Author: TSA Press

Now that most people are quarantined at home with few diversions other than watching television and movies, many people have been talking about their quarantine watch list. Indeed, most of my friends have been discussing each of the series they have been binge-watching since the enactment of stay-at-home orders, and all of the somewhat strange and interesting TV shows and films that bring them joy during this rough time.

I myself have some weird tastes in television shows and movies, and I even still subscribe to Netflix DVDs so that I can get my hands on hard-to-find media that interests me. However, I hope readers will not find it too odd when I suggest that lawyers should watch The Paper Chase TV series in order to binge a good television show during the quarantine.

Most people within the legal profession are familiar with the classic 1973 film The Paper Chase. The movie stars the legendary John Houseman and involves the tribulations of a first-year law student as he handles his studies as well as a romance with the daughter (pre-Bionic Woman Lindsay Wagner) of his contracts professor. When I was in law school about a decade ago, people were still recommending that individuals watch The Paper Chase movie to get a sense about what law school was like and how they can succeed in classes. Of course, law school has changed a lot since the 1970s, and the research methods, teaching strategies, and other aspects of the movie do not really relate to the modern law school experience. However, the movie does encapsulate many of the difficulties that law students faced in the past and still encounter today.

I discovered during my second year of law school that The Paper Chase had been turned into a four-season television series during the 1970s and 1980s. I had never heard of a TV series involving law students before, so I decided to get my hands on the DVDs of the episodes. At first, I ordered the DVDs one at a time through Netflix DVDs, but I eventually heard that a hallmate of mine had seasons one and two on DVD. You see? At least one other person was interested in the series! In any case, I then churned through the first couple of seasons of the show pretty quickly, but seasons three and four were not available on DVD at that time. Fortunately, those seasons became available more recently, and I have since seen every episode of the series.

The Paper Chase is one of the most incredible television series I have ever watched. Probably the most unique aspect of the show is that even though it was filmed decades ago, it still mostly relates to the modern law school experience. For instance, the episode about on-campus recruiting is somewhat reminiscent of the environment during on-campus recruiting at many law schools across the country in the present day. In addition, the episodes about dorm life, politics among law review editors, and the stresses of exams are extremely accurate.

Of course, some of the book research that the students conduct in the television series has little bearing on the modern law school experience. In addition, episodes about the fights between law students and computer science geeks are more appropriate for media like Revenge of the Nerds rather than a true-life depiction of the law school experience. However, the series does capture the nuanced issues faced by all types of law students.

For instance, season three includes a middle-aged empty nester who attends law school later in life, which reminded me of many classmates I had in law school. In addition, the episodes about difficult decisions law students must make between clerking and taking a high-paying law firm job are also very real to many law students. In any case, no TV series or movie is going to be completely accurate about the subject matter it depicts, but The Paper Chase series does an amazing job detailing the trials and tribulations of law students.

This is the reason why pretty much every lawyer can enjoy and appreciate the series. Virtually every practicing attorney went to law school, and although there are different types of law schools, they all contain many common experiences: being cold-called in class, taking high-stress final examinations, jockeying for positions on law journals, competing for job offers, and a number of other struggles.

As a result, all lawyers can appreciate the situations of the series’ characters, since lawyers can definitely see themselves in the experiences depicted in the show. In addition, perhaps the older generation of lawyers would appreciate the series the most. The show is a reminder of how legal education was several decades ago, and we can appreciate all of the advancements that have been made more recently.

In the end, I highly recommend that lawyers check out The Paper Chase. Some may be immediately turned off by the fact that the television series is old, and some of the plot lines do not apply to more modern experiences. However, many lawyers can relate to the stories depicted in the show, and as a result, the series should definitely be on any lawyer’s quarantine watch list.

---

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.

In spite of President Trump’s ostensible Supreme Court victory in asserting his authority over the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, some of his allies have lamented the missed opportunity to euthanize the hated Elizabeth Warren in independent agency form like that other misbegotten measure of the Dodd-Frank law, the Volcker Rule. And, depending on what should happen in November, they are perhaps right to worry.

But, in the meantime, Kathy Kraninger & co. are, like their colleagues elsewhere, making the most of the time they’ve got left to them, phantasmagorically continuing the transformation a body whose name dedicates it to protecting consumers into one protecting those preying on consumers.

