
policy
discriminates
because
of
sex
by
giving
eight
more
weeks
to
female
associates
compared
to
their
male
peers
to
care
for
and
bond
with
a
new
child,
and
on
a
similar
claim
under
the
Equal
Pay
Act.
The
couple
also
raised
triable
evidence
on
their
sex
discrimination
claim
against
Jones
Day
challenging
the
policy
under
the
District
of
Columbia
Human
Rights
Act,
Moss
said.

Additionally,
there’s
the
retaliation
claims
under
Title
VII,
the
Equal
Pay
Act,
and
the
DCHRA.
The
couple
sent
an
email
complaining
about
the
policy
while
Savignac
was
on
leave,
and
he
was
fired
three
days
later
(Sheketoff
had
already
left
the
firm
at
that
time).

A
trial
where
a
Biglaw
firm
is
defending
itself
from
discrimination
allegations
(assuming
there
isn’t
a
last
minute
settlement)
will
certainly
be
interesting
to
watch.

Earlier:

Lawsuit
Alleges
Jones
Day
Doctored
Firm
Picture
To
Make
Attorney
Look
More
Caucasian

New
Discrimination
Lawsuit
Against
Jones
Day
Is
Already
Getting
Messy

It’s
Like
Jones
Day
Doesn’t
Even
Understand
The
Concept
Of
Optics

---

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].

WASHINGTON
—
A
bipartisan
and
bicameral
duo
of
lawmakers
say
they
plan
to
introduce
legislation
aimed
at
boosting
the
United
States’
civilian
and
defense
maritime
industries
following
the
upcoming
election.

Sen.
Mark
Kelly,
D-Ariz.
and
Rep.
Mike
Waltz,
R-Fla.
plan
to
introduce
their
“Ships
For
America
Act”
following
the
November
election,
which
they
said
today
at
an

event
hosted
by
the
Center
for
Strategic
and
International
Studies
has
garnered
support
among
shipbuilding
executives.

“We
need
to
make
it
more
cost
effective
to
operate
US-flagged
vessels
with
some
cargo
preference,”
said
Kelly.
“We
need
regulatory
reform
and
some
financial
support
to
the
industry,
like
tax
credits,
and
then
building
up
our
shipbuilding
capacity
to
make
sure
that
we’re
going
to
be
able
to
have
more
US-flagged
ships
here
at
home,
and
then
the
workforce
[shortage]
issue.

“This
legislation
addresses
all
[of]
those
areas
extensively,”
he
continued.

Kelly
and
Waltz
have
spent
the
past
year
publicly
floating
a
handful
of
ideas
that,
in
their
view,
would
bolster
the
country’s
maritime
industrial
base,
both
the
commercial
shipping
side
as
well
as
military
shipbuilding.
During
the
event
at
CSIS,
the
duo
said
they
supported
a
maritime
czar
of
sorts
—
a
single
individual
inside
the
executive
branch
whose
authorities
span
across
maritime
issues
related
to
both
the
Defense
and
Transportation
Departments.

Waltz’s
Florida
district
encompasses
the
city
of
Jacksonville,
also
home
to
a
Naval
Air
Station
Jacksonville.
While
Kelly’s
state
of
Arizona
is
less
invested
in
shipbuilding
directly,
the
senator
is
a
graduate
of
the
Merchant
Marine
Academy
and
has
been
vocal
about
urging
lawmakers
to
take
action
to
address
a
national
shortage
in
merchant
mariners.

Earlier
this
year,
Waltz
and
Kelly,
along
with
signatures
from
more
than
a
dozen
other
lawmakers,
sent
a
letter
to
the
White
House
calling
on
the
administration
to
“prioritize
U.S.
maritime
defense.”

“The
group
[of
lawmakers]
called
on
the
president
to
establish
an
interagency
maritime
policy
director,
designate
maritime
infrastructure
as
‘critical
infrastructure,’
invoke
the
Defense
Production
Act
(DPA)
for
shipbuilding,
and
develop
a
whole-of-government
maritime
‘de-risking’
strategy
to
reduce
dependency
on
Chinese
maritime
infrastructure
and
industry,”
according
to
a
statement
from
the
lawmakers’
offices
released
alongside
the
letter.

*
If
you
live
in
a
city
where
the
mayor
isn’t
indicted
step
forward…
not
so
fast
New
York.
[CNN]

*
Texas
still
got
nothing
on
Delaware.
[Law.com]

*
Report
concludes
that
S&C
didn’t
know
of
FTX
fraud.
[Law360]

*
SEC
takes
position
that
crypto
“boxes”
are
securities.
More
like
insecurities
but
sure.
[Bloomberg
Law
News]

*
Smartmatic’s
defamation
trial
begins.
[Reuters]

*
Suspect
caught
in
courthouse
explosion.
[ABA
Journal]

Above The Law In your inbox

Subscribe and get breaking news, commentary, and opinions on law firms, lawyers, law schools, lawsuits, judges, and more.

We will never sell or share your information without your consent. See our privacy policy.