Author: TSA Press

Ed.
Note:
Welcome
to
our
daily
feature

Trivia
Question
of
the
Day!

According
to
reporting
by
Law360,
Jacqueline
Bokser
LeFebvre,
a
managing
director
at
recruiting
firm
Major
Lindsey
&
Africa,
says
the
lateral
associate
market
is
currently
experiencing
high
demand
for
attorneys
in
which
three
practice
areas?

Hint:
LeFebvre
said
the
market
(for
these
three
practice
areas)
is
currently
fire,
“Typically
August
is
a
very
slow
month.
This
year
it’s
been
anything
but.”

See
the
answer
on
the
next
page.

As
a
part
of
the
Legal
Marketing
Association’s
partnership
with
Above
the
Law,
each
month
we’ll
share
a
roundup
of
insights
and
intel
from



Strategies
&
Voices,
the
online
trade
journal
dedicated
to
the
craft
of
legal
marketing.

Spanning
the
LMA’s
Body
of
Knowledge
domains
for
Marketing
Management
and
Leadership,
articles
in
this
edition
help
legal
marketers
with
several
initiatives. 

Launch
New
Services

Legal
marketers
can
and
should
play
a
leading
role
in
their
firms’
introduction
of
new
services.
In


Legal
Marketers:
Your
Role
in
Developing
New
Services,
readers
will
learn
key
steps
of
a
strategic
process
for
evaluating
and
launching
new
offerings.

Key
tip:

Engage
your
clients
through
interviews,
surveys
and
focus
groups
to
ensure
your
new
services
meet
and
exceed
client
expectations.

Learn
Your
Style:
Leader
or
Manager?

“Leader”
and
“manager”
may
be
used
interchangeably,
but
they
actually
represent
two
very
different
approaches
to
guiding
a
team.
The
infographic


Leadership
vs.
Management:
Determining
the
Right
Approach
for
Your
Team

provides
some
clarity
using
four
key
questions:

• 
  What
  are
  we
  setting
  out
  to
  do?
• 
  How
  do
  we
  deliver
  results?
• 
  How
  do
  we
  make
  it
  happen?
• 
  What
  are
  the
  outcomes?

Key
takeaway:

Leadership
can
be
summarized
as
“doing
the
right
thing,”
while
management
can
be
distilled
as
“doing
the
thing
right.”

Link
Competitive
Intelligence
to
Firm
Strategy

Competitive
intelligence
professionals
are
often
asked
to
help
with
specific
and
tactical
projects,
such
as
analyzing
a
potential
client’s
litigation
portfolio.
But
leading
law
firms
are
starting
to
incorporate
this
function
into
strategic
planning
or
practices,
industry
groups
and
even
the
firm
as
a
whole.

In


How
Competitive
Intelligence
Can
Support
Firm
Strategy,
three
senior
legal
marketers
share
examples
of
strategic
projects
where
CI
played
a
part;
discuss
the
elements
of
CI
that
apply
best
to
strategic
planning;
and
provide
guidance
on
presenting
CI
data
in
the
strategic
planning
setting.

Key
takeaway:

Avoid
the
“massive
data
dump”;
when
presenting
research
findings,
provide
firm
leaders
with
user-friendly
executive
summaries
that
highlight
the
most
actionable
information.

Leverage
Your
Technology

This
month,


Strategies
&
Voices

also
shared
the
results
of
the


2024
Legal
Marketing
Technology
Ecosystem
Study

conducted
by
LMA
and
RubyLaw.
This
provides
law
firms
of
all
sizes
with
benchmarking
on
technology
use
as
well
as
perspectives
on
how
martech
will
evolve
within
the
legal
sector.

The
primary
output
of
the
study
is
a
Legal
Marketing
Technology
Stack
Blueprint,
which
charts
the
“prevailing
systems
and
tools
used
by
legal
marketers.”
It’s
a
helpful
reference
as
firms
enter
budget
season
this
fall.

