Legal Ops Leaders: The Legal Chief Of Staff


Olga V. Mack is the CEO of Parley Pro, a next-generation contract management company that has pioneered online negotiation technology. 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 founded the Women Serve on Boards movement that advocates for women to participate on corporate boards of Fortune 500 companies. She authored Get on Board: Earning Your Ticket to a Corporate Board Seat and Fundamentals of Smart Contract Security. You can follow Olga on Twitter @olgavmack.  

Florida Lawmakers Cite Above The Law As Legal Precedent… Oh No.

If only this had happened before I delivered my recent CLE presentation at the New York State Bar Association. I spoke about Social Media and the Law and had a whole section on the phenomenon of serving process over Twitter. Little did I know, two weeks later I would be cited as an expert on this whole process and have a little case study to discuss.

The Florida House of Representatives recently launched an investigation of the Florida Coalition Against Domestic Violence. The organization’s former chief, Tiffany Carr, collected millions in taxpayer funds, but reportedly pocketed $7.5 million for herself, raising questions of mismanagement at the non-profit. When the House voted to subpoena Carr last month, it began its effort to serve her, only to find she’d disappeared.

Yesterday, the House took the unorthodox step of serving the subpoena via Twitter:

The move raised questions among observers wondering if this was even legal. House spokesperson Fred Piccolo Jr. responded to critics citing the highest legal authority imaginable — Above the Law:

Welp, there you have it folks. That said, I’m not entirely sure this particular Tweet holds up. It might, but there may be more court maneuvering before this is all over.

Under the Federal Rules, Rule 4(f)(3) provides for alternative forms of service that the court deems “reasonably calculated, under all circumstances to apprise interested parties of the pendency of the action and afford them an opportunity to present their objections.” This is how the Wikileaks Tweet was blessed under the law.

Though a critical factor in the Wikileaks Tweet was the fact that plaintiffs showed that the Wikileaks account was actively monitored and that the subject of the action was definitely the person monitoring the account. But Carr resigned as head of the organization so tagging that agency wouldn’t guarantee that she would be aware of the Tweet. There is no personal handle being “at-ed” here. Courts might have concerns that the Tweet wasn’t reasonably calculated to apprise Carr. Indeed the media coverage about the Tweet might have reached her before the Tweet did.

Also, I’m no expert in Florida law, but I’m not sure there’s a corollary for Rule 4(f)(3). Rule 1.070 covers process and it appears the rule authorizes personal service, service by mail, and service by publication (governed by statute, Title VI, Chapter 49) but those rules seem very narrowly construed. There just doesn’t seem to be the sort of “catch-all” provision that Rule 4(f)(3) provides.

Perhaps the House should get on creating that provision!

Service by Twitter is very real, but it’s not as simple as throwing a notice into the Twittersphere. Whether the Florida House managed to effectively serve Carr yesterday is going to require a little more scrutiny than it may have appeared at first glance.

Disgraced nonprofit CEO served a subpoena via Twitter by Florida House [South Florida Sun-Sentinel]

Earlier: Can You Serve A Subpoena Over Twitter? Yes, And It Just Happened To WikiLeaks


HeadshotJoe 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 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.

Like Many Hedge Fund Investors, Dyal Capital Partners Isn’t Getting What It Thought It Paid For

15 Years Ago, I Wanted To Die

(Image courtesy of Brian Cuban)

It’s a cool and overcast February afternoon as I turn my car into the parking lot of Green Oaks Hospital.

Fifteen years ago, my brothers executed the same turn with me, an unwilling passenger in the back seat.

Today is a happy occasion. I am sitting for an interview about mental health and my journey to long-term recovery.

Fifteen years ago, I was in crisis. My brothers dragged me out of my bedroom past a .45 automatic on my nightstand and a granite dresser top littered with Xanax pills and cocaine residue. I did not want to leave that room. I did not want to see the next morning. I wanted to die.

The drizzle has started before I can exit my car. I’m glad I brought my black jacket because we are taking outside photos.

Fifteen years ago, it was warm and sunny. Bad things happen on beautiful days.

I walk through the front doors and take a seat on the bench, just inside the entrance. I catch eyes with the nurse inside the reception glass. There are several people in the waiting room. I wonder what is going on in their lives.

Fifteen years ago, the nurse behind the glass was the enemy. My brothers were the enemy. I wanted to die.

A nice gentleman, sitting across from me, smiles and says hello. I look at him and smile back. Fifteen years ago, I don’t look up from the floor. I am ashamed. I am scared. I want to die.

