Author: TSA Press

The COVID-19 crisis had given us a lot of time to think, worry, and maybe even plan for the various twists and turns that life brings. Admittedly planning for illness and death is not a pleasant activity, although in theory it should provide some kind of relief that one’s affairs are in order. This is important not only with regard to one’s own care, but with respect to children, parents, partners, friends, and charities.

Like an annual physical exam or dental cleaning, we know we must, but we often delay. Fear, anxiety, cost, and time are all factors in delaying that which all adults, regardless of familial structure and net worth, should accomplish. Executing estate planning documents, specifically a last will and testament, power of attorney and healthcare proxy, need not be a tremendous production, especially in the precarious times in which we live. At a minimum, we should all execute three basic documents, thus mitigating any future drama.

When we pass away, our assets are distributed according to their title, beneficiary designation, a last will and testament, or by the state’s laws of intestate. Joint accounts pass to co-owners, accounts and policies with named beneficiaries pass to the named individuals, and a last will and testament will determine the recipient of any individually held asset, such as a bank account, real estate, or tangible item. If you die without a will, your state’s laws dictate who gets your assets and that may not coincide with your wishes. For example, if you do not have a spouse, children, parents, or grandparents, it is possible that your aunts, uncle, nieces, nephews, or even cousins can receive assets. In some states, stepchildren may be intestate heirs. If you have absolutely no family, your estate may escheat to the State. Especially if you have an estranged familial relationship, you should write a last will in order to properly disinherit anyone whom you do not wish to take under your estate. If you have charitable inclinations, it is also important to make a last will and testament, to include the organization in the disposition of your assets.

If you have minor children, guardians are appointed under the last will and testament. In an abundance of caution, successor guardians are also appointed in the event the initial nominees cannot serve. Trustees may be appointed as well, to manage the minors’ monies until they are old enough to do it for themselves. Without these last will appointments, the local probate judge will choose the children’s guardians, and they may not be the individuals you feel best suited to serve in that capacity (e.g., you cannot stand your mother-in-law, but the judge believes she is an amazing choice).

You should speak with an attorney in your locality about drafting and executing a last will and testament or other testamentary vehicles such as a revocable trust. The attorneys will also address any tax issues related to your estate.

All adults should also execute a power of attorney. A last will and testament controls your assets when you pass away, and a power of attorney controls when you are alive, but, incapacitated or unable to act on your own behalf. The power of attorney authorizes an agent to stand in your place regarding financial matters such as banking, filing taxes, dealing with real estate, and applying for governmental benefits. Without a power of attorney, assets may not be accessible to pay for maintenance, care, or support. Families, health facilities, and even city and state bureaus may commence guardianship proceedings to appoint a guardian to manage your finances or personal needs in the event of incapacity.

The third branch in the trinity of  essential estate planning is a healthcare proxy.

Simply, if you are unable to make medical decisions for yourself, an appointed agent will be called upon to act. You should discuss your medical wishes with the agent, not just regarding end-of-life care, but also in the event of temporary illness. You may include specific instructions as to end-of-life care, such as directions as to mechanical respiration, cardiac resuscitation, and antibiotics.

In many jurisdictions certain restrictions as to in-person executions have been lifted or modified to accommodate social distancing practices during this time. COVID-19 has taught us a lot about the fragility of life. It also confirms that death does not discriminate based on age, race, net worth, or marital status. COVID-19 conjures up a lot of complicated emotions and economic and social problems. Taking care of your estate plan need not add to that stress. Instead it should provide some solace and allow you to free your mind.

---

Cori A. Robinson is a solo practitioner having founded Cori A. Robinson PLLC, a New York and New Jersey law firm, in 2017. For more than a decade Cori has focused her law practice on trusts and estates and elder law including estate and Medicaid planning, probate and administration, estate litigation, and guardianships. She can be reached at cori@robinsonestatelaw.com.

The Midwestern firm of Taft Stettinius & Hollister finalized its merger with Minneapolis-based Briggs and Morgan in the early days of 2020. Remember January? It seems like several years ago now, before the pall of coronavirus overtook every facet of our lives. Anyway, back then, the merger went off without issue, and the new and improved Taft Law firm looked to break into the Am Law 100.