Key
takeaway:

The
survey
shows
the
adoption
rates
of
various
technology
tools
in
law
firms.
In
2024,
popular
tools
have
included:

• 
  Content
  syndication
• 
  Customer
  relationship
  management
• 
  Alumni
  portals
• 
  Sales
  enablement
• 
  Marketing
  automation
• 
  Talent
  management
• 
  Social
  media
  publishing
• 
  Data
  enrichment

What’s
on
the
decline?
Search
and
social,
accessibility
and
compliance,
and
search
engine
optimization.

In
the
months
ahead,
the
LMA’s
Strategies
&
Voices
will
shift
to
focus
on
Client
Service.

Do
you
have
a
compelling
case
study
about
your
firm,
or
marketing
insights
to
share?


Share
your
ideas

with


Strategies
&
Voices

today.

Ed.
note:
Welcome
to
our
daily
feature,

Quote
of
the
Day.

It
makes
no
sense
to
say
that
some
individuals
who
failed
the
bar,
according
to
the
State
Bar’s
standard
of
competency,
are
deemed
qualified
because
they
helped
the
State
Bar
by
participating
in
an
experiment.

—
An
excerpt
from
a

letter
written
by
California
law
school
deans
sent
to
the
state
Supreme
Court,
requesting
that
judges

block
the
state
bar
from
using
Kaplan
materials
on
the
February
2025
bar
exam,
and
asking
for
an
“across-the-board”
score
boost
for
applicants,
rather
than
a
score
boost
just
for
those
who

sign
up
to
take
experimental
versions
of
Kaplan-written
exams.

---

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.

My
first
memory
of
comedian
and
podcaster
Theo
Von
came
from
his
stint
on
MTV’s
Road
Rules,
which
folks
of
a
certain
age
will
remember
as
“The
Real
World
but
in
a
Winnebago.”
For
everyone
else,
it’s
the
show
that
used
to
produce
contestants
for
The
Challenge
before
they
started
populating
that
show
with
failed
Love
Island
participants.
In
one
episode
where
Theo
doggedly
grilled
castmates
over
whether
or
not
they
hooked
up,
the
gone-but-not-forgotten
genius
website

Television
Without
Pity
titled
their
summary
“The
Redneck
Inquisition.”
Von
has
known
how
to
lean
on
his
Louisiana
roots
to
get
deceptively
good
“I’m
just
a
simple
country
lawyer”
results
for
years.

In
the
most
recent
episode
of
his
popular
This
Past
Weekend
podcast,
Von
and
fellow
comedian
Bobby
Lee
were
discussing
Bobby
lookalikes
—
“Kim
Jung
Un
and
I
come
from
the
same
body
type”
—
when
Lee
raised
Trump
campaign
spokesperson
Steven
Cheung
and
asked
the
producer
to
look
up
“I
think
he’s
an
attorney…
for
Trump.”

Which
the
producer
confirmed,
EXCEPT
he
found
this
by
searching
for
Steven
CHUNG
and
not
CHEUNG,
pulling
up
the
feed
of

Above
the
Law
resident
tax
law
columnist
Chung.

Cheung,
by
the
way,
is
not
an
attorney.

Obviously,
Above
the
Law
does
not
have
a
Trump
campaign
spokesperson
as
a
columnist…

anymore.

---

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.

Early
presidential
voting
is
kicking
off.

It’s
time
for
me
to
stop
foaming
at
the
mouth
and
start
trying
to
influence
things.

For
my
friends
who
have
been
Republicans
for
decades
—
who
voted
for
Reagan
and
McCain
and
Romney
over
the
years
—
please
read
on.

Here’s President
Reagan
on
NATO:
“If
our
fellow
democracies
are
not
secure,
we
cannot
be
secure.
If
you
are
threatened,
we
are
threatened.
And
if
you
are
not
at
peace,
we
cannot
be
at
peace.”