The support from the PPP enabled [the council] to maintain operational continuity at a time of severe disruption due to the pandemic. We were able to maintain all our vital services to schools and candidates and at the same time develop a new online delivery system for the LSAT that enabled candidates to earn a score from the safety of their own homes and enabled this year’s applicant volumes to catch up with last year’s.

— Kellye Testy, president of the Law School Admission Council, commenting on the $5.3 million paycheck protection program loan the council received enabled it to develop the LSAT-Flex, an online version of the law school admissions exam that was used for the first time in June 2020 following the cancellation of in-person tests due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

---

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.

Let’s face it: 2020’s been a little rough. But tough times, like necessity, can be the mother of invention, and law firms can rise from the ashes from the lessons of this difficult year.
In this webinar, we will understand the primary drivers of profitability and how to drive more revenue through automation.

Join Bob Ambrogi, founder of LawSites Blog, and Rocket Matter’s CEO Larry Port for a webinar on July 9th at 1 p.m. ET/10 a.m. PT who will dive into ways to streamline your business.

Key Objectives:

1. Explore techniques to predict and improve profitability for law firms.
2. See tech demonstrations that make routine tasks, including getting paid, automated.
3. See how hourly billing can move to alternative fee arrangements and drive more revenue with technology.

By filling out the form you’re you are opting in to receive communication from Above the Law and its Partners.

Holy structuring, Batman!

Yesterday Deutsche Bank inked a $150 million settlement with New York’s Department of Financial Services (DFS) for the bank’s failure to comply with anti-money laundering laws in its dealings with Jeffrey Epstein and two small, foreign banks.

In the Consent Order, DFS describes Epstein’s attorney making 97 cash withdrawals on his client’s behalf, totaling $200,000 over just four years. When asked why he needed so much money, the unnamed attorney claimed Epstein needed it for “travel, tipping and expenses.”

But the attorney had questions of his own for Deutsche.

In May of 2014, the attorney “inquired into how often he could withdraw cash on behalf of Mr. Epstein without triggering an alert.”

RELATIONSHIP COORDINATOR-1 sent an email to the branch manager stating that ATTORNEY-1 “asked how often they could come in to withdraw cash without creating some sort of alert,” and asking “Is it once a week? Twice a week? Once every other week?” The Bank has represented that it has no record of any response.

DB claims to have understood this as a question about its own $7,500 limit on third-party withdrawals, not an attempt to evade triggering a mandatory report to the Treasury Department for a cash transaction of $10,000 or more.

UH HUH.

In 2017, Epstein’s lawyer asked again, but this time he specifically wanted to know “whether a withdrawal transaction in excess of $10,000 would require reporting and, upon being advised that it would, broke up the withdrawal transaction over two days.”

Why said attorney asked the bank teller instead of Mr. Google about Treasury reporting triggers is unclear. But if he had done a minimum of research, he’d probably have discovered that the government takes a rather dim view of structuring transactions to evade reporting requirements.

Faced with the attorney’s apparently unequivocal admission that his goal was to evade federal reporting, not the bank’s own rules, Deutsche’s compliance department sprung into action!

No, not really, but they definitely gestured in the direction of action.

[An anti-money laundering officer], among others, spoke with ATTORNEY-1 and advised that (a) his patterns gave the appearance of structuring, (b) this pattern was unacceptable, and (c) he would be provided with additional information about CTR reporting requirements. ATTORNEY-1 represented that he had not intended to structure cash withdrawals. Bank personnel found ATTORNEY-1 credible and permitted him to continue to withdraw cash from his own and Epstein’s accounts.

They asked him if he was committing a crime, and he said “no.” Case closed!

Then in 2018, just before Deutsche closed the branch nearest Epstein’s house, the same attorney made a $100,000 cash withdrawal. When asked, he explained that “Mr. Epstein needed the funds for tipping and household expenses.” Which seemed to satisfy the bank.

It did not, however, satisfy the New York State Department of Financial Services. And if it wants to lean on this attorney for cooperation against Epstein’s still-living co-conspirators, it appears to have ample leverage.

Great job, ATTORNEY-1!

Consent Order [In the Matter of Deutsche Bank AG]

---

Elizabeth Dye (@5DollarFeminist) lives in Baltimore where she writes about law and politics.

Lately, I have seen a lot of interest from lawyers wanting to set up their own practices. Maybe they are sick of being an employee. Or they didn’t get the job or promotion they wanted. Or they got laid off. Or that’s what they always wanted to do.