“There were no hiccups or problems we didn’t anticipate,” said Steven Ryan, the partner in charge of Taft’s Minneapolis office. Taft managing partner Robert Hicks expressed similar sentiments, saying while there was some “scrambling” at one point, “it couldn’t have gone any better.”

Anyway, the world is a very different place now.

Though the firm claims strong financials, they’ve determined the prudent course of action is a regimen of austerity measures. From Taft Law’s statement (available in full on the next page) on the cost-cutting:

Taft substantially out-performed its budgets in 2018 and 2019 and is performing ahead of budget through March 31, 2020. As a result of conservative financial management, Taft maintains a strong balance sheet and liquidity. Notwithstanding its strong financial position, as a result of the significant disruption to the global and United States economies that already has occurred as well as the anticipated, pervasive effects of COVID-19 that almost certainly will disrupt those economies for the next several months, Taft adopted a comprehensive COVID-19 Financial Plan, effective April 1.

So what is the firm doing to cut costs? Well, partner draws were cut by 25 percent, and the firm had to make layoffs — of both attorneys and staff — and they’ve left the door open for additional austerity measures, should they be necessary:

Under Taft’s COVID-19 Financial Plan, all partner draws were reduced by 25% and minimal reductions – spread across all of its seven primary offices – were made in attorney headcount (1.4% firm wide) and staff headcount (3.5% firm wide). Given the significant uncertainty of COVID-19’s financial impact on the firm’s many clients, the forward-looking plan contemplates multiple scenarios and pivot points to help firm leadership select the best course of action based on future information and conditions as they develop.

Taft’s Chairman and Managing Partner Robert J. Hicks had this to say about the firm’s COVID-19 plan:

“We are very thankful for our size, scale and financial strength, together with the remarkable loyalty and culture of our clients and personnel. These advance, conservative measures are merely intended to add to our existing strong financial and liquidity positions so that we can better weather the COVID-19 storm while we help guide our clients through this time. Taft prides itself on looking forward and never hesitating to invest in or protect our future. We view this proactive approach as the appropriate and best practice in this situation.”

If your firm or organization is slashing salaries, closing its doors, or reducing the ranks of its lawyers or staff, whether through open layoffs, stealth layoffs, or voluntary buyouts, please don’t hesitate to let us know. Our vast network of tipsters is part of what makes Above the Law thrive. You can email us or text us (646-820-8477).

If you’d like to sign up for ATL’s Layoff Alerts, please scroll down and enter your email address in the box below this post. If you previously signed up for the layoff alerts, you don’t need to do anything. You’ll receive an email notification within minutes of each layoff, salary cut, or furlough announcement that we publish.

---

Kathryn Rubino is a Senior Editor at Above the Law, and host of The Jabot podcast. 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).

It’s hard to imagine that anything good might come out of the coronavirus/COVID-19 crisis. I almost died from COVID-19, spending six days on a ventilator in critical condition, so I certainly don’t have many good things to say about the disease.

And so far, for Biglaw, the news associated with coronavirus has been … bad. If you scroll through Above the Law’s coronavirus coverage, you’ll see story after story about firm after firm implementing reductions or delays in partnership draws, cuts or freezes for associate and staff compensation, and more drastic measures, like layoffs and furloughs.

But upon reflection, I came up with a few silver linings to the coronavirus cloud. Here they are:

1. A greater openness to working remotely.

This is perhaps the most obvious benefit of the current crisis. Forced by stay-at-home orders to work remotely, lawyers have done so — and have discovered that the world continues to turn.

Many younger lawyers, especially millennials, are quite familiar and comfortable with working remotely. But many older lawyers, the ones who have traditionally resisted remote working, are now discovering that it’s quite feasible — and really not that bad.

Exhibit A: David Boies, chairman and founding partner of Boies Schiller Flexner.

“I’ve always been dubious about working remotely,” Boies told me when we spoke by phone yesterday. “I didn’t quite understand how you can have the interactions that are so critical for practice. But now I’m getting into experiences and patterns of working remotely where I’ve developed these same kinds of interactions.”