Here’s Donald
Trump
on
NATO: “Someone
said,
‘Sir!
Would
you
leave
us
if
we
don’t
pay
our
bills?’
They
hated
my
answer.
I
said,
‘Yeah,
I
would
consider
it.’”

Trump’s
former
National
Security
Advisor, John
Bolton,
made
it
even
more
explicit:
If
Trump
wins
in
November,
“the
U.S.
will
be
out
of
NATO.”

Here’s President
Reagan on
free
trade:

America’s
most
recent
experiment
with
protectionism
was
a
disaster
for
the
working
men
and
women
of
this
country.
When
Congress
passed
the
Smoot-Hawley
tariff
in
1930,
we
were
told
that
it
would
protect
America
from
foreign
competition
and
save
jobs
in
this
country
—
the
same
line
we
hear
today.
The
actual
result
was
the
Great
Depression,
the
worst
economic
catastrophe
in
our
history;
one
out
of
four
Americans
were
thrown
out
of
work.

Here’s Donald
Trump on
the
same
subject:

We
are
going
to
have
10%
to
20%
tariffs
on
foreign
countries
that
have
been
ripping
us
off
for
years,
we
are
gonna
charge
them
10%
to
20%
to
come
in
and
take
advantage
of
our
country
because
that
is
what
they
have
been
doing.

President
Reagan famously
said
that
the
Eleventh
Commandment
was:
“Thou
shalt
not
speak
ill
of
any
fellow
Republican.”

Donald
Trump called
Dick
Cheney,
for
whom
you
voted,
“an
irrelevant
RINO.”

Donald
Trump
had
this
to
say
about
John
McCain,
for
whom
you
voted:
“He’s
not
a
war
hero.
He
was
a
war
hero
because
he
was
captured.
I
like
people
who
weren’t
captured.”

Donald
Trump called
Mitt
Romney,
for
whom
you
voted,
a
“pompous
ass”
—
and
that
was before Romney
voted
to
impeach
him.

Donald
Trump
called
Paul
Ryan,
for
whom
you
voted,
“a
loser
who
left
Congress
in
disgrace.”
I
don’t
remember
whether
that
was
before
or
after
Trump
called
Ryan
“weak”
and
“stupid.”

And
Donald
Trump,
of
course,
stood
silent
for
three
hours
while
a
mob
attacked
the
Capitol
Building
on
January
6,
2021. 
Trump
neither
asked
the
mob
to
stop
nor
asked
the
National
Guard
to
protect
the
legislative
branch.

Can
you
imagine
Reagan,
or
Cheney,
or
McCain,
or
Romney,
or
Ryan
doing
the
same?

I
know
that
you’re
a
Republican.
I
know
that
you
think
Democrats
are
the
enemy.

But
please
think
hard
about
Trump
before
you
vote.

---

 


Mark Herrmann spent
17
years
as
a
partner
at
a
leading
international
law
firm
and
is
now
deputy
general
counsel
at
a
large
international
company.
He
is
the
author
of



The
Curmudgeon’s
Guide
to
Practicing
Law and Drug
and
Device
Product
Liability
Litigation
Strategy (affiliate
links).
You
can
reach
him
by
email
at [email protected].

Black
Card:
“We
have
terrible
news.
Seven
years
ago,
150,000
people
paid
us
$15
to
protect
a
pristine
parcel
of
land
on
the
US-Mexico
border
from
racist
billionaire
Donald
Trump’s
very
stupid
wall.
Unfortunately,
an
even
richer,
more
racist
billionaire,
…………
snuck
up
on
us
from
behind
and
completely
fucked
that
land
with
gravel,
tractors,
and
space
garbage.”

White
Card:

Elon
Musk,
via
SpaceX,
the
rocket
company
he
uses
to
subsidize
his
stupid
plan
to
colonize
Mars
for
the
Übermenschen.