So for the next few columns, I will write about what it takes to set up a simple law practice. When I mean simple, I mean a practice with minimal overhead, costs, and management. I am hoping these columns might be useful for new attorneys or experienced employees who want to start their own firm. It might be useful for law firm owners who want to cut costs or “get back to basics” while the world is changing. But this column is one opinion and should be read with similar columns on this topic as I am sure I’ll miss a few things.

The Things You Will Need To Pay For

Annual state bar dues. Average $250/year.

City or county business license. Average $200/year.

E-fax machine ($15 – $50 startup fee plus monthly or annual subscription fee). Unfortunately, some people still use fax machines. Not a lot but enough to justify paying for one. Thankfully the startup and recurring costs are pretty negligible. You do not need to get an actual fax machine. Your computer along with your printer or scanner can also fax the documents.

Computer, printer, and scanner ($0 to $1,500). If you already have one of these, then good for you. Otherwise, invest in a reliable laptop at a minimum. As for printers, a good all-in-one device that can print, scan, and fax should be enough. While laser printers have slightly better print quality, they are also more expensive. As a rule of thumb, you do not need a laser printer unless you do a lot of printing.

As for a standalone scanner, it might be a good idea to have if you have a truly mobile practice and want to scan documents on the go. Good options are the Fujitsu Scansnap series or the Neatdesk scanner. Otherwise, if your printer can also scan documents, that should be enough.

Office supplies ($100 – $900). Most regular office supplies are inexpensive so startup costs should not exceed more than a few hundred dollars. However, you might want to invest in office software like Microsoft Word and Excel so you can set up billing and print your own letterhead and mailing labels.

Professional attire ($1,000 – $5,000). Look, I know we are working from home, and the lawyer dress code may have relaxed a bit. But we are respected professionals. And some of us are paid more per hour than what people in some countries make in a month. Our clients trust us with their money, intimate details, and even their lives. So we have to look the part. While you don’t need to spend $1,000 or more on a suit, you should look like you have.

Things You Will Need That You Do Not Need To Pay For.

Employer ID Number (EIN). An EIN is useful for a lot of things. First, it can act as a substitute for your social security number. A client may ask you to complete a Form W-9 before they pay you. Unless you have an EIN, you will have to input your social security number on that form. Second, you will need one to set up a business bank account. Third, you will need one to have employees and file federal and state employment tax returns.

Thankfully, getting an EIN is free and fairly simple. You can apply for one through the EIN Online webpage. In most cases, you will get an EIN almost immediately after completing the application.

Second bank account. Technically, you do not need a second bank account if you are fairly organized, do not have multiple sources of income, and have a credit card solely for business expenses. But generally, a second bank account used exclusively for your practice is a good idea.

Now I said second bank account. Not a business bank account. I’ve found that for simple practices, a separate business account does not provide any advantages. The only advantage is that your business name will be printed on checks. So establishing a business checking account might be a good idea if your business issues a lot of checks.

On the other hand, setting up a business bank account might require more work. You may need to have an EIN. Also, some banks require you to pay a monthly service fee unless you maintain a minimum balance (usually ranging from $1,000 to $5,000).

For new or simple practices, you might be better off getting a second personal account, particularly if it is free. Make sure that this second account lists your business address on the checks.

Google Voice. Assuming you have a smartphone, the Google Voice app is a must. It is free. Also, it gives you a second phone number that can be used for calls and text messages. Finally, it can record and email voice messages. And it also gives you a voice transcript (although it is not perfect).

Google Calendar. Google calendar is a great scheduling tool. It can send you reminders through your phone or through email.

Things You Do Not Need To Pay For

A limited liability entity. A lot of attorneys ask whether they should set up a corporation or a limited liability company (LLC) as soon as they start practicing. The two main reasons for wanting to do so is to protect their assets and for tax savings purposes. Also, they may have worked for attorneys who have set up entities for their practice.

The entity might not provide the protection you were hoping for. In almost all states, operating under a limited liability entity does not shield you from professional malpractice liability. It might also not help you get out of a debt, especially if you sign as a personal guarantor in case the entity defaults on their payments.

As for tax purposes, most lawyers opt to choose an S-corporation and a rare few use a C-corporation. While this subject deserves a column of its own, generally, it is better to wait until the practice starts making significant money before incorporating. Otherwise the costs of maintaining the entity will exceed the tax savings. For example, in California, it costs $800 per year to keep a corporation in good standing. The corporation must also pay a $25 annual statement of information fee. Also, you may need to pay $100 to $300 per year to purchase payroll software or hire a payroll service. Finally, you may need to pay state unemployment and disability taxes. This is because the corporation must pay the managing shareholder like an employee and must pay them a reasonable salary. So a corporate practice must save at least $1,000 in taxes in order to break even and justify the corporation’s existence.