The photographer and interviewer arrive. We walk through a secured area into the heart of the facility. There are many doors to many rooms. I wonder if one of those rooms is where I sat with the psychiatrist, nurse, and family. They were all trying to help me. I wanted to die.

We take photos in a beautiful, green, parklike area behind the facility. It is strangely surreal. I don’t notice the cold.

Fifteen years ago, all I saw only concrete and darkness. I wanted to die.

We have a wonderful interview. I break down relating the role of my brothers and late father in saving my life, and the bond we share today. I pause the interview to compose myself.

Fifteen years ago, my only thought was that I  am dark stain on the Cuban name, deserving to be wiped spotless from the earth, with no further mention. I wanted to die.

The interview ends. We stroll back out through the locked entrance into the lobby. The same pleasant man says hello. He has an infectious smile in an area where there is so much pain. I remind myself to smile more.

Fifteen years ago, I could not remember the last time I smiled. I could not remember a day I had not cried. I wanted to die.

The rain is coming down in buckets. I run to my car. I pull out into the street and drive toward home. I watch the building get smaller in the rear-view mirror. It’s now paradox. So much pain but a symbol of my future. Good things do happen on rainy days.  I am glad to be alive.


Brian Cuban (@bcuban) is The Addicted Lawyer. Brian is the author of the Amazon best-selling book, The Addicted Lawyer: Tales Of The Bar, Booze, Blow & Redemption (affiliate link). A graduate of the University of Pittsburgh School of Law, he somehow made it through as an alcoholic then added cocaine to his résumé as a practicing attorney. He went into recovery on April 8, 2007. He left the practice of law and now writes and speaks on recovery topics, not only for the legal profession but on recovery in general. He can be reached at brian@addictedlawyer.com.

It’s Been A Mad March, But Here’s A Chance To Win $5,000

With the men’s college basketball tournament approaching, we are inviting our clients and candidates to join Lateral Link’s bracket challenge for a chance to win $5,000. Entry is free, all you have to do is register on Lateral Link, follow us on LinkedIn, and fill out your bracket. Before practicing at Am Law 200 firms, most of our recruiters attended top law schools, and had the chance to witness the trials and tribulations of their school’s team firsthand. Here are their thoughts on their school’s chances in the upcoming tournament. 

Paul Dorfeld | The Ohio State University

When I came to Ohio State, the basketball program was fresh off NCAA sanctions under the previous head coach. Over the next decade-plus, Thad Matta revitalized the program, leading them to five conference crowns, four conference tournament titles, two final fours, and an NIT title. Current head coach Chris Holtmann has brought the program back the past three seasons and currently has them ranked in the top 20. The boys are poised for a run this March, so the Buckeyes are my sleeper pick!

Jesse Hyde | University of Michigan and Loyola University Chicago School of Law

In 2018, my two alma maters squared off in the Final Four. I have enjoyed seeing the recent success of both programs and am particularly excited about Juan Howard being Michigan’s coach. He is an outstanding leader and next year’s recruiting class is stacked. Go Blue!

Steven Rushing | Florida

Florida was never a basketball school. At least until winning back-to-back NCAA championships in ’06-’07. Being on campus for that incredible run made winning seem easy and we’re living and breathing off that feeling to this day. With only a championship able to quench that thirst, I’m hoping for a miracle run with our hot and cold team this March Madness.

Scott Hodes | Florida

I started at the University of Florida right after their Final Four run in 1993. Coach Billy Donovan took over soon thereafter and really put Florida basketball on the map. Since that time, they made history with back-to-back championships with arguably one of the best college basketball teams in recent memory, and Gator fans have grown accustomed to deep tournament runs. Although inconsistent as of late, they are not a team to be taken lightly come every March.

Ryan Belville | Michigan

Michigan basketball keeps me afloat during the, shall we say, somewhat lean football years as of late. Two final fours and an elite 8 in the last seven years is solid. Let’s see if we can make another deep run this year. 

David Lat | Harvard

I am probably the one person in America who does not follow March Madness, so I’m afraid I don’t have much to say about Harvard — and given their history in the tournament, I don’t think there’s much to be said. I’ll just quote the Harvard Lampoon from 2013, when the Crimson did surprisingly well: “America, we are sorry for messing up your brackets and also your financial system and everything else.”

Ed. note: This is the latest installment in a series of posts from Lateral Link’s team of expert contributors. Michael Allen is the CEO of Lateral Link. He is based in the Los Angeles office and focuses exclusively on Partner and General Counsel placements for top firms and companies. Prior to founding Lateral Link in 2006, he worked as an attorney at both Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP and Irell & Manella LLP. Michael graduated summa cum laude from the University of California, San Diego before earning his JD, cum laude, from Harvard Law School.