In
2017,
the
guys
behind
the
wildly
successful
party
game
Cards
Against
Humanity
(CAH)

crowdsourced
$15
each
from
roughly
150,000
people
to
“purchase
a
plot
of
vacant
land
on
the
US/Mexico
border
and
retain
a
law
firm
specializing
in
eminent
domain
to
make
it
as
time-consuming
and
expensive
as
possible
for
Trump
to
build
his
preposterous
wall.”

“Unfortunately,
the
United
States
government
is
more
powerful
than
a
comedy
card
game,”
they
conceded.
“However,
we’ll
do
everything
we
can
to
protest
the
wall
and
slow
down
the
process
of
eminent
domain.
If
Trump
tries
to
build
a
wall
on
our
land,
we’ll
be
a
big
pain
in
the
ass.”

And
indeed,
Trump

was
a
“big
pain
in
the
ass,”
and
continues
to
be
so.
But
with
respect
to
the
CAH
plot
in
Texas,
Elon
Musk
turned
out
to
be
an
even
bigger
pain.
According
to
a

complaint
filed
in
the
District
Court
of
Cameron
County,
SpaceX,
which
has
a
launch
site
just
three
miles
away,
cleared
the
land
of
vegetation,
laid
down
hard
gravel,
and
has
been
using
it
as
a
construction
site
for
six
months.

“After
we
caught
him,
SpaceX
gave
us
a
12-hour
ultimatum
to
accept
a
lowball
offer
for
less
than
half
our
land’s
value,”
CAH

wrote
on
a
website
announcing
the
suit.
“We
said,
‘Go
fuck
yourself,
Elon
Musk.
We’ll
see
you
in
court.’”

The
complaint
alleges
trespass,
nuisance,
unjust
enrichment,
and
tortious
interference
with
existing
and
prospective
contracts
and
business
relationships.
That
last
is
a
pretty
good
troll,
since
it’s
exactly
what
Twitter
alleged
in
the

SLAPP
suit
against
Media
Matters
for
America
for
publishing
screenshots
of
Nazi
content
next
to
ads
for
companies
like
IBM,
Disney+,
and
Oracle.
Twitter
dragged
Media
Matters,
which
operates
in
DC,
into
federal
court
in
Texas
demanding
to
be
made
whole
for
the
ensuing
advertiser
exodus,
and
it
ensured
that
it
got
the
case
in
front
of
Judge
Reed
O’Connor,
one
of
the
only
judges
in
the
country
craven
enough
to

deny
a
motion
to
dismiss
for
lack
of
personal
jurisdiction.

Here,
CAH
claims
reputational
damage
with
the
donors
who
subsidized
the
purchase
of
the
land
and
demands
at
least
$15
million.

“Musk,
by
allowing
his
company
to
wrongfully
operate
on
CAH’s
Property,
casts
the
shadow
of
possible
association
between
him
and
CAH,”
they
argue
in
the
complaint.
“Nothing
could
be
more
offensive
to
CAH
nor
more
harmful
to
its
reputation
with
its
supporters.”

In
addition
to
suing,
CAH
set
up
ElonOwesYou100Dollars.com,
to
publicize
the
effort.

If
we
win,
we’ll
equally
split
the
lawsuit’s
net
proceeds
among
all
150,000
of
our
original
subscribers,
up
to
$100
each.
While
this
isn’t
enough
to
compensate
our
subscribers
for
the
anguish
they’ve
suffered
witnessing
Elon
Musk
defile
their
once-verdant
land⸺where
wild
horses
galloped
freely
in
the
Texas
moonlight⸺we
think
it’s
a
pretty
good
start.

“P.S.
We
will
also
accept
Twitter.com
as
compensation,”
they
add.

It’s
an
excellent
troll,
and
one
which
is
guaranteed
to
drive
the
internet’s
most
brain-poisoned
oligarch
to
lose
his
shit.