Based on the above, you may be better off waiting until your practice starts making money before setting up an entity.

Marketing and advertising. Keep a few things in mind. First, marketing and advertising can be free — you simply need to advertise yourself. It’s slow, and occasionally dull but it eventually works.

Second, and most importantly, marketing and advertising are crapshoots. You don’t really know what works and what doesn’t, no matter what some salesperson’s “analytics” tell you. As such, as a general rule, you should spend only the amount you can comfortably afford to lose.

Startups should at a minimum spend money on a simple website and business cards.

In these pandemic times, there are less in-person networking events and more virtual events. So be familiar with conferencing apps like Zoom. And you may want to spend more time in social media groups.

The above are the bare-bones minimum startup fixed costs to start a simple law practice. I am sure I am missing a lot of other expenses. So depending on your situation, you will spend anywhere between a few hundred and a few thousand dollars to get started. In my next Simple Practice column, I will discuss recurring expenses such as rent. If you have questions or suggestions, feel free to reach out to me.

---

Steven Chung is a tax attorney in Los Angeles, California. He helps people with basic tax planning and resolve tax disputes. He is also sympathetic to people with large student loans. He can be reached via email at sachimalbe@excite.com. Or you can connect with him on Twitter (@stevenchung) and connect with him on LinkedIn.

Partners may have wide latitude to run their practice as they see fit, but one of the fundamental principles of legal representation is, you know, that you are representing the interests of a client. So that means — as a bare minimum — lawyers cannot settle cases without approval from their client first. Yes, even when the client is an insurance company.

Asher Brooks Chancey was fired from his position as a partner in the Philadelphia office of Am Law 200 firm Goldberg Segalla in May 2018. This was after he settled cases he was working on without informing the insurer, Knight Insurance Group, that hired his then firm. Chancey self-reported the lapse in judgment to ethics regulators in September 2019 and was temporarily suspended at that time. Now, the the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has weighed in with its final judgment.

Chancey has been suspended, on consent, from the practice of law for three years, retroactive to his temporary suspension in September. In settling on the punishment, the court cited mitigating factors including his self-reporting, lack of other misconduct, remorse, and Chancey’s diagnosis of depression and anxiety.

As reported by ABA Journal, Knight Insurance has filed malpractice claims over the conduct:

Chancey is accused of agreeing to settle auto accident cases in amounts ranging from $35,000 to $1.5 million without informing the Knight Insurance Group. He is also accused of failing to tell the insurance group about scheduled arbitration hearings and default judgments, failing to file court documents, failing to respond to discovery requests, and failing to pursue evidence.

Chancey has not commented on his suspension.

---

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).

You know how there are some stores that you just can’t stay away from? I guess lawyers and judges have difficulty in staying away from the stupid store. It’s not that hard to do, but there’s something almost magnetic about its allure.

It seems that I am visiting the stupid store more often than I used to. Whether that’s because the past few months of confinement have addled minds or because people don’t think before they talk (that NEVER happens to lawyers and apparently judges as well), or because people are just cranky, crabby, and now displaying their true beliefs. Whatever. It’s ugly out there. I don’t know if anyone remembers how to be kind or ever tries to be any more.

So, in the stupid store, there’s now presently a run on nastiness, vitriol, and vituperative words along with plain old-fashioned foot in mouth, and there’s plenty in stock to go around. Let’s go shopping with a judge and check his shoe size. Two Maryland lawyers also shopped there, and they have been suspended for essentially cleaning out the supplies of nastiness, vitriol, and blatant prejudice.

Here in my very own Central District of California, the chief judge, Cormac Carney, who just assumed the chief judgeship last month, has resigned that position. Intemperate comments did him in. The chief judge was bewildered by blowback arising from his use of the term “street smart” to refer to the Clerk of the Court and Court Executive, Kiri Gray, a black woman, a term that he considered complimentary to Gray. Then Carney complained that criticisms of his remark were analogous to the conduct of the Minneapolis cop who put his knee on George Floyd’s neck. Really? You can read the entire story here.