Lateral Link is one of the top-rated international legal recruiting firms. With over 14 offices world-wide, Lateral Link specializes in placing attorneys at the most prestigious law firms and companies in the world. Managed by former practicing attorneys from top law schools, Lateral Link has a tradition of hiring lawyers to execute the lateral leaps of practicing attorneys. Click here to find out more about us.

Donald Trump’s Devaluation Of The Federal Clerkship

It seems like a simple question to answer: do you want your entire legal career tied to a name that brings up the words “not-qualified” when someone Googles it?

Astoundingly, there are people out there acting like law students should be thrilled at hanging that kind of career albatross around their necks. Go ahead and trust your instincts, folks — this is a bad deal.

A federal clerkship used to be a blanket golden ticket attorneys could ride through retirement. Well, firms are about to get a lot more critical of where folks earned that career chit.

For decades, the federal clerkship has been the most coveted career accolade a young practitioner could secure. The opportunity to step outside the academy and learn the contours of the law at the knee of an accomplished lawyer at the height of his or her profession — a federal judge — offered the height of practical education. Beyond the education, clerks created lifelong bonds with judges and co-clerks that translated into a powerful professional network.

But what if those wizened federal judges were replaced with hack apparatchiks and attorneys barely removed from law school themselves? Stuffed robe ideologues who can’t even clear the minimal bar of a qualified rating from the ABA? Anti-gay bloggers! People who won’t even commit to saying segregation is illegal! The dulling of the college of America’s sharpest legal minds is a slow-motion tragedy.

It’s also a mess poised to spill over to the job market. It’s certainly not a critical mass yet, but attorneys I’ve talked to recently are already saying they take more time these days to peel back the onion to make sure that Middle District of Bumbletown clerkship was with the venerable former law school dean and not some 28-year-old Daily Caller contributor Leonard Leo pulled out of his rolodex. Firm-wide recruiting edicts about the value of clerkships will, for the time being, still be enough to get the latter past a non-attorney staff member, but once lawyers get involved in the process the scrutiny is going to go up and candidates are going to have to justify what they’ve actually learned on these apprenticeships.

As it turns out, we’re already seeing students “vote with their feet.” Harvard is begging students to apply for clerkships with Trump’s dregs because no one seems to want to apply. This pressure is understandable from the perspective of the school. After all, ranking systems — like the Above the Law rankings, in fairness — value clerkships blindly and the school gets to celebrate “X percentage of our students received federal clerkships!” on promotional materials. But it’s the curse of the ivory tower — if the folks pushing these students into shaky clerkships with non-qualified judges took some more time interacting with the profession, they’d hear these rumblings about tightening up on the value of clerkships.

But law students are already far savvier than those pushing them into clerkships willy-nilly. They’ve seen the writing on the wall and don’t see the value in sacrificing a year’s earnings in Biglaw to get a clerkship that lawyers are going to look at side-eyed in the years to come. The students are making a rational choice by being picky with the names they want to tie to their careers.

When the top students take themselves out of the running, it only exacerbates the scrutiny that will be leveled on these clerkships because the judges are still going to fill those slots somehow. If they drop down to lower-tier programs and we start seeing “Arizona Summit” and “federal clerkship” in the same résumé, there’s going to be some serious reevaluation of that clerkship. However the more likely outcome will be subpar students from elite schools will try to slide into those clerkships to bolster middling résumés with the magic c-word. It’s a tempting hack, but one that could easily backfire. When the hiring powers-that-be start to scrutinize these judges, they’re not only going to discount that experience, they may look askance at the whole resume, wondering why they want to work with someone trying to game the system.

And whatever happens to fill those slots, it’s just going to further devalue the profession’s estimation of that position when experiences mount of subpar attorneys coming out of these specific positions.

The moral of the story is that clerkships are a career move and students need to approach these opportunities like they would any other career opening. Just as a student considers every job with an eye toward how it would look when applying for the next job, it’s worth taking the time to consider “what am I getting out of this clerkship and how will it look on my résumé the next time I’m on the market?”

The bright side of all of this, for the most lucky students out there, is that high-quality clerkships are going to be even more valuable as they become rarer and rarer.

Earlier: Harvard Law School Students Are Uninterested In Clerking For Trump Appointed Judges


HeadshotJoe 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 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.