Another friend, also a partner at a top Biglaw firm, posted on Facebook a list of things that she hopes we retain even after we enter “our next normal.” Here’s one of her items: “A more flexible attitude towards work from home in workplaces like mine that have been slow to adopt it. God knows, I’m dying to get back to my office, and see my colleagues in person, and I still think a lot of personal interaction is good for the work and good for people, but now that we’ve demonstrated that we CAN work from anywhere, a once-a-week tolerance wouldn’t be so bad.”

2. More tech savvy among lawyers, especially older lawyers.

In a piece for the Times of London, Richard Susskind, a longtime observer of the legal profession, made this prediction:

If law firms and court systems cannot find a way to work remotely in the coming weeks, Covid-19 will rapidly run them into the ground. To do so they will need systems to manage secure messaging, video calling, online collaboration and virtual meetings. Tools and companies previously unknown to most lawyers and judges — such as the messaging services Signal, Zoom, Slack and Google Hangouts — will be embedded in everyday legal life within a fortnight.-

And it sounds like lawyers and law firms are learning how to work remotely, by embracing technologies that many of them resisted learning about for the longest time. In my conversation the other day with David Boies, he marveled at how many tech tools he has learned how to use in the past few weeks — out of necessity.

“I’m meeting with co-counsel by Zoom, I’m arguing to a court of appeals in a few weeks by videoconference, and I’m FaceTiming with my grandkids,” he said. “Like many senior lawyers, I resisted adopting new technologies — but now we’re being forced to, and it’s a good thing.”

3. An enhanced focus on value and efficiency.

The Great Recession shifted some power away from Biglaw and toward in-house counsel. The recession (or depression?) arising out of the coronavirus crisis will likely do the same, meaning that law firms will have to compete harder than ever to win the business of corporate counsel. As Basha Rubin and Mirra Levitt, co-founders of Priori, wrote in a smart and thoughtful piece for Corporate Counsel:

As a result [of the economic crisis], many in-house legal departments will reduce their outside counsel spending and pause W-2 hiring. In turn, those changes will put pressure on law firms and other service providers to deliver higher quality services more efficiently and cost-effectively than before the pandemic crisis…. [T]he pressure to deliver excellent services at lower cost could incentivize collaboration — and potentially drive valuable long-lasting partnerships throughout the legal ecosystem.

This pressure could be painful (or even fatal) for firms that can’t cut it. But it will be a tonic to the firms that rise to the challenge, and beneficial for Biglaw as a whole.

4. A greater sense of perspective.

I emerged from my COVID-19 battle with a much better sense of what truly matters. When you’re fighting for your life, wondering if you’ll ever see your family again, you realize that most of what we get stressed about in day-to-day life is pretty petty. Our nation and our profession are undergoing a similar crisis — and crisis helps put things in perspective.

In normal times, litigators love to get worked up over document productions. They enjoy holding opposing counsel’s feet to the fire, demanding strict compliance with discovery deadlines.

But I just heard a story from a New York litigator that I don’t think I would have heard in normal times. This litigator is handling a document production that’s due in a few weeks. Opposing counsel, lawyers from out of state, reached out and said, in essence, “We’ve heard about what you’ve been going through in New York. Are you okay with the current deadline, or do you need more time? If you need more time, just let us know, and we’ll notify the court.”

Litigators playing well with each other? We are definitely not living in ordinary times. And maybe that’s not (entirely) a bad thing.

---

David Lat, the founding editor of Above the Law, is a writer, speaker, and legal recruiter at Lateral Link, where he is a managing director in the New York office. David’s book, Supreme Ambitions: A Novel (2014), was described by the New York Times as “the most buzzed-about novel of the year” among legal elites. David previously worked as a federal prosecutor, a litigation associate at Wachtell Lipton, and a law clerk to Judge Diarmuid F. O’Scannlain of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. You can connect with David on Twitter (@DavidLat), LinkedIn, and Facebook, and you can reach him by email at dlat@laterallink.com.

Biglaw firms continue to roll out austerity measures in attempts to stave off the financial pains the COVID-19 crisis may bring in the future. Some firms now find themselves taking more cost-cutting measures than they initially hoped would be necessary to shore up the cash needed to weather this storm. One of those firms is Ogletree Deakins.