Miscommunications and hurt feelings abounded. Perhaps there is a lesson here for all of us in how to communicate, how not to communicate, and if it prompts any of us to count to ten before speaking, so much the better. Usually, less is more. I used to think that sincere apologies could soothe hurt feelings, but I am not so sure these days. Since there did not seem to be any way that the chief judge and the clerk/executive officer would be able to work together, the chief judge resigned as chief judge but retained his position as a federal judge.

We can all probably agree that the indefinite suspensions imposed on two government lawyers in Maryland who used vile, even terrifying, words in emails on the job, no less, were completely justified. First, you would think that government lawyers using government emails would be way more temperate in their language, but you would be wrong.

One of the two lawyers indefinitely suspended was an administrative law judge, James Andrew Markey, the other an attorney advisor, Charles Leonard Hancock. Both were working for the Board of Veterans Appeals. The Maryland Court of Appeals opinion about the two speaks for itself. Read it and be mindful of the lessons to be learned and what not to say in emails or any other form of communication that can be seen by others.

The group of employee lawyers communicating through email chain called it a “forum of hate.” (Their words, not mine.) Great words to use in emails, hardly the kind of language appropriate in any email, let alone a government email system.

Let’s just take some examples that the court identified: in response to a photograph of Hancock’s son’s all-white Little League team, Markey asked where the white sheets were and stated “ ‘[b]onfire’ after every victory[,]” referencing the Ku Klux Klan. In another, Markey referred to an African-American woman, a chief veterans law judge, as “a total b [****.]”

Among many other examples, Hancock referred to the aforementioned CVL judge as a “Ghetto Hippopotamus” and “a despicable impersonation of a human woman, who ought to [have] her cervix yanked out of her by the Silence of the Lamb[s] guy, and force[-]fed to her.” Nauseating, disgusting, vile.

The Veterans Affairs Office of Inspector General discovered the e-mails, the Veterans Administration terminated Markey, and Hancock voluntarily retired, a smart move on his part. Eventually, their actions came to bar counsel’s attention. Not a moment too soon.

What did the two attorneys have to say for themselves? They claim that their private exchanges fell outside the ethics rules. Oh, please. On a government email system? Really?

Adopting the hearing officer’s conclusions, the Court of Appeals said that the conduct of the two attorneys was related to the practice of law, “knowingly manifesting bias and prejudice based upon race, sex, sexual orientation, national origin, and socioeconomic status.” They were acting as lawyers when they made the remarks and thus their conduct was prejudicial to the administration of justice.

These were not “stray remarks.” In the words of the hearing officer, the numerous emails contained statements that were “racist, misogynistic, xenophobic and homophobic.” Thus, the discipline imposed. According to the court, Markey is already suspended for reasons unrelated to this case, and Hancock is inactive. They should both stay that way but if there’s any attempt to try change their statuses, their indefinite suspensions would take effect.

What boggles my mind, whatever is left of it, is how could two lawyers who have been in practice for years (1988 and 1994) could be so stupid. Obviously, they shopped at the stupid store, and it seems there is plenty of inventory left in stock.

So, lessons to be learned? You never get into trouble by being quiet; it’s when we open our mouths (I see a foot). We lawyers love to talk, love to email, love to text. Three ways we earn our money and three ways we get into trouble.

Even with the pandemic raging, the stupid store is one store that will never go out of business.

---

Jill Switzer has been an active member of the State Bar of California for over 40 years. She remembers practicing law in a kinder, gentler time. She’s had a diverse legal career, including stints as a deputy district attorney, a solo practice, and several senior in-house gigs. She now mediates full-time, which gives her the opportunity to see dinosaurs, millennials, and those in-between interact — it’s not always civil. You can reach her by email at oldladylawyer@gmail.com.

It should come as no surprise that restructuring is big business right now. Restructuring attorneys at large-enough law firms are getting calls from headhunters telling them things like “restructuring is a hot practice area” and that it is a “great time to make a move”. While this is true, anyone with an internet connection and a set of eyes can draw this conclusion with little analysis. Let’s dig deeper to cover why this is happening and what it means for different classes of attorney.