---

Liz
Dye lives
in
Baltimore
where
she
produces
the
Law
and
Chaos substack and podcast.

Early
presidential
voting
is
kicking
off.

It’s
time
for
me
to
stop
foaming
at
the
mouth
and
start
trying
to
influence
things.

For
my
friends
who
have
been
Republicans
for
decades
—
who
voted
for
Reagan
and
McCain
and
Romney
over
the
years
—
please
read
on.

Here’s President
Reagan
on
NATO:
“If
our
fellow
democracies
are
not
secure,
we
cannot
be
secure.
If
you
are
threatened,
we
are
threatened.
And
if
you
are
not
at
peace,
we
cannot
be
at
peace.”

Here’s Donald
Trump
on
NATO: “Someone
said,
‘Sir!
Would
you
leave
us
if
we
don’t
pay
our
bills?’
They
hated
my
answer.
I
said,
‘Yeah,
I
would
consider
it.’”

Trump’s
former
National
Security
Advisor, John
Bolton,
made
it
even
more
explicit:
If
Trump
wins
in
November,
“the
U.S.
will
be
out
of
NATO.”

Here’s President
Reagan on
free
trade:

America’s
most
recent
experiment
with
protectionism
was
a
disaster
for
the
working
men
and
women
of
this
country.
When
Congress
passed
the
Smoot-Hawley
tariff
in
1930,
we
were
told
that
it
would
protect
America
from
foreign
competition
and
save
jobs
in
this
country
—
the
same
line
we
hear
today.
The
actual
result
was
the
Great
Depression,
the
worst
economic
catastrophe
in
our
history;
one
out
of
four
Americans
were
thrown
out
of
work.

Here’s Donald
Trump on
the
same
subject:

We
are
going
to
have
10%
to
20%
tariffs
on
foreign
countries
that
have
been
ripping
us
off
for
years,
we
are
gonna
charge
them
10%
to
20%
to
come
in
and
take
advantage
of
our
country
because
that
is
what
they
have
been
doing.

President
Reagan famously
said
that
the
Eleventh
Commandment
was:
“Thou
shalt
not
speak
ill
of
any
fellow
Republican.”

Donald
Trump called
Dick
Cheney,
for
whom
you
voted,
“an
irrelevant
RINO.”

Donald
Trump
had
this
to
say
about
John
McCain,
for
whom
you
voted:
“He’s
not
a
war
hero.
He
was
a
war
hero
because
he
was
captured.
I
like
people
who
weren’t
captured.”

Donald
Trump called
Mitt
Romney,
for
whom
you
voted,
a
“pompous
ass”
—
and
that
was before Romney
voted
to
impeach
him.

Donald
Trump
called
Paul
Ryan,
for
whom
you
voted,
“a
loser
who
left
Congress
in
disgrace.”
I
don’t
remember
whether
that
was
before
or
after
Trump
called
Ryan
“weak”
and
“stupid.”

And
Donald
Trump,
of
course,
stood
silent
for
three
hours
while
a
mob
attacked
the
Capitol
Building
on
January
6,
2021. 
Trump
neither
asked
the
mob
to
stop
nor
asked
the
National
Guard
to
protect
the
legislative
branch.

Can
you
imagine
Reagan,
or
Cheney,
or
McCain,
or
Romney,
or
Ryan
doing
the
same?

I
know
that
you’re
a
Republican.
I
know
that
you
think
Democrats
are
the
enemy.

But
please
think
hard
about
Trump
before
you
vote.

---

 


Mark Herrmann spent
17
years
as
a
partner
at
a
leading
international
law
firm
and
is
now
deputy
general
counsel
at
a
large
international
company.
He
is
the
author
of



The
Curmudgeon’s
Guide
to
Practicing
Law and Drug
and
Device
Product
Liability
Litigation
Strategy (affiliate
links).
You
can
reach
him
by
email
at [email protected].