The Am Law 100 firm previously canceled its summer associate program without guaranteeing future employment for law students. The firm also approved special COVID-19 pay for some staff, and when those monies ran out, placed them on unpaid leave (with paid benefits through May 31). At the time, we mused that this “unpaid leave” sounded like a polite way of saying those employees had been furloughed. Now sources report to Above the Law that there are pay cuts for all remaining employees.

Specifically, Ogletree will be reducing pay for equity partners (by 20 percent), associates (by 15 percent), and highly compensated staff (by 10 percent) for the remainder of 2020. A memo detailing the firm’s plans can be found on the next page.

We reached out to Ogletree for comment on these salary cuts, and received this statement from a spokesperson (with an update on the unpaid leave health benefits):

In order to preserve jobs and maintain the stability of the firm for the long run, our firm announced on Monday, April 20, 2020, that it has made the difficult decision to implement pay reductions for attorneys and highly compensated staff through the end of the year. The firm will not reduce compensation for staff who earn less than $100,000 per year. For staff who earn $100,000 per year or more, the firm will reduce compensation by 10 percent. We will reduce attorney salaries by 15 percent, and we expect equity shareholders to receive a 20 percent reduction in compensation.

In addition, as we shared last week, a number of employees have exhausted their firm-provided COVID-19 pay and have recently begun or will begin a period of temporary unpaid leave. For these employees, the firm has extended the period it will pay the full health, vision, dental, short-term disability, and life insurance premiums for an additional month, through June 30, 2020. We plan to reinstate staff once the economy recovers.

Hopefully this will be enough to “preserve jobs” at Ogletree amid a pandemic.

(Flip to the next page to see the full memo from Ogletree.)

If your firm or organization is slashing salaries, closing its doors, or reducing the ranks of its lawyers or staff, whether through open layoffs, stealth layoffs, or voluntary buyouts, please don’t hesitate to let us know. Our vast network of tipsters is part of what makes Above the Law thrive. You can email us or text us (646-820-8477).

If you’d like to sign up for ATL’s Layoff Alerts, please scroll down and enter your email address in the box below this post. If you previously signed up for the layoff alerts, you don’t need to do anything. You’ll receive an email notification within minutes of each layoff, salary cut, or furlough announcement that we publish.

---

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 Twitter or connect with her on LinkedIn.

There are many ways for a professor to teach. When this is all over, we are sure there will be a great discussion about the merits of “synchronous” versus “asynchronous” learning. By far the most popular version of “synchronous” learning is to have a “Zoom” class.

It occurred to us that the use of Zoom might be problematic in a variety of ways. And that might be the topic of another blog post. Today, we wanted you to miss the musical Hamilton, while at the same time discuss some of the common issues of using Zoom.

The Ten Commandments of Zoom (with apologies to everyone and everything Hamilton for this parody):

Profs: One, Two, Three, Four
Students: Five, Six, Seven, Eight, Nine
Deans: It’s the Ten Zoom Commandments

Full School: Number One

The invitation requires acceptance
If the class cancels there’s no attendance

Full School: Number Two

If it’s on, grab your friend
They only have a second

Full School: Number Three

Have the tutors meet face to face
Negotiate a space
Or negotiate a time and a place

Full School: Number Four

If there’s no review session that’s alright,
Time to get some outlines and find the online site

Debate the issues with civility
But hedge your answer with deniability

Full School: Five

Study before the sun is in the sky
To ask a question wave your hand up high

Full School: Six

Leave a note for your roommate
where you’re going to be
Pray to Heaven
It’s somewhere they can’t see

Full School: Seven

Brief your cases, prepare for the moment
Of adrenaline when you finally face prof opponent

Full School: Eight

Your last chance to negotiate
Cite your authority, see if it sets the record straight

Dean 1: Mortimer?
Dean 2: Yes, sir?
Dean 1: Can we agree that online teaching technology can be obscure?
Dean 2: Sure. But the profs must still learn to adapt sir.
Dean 1: Hang on, how many students must pass/fail to be sure, sir?
Dean 2: Okay, we’re doing this but the students we must assure.