Peering Into Biglaw’s Crystal Ball

If you want a glimpse of what private law may look like in 2030, check out the work being done at Elevate. The alternative legal service provider (“ALSP”) has been on a tear of late, and it’s got a vision for the shape of the legal marketplace that merits attention. Luckily for me, members of Elevate’s senior leadership, including CEO Liam Brown and President John Croft were willing to sit down and discuss that vision with me recently.

The elevator pitch for Elevate is simple, according to Brown: “We’re Accenture for law.” Elevate operates as a consulting group working with both in-house legal departments and private law firms on long-term strategy issues, technology selection, workflow design, legal-spend planning, and most any other kind of problem a legal team might need to address. So far, so normal. Where Elevate gets interesting is in its basic conception of the legal marketplace, and its vision for how to break down that concept going forward.

The Three Camps

Elevate sees the legal market broken into three camps: law firms, law companies, and law departments. Law firms are self-explanatory; collections of licensed attorneys whose primary focus is providing clients legal advice. Law companies are what most would call ALSPs. Law companies focus on providing their clients with business solutions to problems that include a legal dimension. Law departments are the in-house interface point for law firms and law companies, and provide their parent company legal advice, strategy, and business solutions.

Elevate’s fundamental insight is that, although each of these three types of organizations is different, the people who make them up are fundamentally the same. Per Brown, “when you think about the sort of tribe of people, whether or not you work at a law company, a law department, or a law firm today, those people are just delivering differently for customers. We’re all kind of sort of part of this tribe of people that are really trying to make a dent in the universe.”

Given that the members of these organizations are generally like-minded, it makes little sense not to attempt to leverage that by working together. Elevate’s goal, then, is to fuzz the traditional hard lines between law companies like itself and the law firms and law departments it works with. “Instead of there being this bright line where law firms do all of these things and then law companies do all of those things and they never cross, law firms and law companies actually collaborate on one area.”

Getting The Team Together

Elevate’s effort to fuzz the lines between ALSP and law firms is in full swing. In the UK, where ownership of law firms isn’t limited to attorneys, Elevate purchased a midsize firm called Halebury outright. While the entities remain separate, their unified ownership means that Elevate can effectively cover the entire spectrum of legal services. There’s no reason Halebury attorneys wouldn’t want to freely collaborate with Elevate professional staff, because every dollar earned and good result achieved flows back to Elevate itself.

In the US and elsewhere, where law firm ownership remains restricted to licensed attorneys, Elevate has partnered closely with independent Biglaw firms. According to Elevate’s recent presentation at the legal-oriented SOLID West Conference, its team-up with international powerhouse Hogan Lovells is paying off in big ways.

For example, as you’re probably aware, the London Interbank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”) has long been the standard benchmark interest rate. It’s omnipresent in transactional contracts. LIBOR is being discontinued in 2021, and the administrative headache of managing the transition is staggering. Hogan Lovells set out to become a one-stop shop for clients dealing with that transition. Rather than build it from the ground up, Hogan Lovells brought in Elevate’s technical and consulting expertise to build its tool, which ended up making the program 50% more efficient than Hogan Lovell’s traditional law firm model would have been.

In a similar vein, Hogan Lovells turned to Elevate to help it build a flexible lawyer resourcing center. As John Croft put it, “if you look at the shape of any law firm, what are the chances that the client needs the exact mix of people the firm employs on any given day? The answer is 0%. If you wander around a law firm, either there are people sitting around doing nothing or there are people pulling all-nighters and working all weekend.”

Hogan Lovells could have built its own staffing program from the ground up. Instead, it collaborated with Elevate, which had already built its own flexible legal staffing center in Phoenix. Elevate used that expertise and infrastructure to help Hogan Lovells build its own captive law firm to provide low cost virtual services to its clients, which ended up reducing Hogan Lovell’s overhead on the project by 57%, cutting down the break-even point of the project dramatically.

To A Better, More Profitable Future

Under conventional thinking, what Elevate is doing is crazy. It’s helping one of its competitors provide better and broader customer service at lower prices. But by getting out of the competitive mindset, and by being willing to fuzz the lines and see each other as collaborators rather than enemies, Hogan Lovell and Elevate have to date brought in $40million in revenue they otherwise wouldn’t have been able to get.

While breaking down the traditional lines between lawyers and other legal professionals may seem threatening to those of us with JDs, in Brown’s experience the collaborative approach has improved the lives of the lawyers working with Elevate. According to Brown, marrying ALSPs and law firms has meant unbundling Elevate’s lawyers from the lower-tier work, “the cluster of email in their inbox that would turn up on a Thursday evening when they were leaving to pick up their kids from football practice.” In Elevate’s vision, lawyers spend less time on busy work and more time where they’re most valuable, analyzing law and advising clients.