There
are
three
constants
in
life:
death,
taxes,
and
YSL
RICO
fuckery.
The
shenanigans
died
down
after
the
defense
shifted
from
questioning
Lil
Woody,
but
things
are
turning

back
up
to
11
with
Quindarrius
“Lil
Dee”
Zachary
—
QZ
for
short
—
on
the
stand.
His
short
time
on
the
stand
feels
less
like
the
stuff
you’d
expect
of
a
serious
racketeering
trial
and
more
like
a
medley
of
realty
TV
show
greatest
hits.
For
example,
there
are
moments
that
channel
Flavor
of
Love:

Judges
have
done
far
worse
than
giggle
at
a
smitten
man
on
the
witness
stand,
but
pull
it
together,
Judge
Whitaker!
You’re
overseeing
a
serious
trial,
not
a
school
dance
where
the
“will
they,
won’t
they”
students
hold
hands
for
the
first
time.

There
were
moments
that
channel
Sober
House:

I
don’t
even
know
what
show
this
would
be,
but
it
is
great
television
nonetheless:

Between
this
case
and
the
upcoming
Diddy
trial,
you
should
cancel
all
of
your
subscriptions
to
those
streaming
sites.
These
are
going
to
be
the
only
things
worth
watching.

Earlier:

Woody
Is
Back
In
The
Hot
Seat
&
Credibility
Is
Rapidly
Burning

YSL
RICO
Prosecutors
So
Bad
Judge
Mandates
Tutorial
On
How
To
Do
Their
Jobs

---

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.

With
Q4
nearly
upon
us,
Biglaw
firms
most
definitely
have
the
urge
to
merge.
Within
the
last
month,
three
major
mergers
have
already
been
announced
—

Troutman
Pepper
and
Locke
Lord,
followed
by Ballard
Spahr
and
Lane
Powell,
then
by

Womble
Bond
Dickinson
and
Lewis
Roca. 
Law
firm
merger
interest
is
at
an

“all-time
high,”
and
it’s
no
surprise
that
two
more
firms
have
signaled
that
they’ll
soon
be
combining.

Today,
Am
Law
100
firm
Taft
Stettinius
&
Hollister
and
Mid-Market
50
firm
Sherman
&
Howard
announced
that
they’d
combine
to
create
a
1,050-lawyer
firm,
with
a
total
of
more
than
$810
million
in
gross
revenue
based
on
last
year’s
numbers.
The
merger
will
take
effect
on
January
1,
2025,
and
the
new
firm
may
see
itself
rise
up
to
20
spots
in
the
Am
Law
100.

Taft
has
been
doing
quite
well
in
recent
years,
growing
its
revenue
by
more
than
400%
since
2017.
With
growth
still
in
mind,
the
firm
may
not
be
done
when
it
comes
to
mergers.
The

American
Lawyer
has
the
scoop:

In
an
interview,
Bob
Hicks,
the
managing
partner
and
chairman
of
the
executive
committee
of
Taft,
said
that
the
firm
is
also
in
preliminary
talks
with
two
or
three
other
firms
for
a
potential
combination,
although
he
noted,
“I
normally
talk
to
20
or
30
firms
before
I
find
one
that’s
viable.”
…

Hicks
said
that
[Taft
and
Sherman
&
Howard]
have
already
begun
integrating
their
people
and
systems,
anticipating
the
combination,
and
their
operations,
websites,
and
internal
systems
will
be
ready
to
launch
together
on
January
1.
However,
their
partner
compensation
systems
may
take
around
one
to
three
years
to
fully
integrate
because
each
separate
firm
will
be
deciding
partner
rates
for
now,
according
to
Hicks.

Congratulations
to
Taft
and
Sherman
&
Howard
on
what
promises
to
be
a
successful
alliance.

In
the
Latest
Big
Merger,
Taft
to
Combine
with
Sherman
&
Howard
[American
Lawyer]

---

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.