Full School: Number Nine

Look the camera straight in the eye,
Aim no higher
Summon all the courage you require

Then count

Students: One Two Three Four
Faculty: Five Six Seven Eight Nine
Deans: Ten Faces!
Hamilton: Teach!

---

TempDean is an anonymous professor and former interim administrator at a top 100 law school. Email him c/o lawprofblawg@gmail.com if you must.

LawProfBlawg is an anonymous professor at a top 100 law school. You can see more of his musings here. He is way funnier on social media, he claims. Please follow him on Twitter (@lawprofblawg) or Facebook. Email him at lawprofblawg@gmail.com. 

In safer, happier and more secure times, David Tepper can be found minimizing his tax bill while maximizing the amount of tax money he receives as the wealthiest owner of an NFL team. But these are not safe, happy or secure times, and Tepper is showing off his brass balls, calling on his fellow billionaires to do their part in helping the less fortunate weather COVID-19 and its economic impact.

“We hope that everybody steps up,” says Tepper, who is bunkering with his family in an undisclosed location. “I think in general, in times of need, people have to step up if they have the ability to step up. Period.”

* Amazon’s lawsuit against the Department of Defense is on hold to give the DoD time to reconsider it’s decision to award a $10 Billion contract to Microsoft. $10 Billion is chump change for Jeff Bezos… [Business Insider]

* A lawyer may be dismissed from a case because he removed his pants at a courthouse security checkpoint after taking offense at being asked to remove his belt. [ABA Journal]

* Dewey know Howrey going to weather the storm of COVID-19? Borrow more money. [American Lawyer]

* A teen has filed a lawsuit after allegedly being threatened with arrest if she didn’t remove social media posts suggesting that she had COVID-19. [ABA Journal]

* Authorities claim that a Florida lawyer worked as a pimp when he wasn’t practicing law. Sounds like the plot of a horrible sequel to Risky Business… [Miami Herald]

---

Jordan Rothman is a partner of The Rothman Law Firm, a full-service New York and New Jersey law firm. He is also the founder of Student Debt Diaries, a website discussing how he paid off his student loans. You can reach Jordan through email at jordan@rothmanlawyer.com.

Yesterday, the permanent secretary in the ministry of information Nick Mangwana tweeted that we — overseas returnees — were demanding hotels. No, this is an outright lie! We did not demand hotel accommodation. In fact, I was shocked when I read the tweet which many Zimbabweans believed, including those who purport to be frontline human rights defenders. And the Fourth Estate too was hoodwinked.

Here is the other side of the coin. Just like any other Zimbabwean citizen with rights including access to shelter, water and health amongst other basic amenities, we demanded to be housed at a decent facility. Decent in as far as basic health as defined by health bodies in the wake of the coronavirus is concerned. By basic facilities we meant at least a room with a bed and blankets; toilets with running water and clean bathrooms.

Belvedere, a facility which government authorities provided doesn’t have all those. And government spin doctors led by Mangwana want all Zimbabweans and the rest of the world to laud government for a job well done when in fact what they are doing is exposing returning residents to COVID-19, a pandemic government is claiming to be working to halt.

That hundreds of desperate college students live in shanty facilities such as Belvedere with no complaints doesn’t make it a habitable place. That other citizens returning via Plumtree and Beitbridge ports of entry have agreed to be housed in dirty, stinky and cholera-infested facilities doesn’t make it right either and doesn’t indicate at all that the government of Zimbabweans cares about its citizens. If this treatment of citizens by Zimbabwean authorities has anything to show, it is that authorities who have presided over poor infrastructure including hospitals does not care at all about protecting its citizens from COVID-19.

While we understand that this is an abnormal situation, a period of crisis, no right thinking Zimbabwean should commend government for treating its returning citizens like animals. When we arrived at Belvedere we thought authorities had already assessed the place and certified it as habitable. Although we did not expect anything flashy given the fact that this is a temporary quarantine facility in an emergency situation, we didn’t expect that we will be thrown in a place which doesn’t have basic amenities such as running water.

To make matters worse, government authorities who came to address us regarding our concerns were arrogant. A case in point is when a senior official in the ministry of Public Service, Labour and Social Welfare threatened to unleash police on us, to force us to occupy an inhabitable accommodation.