Elevate’s vision is a strong one. I’ve long said that law firms looking to remain competitive in the coming economy will need to find new ways to deliver value at reduced costs. Partnering with ALSPs, rather than competing with them, is a strong play in that direction. Both players bring different strengths to the table, and both stand to win by bringing onboard clients they couldn’t land separately.

Collaboration, instead of competition, can lift up everybody.


James Goodnow

James Goodnow is an attorneycommentator, and Above the Law columnist. He is a graduate of Harvard Law School and is the managing partner of NLJ 250 firm Fennemore Craig. He is the co-author of Motivating Millennials, which hit number one on Amazon in the business management new release category. As a practitioner, he and his colleagues created a tech-based plaintiffs’ practice and business model. You can connect with James on Twitter (@JamesGoodnow) or by emailing him at James@JamesGoodnow.com.

Washington Law Student Placed In Self-Quarantine Over Suspected Case Of Coronavirus

(Image via Getty)

After a New York lawyer tested positive for coronavirus, concerns over the illness caused one New York law school to close its doors and a law student at another New York law school to go into self-quarantine. Now, the mysterious virus is touching the legal community on the other side of the country in Seattle, Washington, an outbreak hotspot where there have been 70 confirmed cases of coronavirus and 10 deaths.

According to The Daily, a first-year student with a suspected coronavirus diagnosis at the University of Washington School of Law has been placed in self-quarantine by a doctor. Here are some additional details:

“The student’s healthcare team reports that according to CDC guidelines, the student currently does not warrant testing,” the email [from School of Law dean Mario Barnes] reads. “As a result, we do not know with certainty whether the student has coronavirus.”

To be tested, a patient’s physician or health care provider has to order it based on guidance from local and federal health officials, according to UW Medicine. People cannot refer themselves for testing. Keith Jerome, who leads the virology division of the UW School of Medicine department of laboratory medicine, noted that people with more mild symptoms should not get tested so as to not strain the limited resources locally.

The student is receiving care and will stay out of public for the next 14 days.

Dean Barnes told students that all public areas and restrooms at the law school are being disinfected and undergoing expanded cleanings, and the university has made a recommendation that if someone is feeling sick, they should stay home, and call their doctor before showing up unannounced.

“We will make every effort to accommodate students who choose to self-isolate,” Dean Barnes wrote in his email. “Students will be treated as if they are experiencing a health issue that keeps them from attending class; no doctor’s note is needed.”

We will be closely following these latest developments. What is your law school or law firm doing to protect students and employees from coronavirus? Please text us (646-820-8477) or email us (subject line: “Coronavirus Response”). Stay safe, everyone.

Law student directed to self-isolate on novel coronavirus suspicions [The Daily]

Earlier: Prior ATL coverage of the coronavirus outbreak


Staci ZaretskyStaci 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.

‘I Was Told There Would Be No Math?’ – An Accounting Quiz For Attorneys

Law school is known as a place for those who have an aversion to numbers, but unbeknownst to these mathphobic young students, they may wind up having to analyze financial records in their future law practices. In fact, having even a basic understanding of accounting principles will allow lawyers to become more knowledgeable about the legal matters they’re working on.

But how can you measure your knowledge on these generally accepted rules and regulations?

Luckily for you, Above the Law has teamed up with PwC to create a quiz that will test you on the basics of this need-to-know part of legal practice.

Do you have what it takes?

Take the Quiz Now

George Conway Disappears From Wachtell Website

George Conway via Twitter

America’s favorite Never-Trumper Republican, George Conway, has abruptly disappeared from the Wachtell Lipton website.

The husband of Trump’s 2016 campaign manager and current spokesperson-at-large Kellyanne Conway was last seen admonishing Chuck Schumer for attacking the Supreme Court — which was mildly inappropriate on the Senator’s part but hardly worth the consternation the scolds were giving it — and maxing out his contribution to the Biden campaign. The ubiquitous Tweeter even changed his banner to a Biden 2020 poster:

But checking in on Conway at the firm where he — until recently at least — served as Of Counsel brings up…

It’s like this American treasure of the Twittersphere just got Carmen Sandiegoed.

What’s going on? Does this portend a move to get more active in the upcoming campaign? Spending more time with his SuperPAC to convince Republicans to ditch Trump? Earlier this morning, he retweeted this message from the SuperPAC, The Lincoln Project, suggesting some Trump attack ads were in the offing:

Where have you gone, George? Wherever you are, keep Tweeting.


HeadshotJoe 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 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.