“If you don’t comply we will ask police to enforce our commands,” the permanent secretary in the Social Welfare ministry who should otherwise know better about the government’s obligations about taking care of the vulnerable, us included, told us.

He added: “You can’t choose where to stay, we chose for you.”

This was after we had requested to be either quarantined at our homes or housed at a decent facility. Alternatively we requested the government authorities to open one of the hotels so that we pay living costs on our own while government provides food. We also made it clear to the government authorities that we’re willing to be quarantined like other returning citizens but only if bare minimum conditions are met.

To those who have made insulting returning residents, their full-time jobs during this ongoing crisis; please know that while we understand the importance of being isolated from the rest of the community now, the conditions that returning residents are subjected to will in fact propagate the spread of COVID-19. While most of us are from Coronavirus hotspots, we don’t necessarily have the disease, but because of our poor living conditions in quarantine we’re now at more risk of contracting the deadly disease more than other citizens yet government should protect everyone equally.

And while some of you are wailing, thinking returning home is the stupidest thing to do, remember that some of the returnees are students whose accommodation has been withdrawn by their universities in countries such as the U.K and the U.S. And also remember that some of the returning residents are people who had just visited for shorter periods and therefore cannot live in those countries indefinitely. After all it’s better to die in Zimbabwe where your family can bury you albeit within 24 hours than to die elsewhere where your family will not be able to access your mortal remains.

And by the way, returning residents also have homes where they can actually self-quarantine and cater for basic services our government is failing to meet. While most of us are willing to be quarantined, we also do not understand why authorities are imposing a 21 day isolation, instead of the WHO approved 14 days. Why should a cash-strapped government seek to host returning citizens for 7 extra days at it’s expense when it can use those resources to cater for more vulnerable communities who are already bearing the brunt of the extended lockdown, with barely no food?

And while you naysayers are supporting government on outright violation of human rights in the name of fighting COVID-19, remember that the government that you’re enabling to abuse it’s returning citizens now will not stop at that. Post COVID 19 this government will continue to violate citizen rights because you enabled it to do so during a crisis.

Last but not least, Mangwana, we appreciate your ardent job in timely informing the nation about COVID-19, especially using real time platforms such as twitter. But I just have one request: Please stop spinning public interest information. It doesn’t help your government and citizens who should make informed decisions during this unprecedented time. And to gullible Zimbabweans, please always take what government authorities say with a pinch of salt. 99.9 percent of what they say is false or half-true. The worst you can get from government authorities is a single story narrative. Find the other narrative before you opine on issues of public interest.

Quick updates:

1. There is still no running water at Belvedere.
2. Contrary to reports, police did not guard Belvedere so that returnees don’t riot or at worst escape. As a matter of fact, three police officers came, engaged with returnees then left after an amicable discussion.
3. Nomatter what authorities say, we won’t stay where we risk catching more viral diseases in addition to coronavirus. We will fight for our rights until we’re relocated to a facility that meets basic conditions: running water, one-person room, functional ablution facilities, bedding and food.

For the purposes of signing off, let’s just say my name is Case #0

Post published in: Featured

36 year-old Lovemore Zvokusekwa of Chitungwiza appeared at Harare Magistrates Court on Monday
20 April 2020 after he was arrested on Saturday 18 April 2020 by Zimbabwe Republic Police (ZRP)
officers, who charged him with publishing or communicating false statements prejudicial to the state as
defined in section 31(a)(i) of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act.

In court, prosecutors alleged that Zvokusekwa, who is re represented by Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human
Rights, peddled falsehoods when he reportedly circulated a false and unsigned press statement
purportedly written and issued by President Mnangagwa titled “EXTENSION OF LOCKDOWN PERIOD
BY 13 DAYS ONLY” advising people that he had extended the national lockdown period by 13 days from
20 April 2020 to 3 May 2020.

Zvokusekwa, prosecutors charged, disseminated the false press statement on different WhatsApp
platforms using his Huawei mobile phone handset and yet President Mnangagwa had not written or
signed the purported press statement.

Prosecutors said some witnesses who received the false press statement will testify against Zvokusekwa
during his trial.

Zvokusekwa, who was remanded in prison custody, will return to court on 13 May 2020.

Post published in: Featured