1. Partners with a Strong External Reputation

We talk to a lot of partners in all practice areas, but let’s face it: bankruptcy partners have not been in fashion for a long time. Certain firms (Kirkland and Weil, to name two) have always had their heavy hitters, but they were not going to move and hiring senior people with business was not something they have ever pursued heavily. Less profitable firms have jettisoned these practices as often as they have bolstered them. The bull market of the last decade-plus has absolved company after company of its sins and caused bankruptcy and restructuring to be an unfashionable skillset. That situation has now changed. The inherent value of a debtor-side restructuring practice is that fee applications are approved by the courts, and as long as the fee application comes with the firm’s actual rack rates for the attorneys, it will be approved. Thus, if there are significant debtors winding up in the bankruptcy courts and you are a partner at a less profitable firm who has the ability to capture those clients, you are leaving a lot of money on the table keeping yourself busy at rates lower than the “big shops” are charging for their third and fourth year associates. As one bankruptcy partner told me last week, “Five more of my client firms are entering bankruptcy court next week, two of them big boys. What am I doing charging $850 per hour?” Let’s have a conversation if this describes you as well.

2. Senior Associates, Counsel, and Junior Partners 

Large firms set rules against hiring non-partners into partner positions, but rules are made to be broken. Especially in the current environment, with regard to restructuring, these rules are being broken regularly. There has probably never been a better time for a bankruptcy counsel or income partner to jump ahead to obtain the “P” or equity, respectively. Of course, even in such an in-demand practice area, associates and counsel must be strong contenders for partnership at their own firms as well, meaning that they show strong emotional intelligence, business sense, and legal skills.  But if you have these things and are just jammed up, this a way for to jump the line.  Because of the weakness in the restructuring practice area generally over the last several years described above, this problem is endemic. Just the other day a client told us that, while they would like to hire a senior associate/counsel candidate or ours with strong skills and experience in restructuring, they could not hire her right now because there are three very senior lawyers in her class at the firm in restructuring, all working like crazy, and all hoping to get the elevation to partner. The likelihood at that firm, mind you, is that none of them will make it – but that’s a different story and not one for print.

In this as in all games, timing is everything. But the time is now for promotions in restructuring. Recently, we worked with an Amlaw 100 firm to recruit a counsel/senior associate from a tier-1 restructuring practice. He joined as partner.  Talking to the MP of the hiring firm yesterday, we learned that listing this new partner on a pitch helped this firm win a debtor-side bankruptcy representation in the new partners’ third week. Given the firm’s institutional client base, the thing most special about the representation is that it was not lost to a restructuring powerhouse. The managing partner raved about this new partner because with this one deal, he probably just paid three years of his own partnership share. Another example is a candidate with a similar pedigree as the first attorney – senior associate at a tier-1 restructuring practice with very little opportunity for upward mobility.  The only difference is, he did his search in 2019 instead of 2020.  At that time, he was turned down by a number of firms with smaller restructuring practices.  The attorney did end up being placed as partner at an Am Law 200 firm, but with much less fanfare. Come to think of it, we need to check on him!

The takeaway is that not only is this a time to try to get a lateral promotion, but that we are constantly in touch with law firm leadership about their needs and strategies.

3. Local Restructuring Counsel

One of the perqs we provide our clients, candidates, and friends is a daily newsletter listing the week’s lateral moves, articles about firm expansions, and a section on bankruptcy filings.  The bankruptcy filing section lists the case, court, and all the law firms listed on the matter, from the “big cheese” law firm leading the deal to local bankruptcy counsel.  Local counsel lawyers with the pedigree and experience typical of a top-tier restructuring firm can use this opportunity to lateral to a larger shop for a pay raise.  Of course, this is also a boom time for these local counsel partners who are fed work from the larger restructuring shops.  But a more junior lawyer who does not yet have these relationships should consider a move – it’s the same work and you’ll be paid better.

Feel free to reach out to us anytime at jobs@kinneyrecruiting.com to reach the whole team (and get the whole story).

On June 21, the Chief Justice of the United States took a walk and fell, cracking his head so badly that he required stitches and an overnight stay in the hospital. For some reason, the American public only learned that the most powerful lifetime official in the country was injured on the evening of July 7.

Despite his brush with slip and fall practice, Chief Justice Roberts is now “fine.” That his last fall back in 2007 was brought on by a seizure — arguably intensifying the public need to know about his fall — was brushed off by doctors, who blamed this fall on “dehydration,” which is never a valid excuse unless you’re canceling a concert where you furiously dance for a couple hours.

And let’s not glide over the double standard that RBG sets off a media firestorm when she gets the sniffles, but Massive Headwound Harry here got to peacefully lounge around the hospital with nary a word. It sucks that a woman is constantly dragged into breathless news cycles where people — on both sides, depending on the president — construct a public narrative about how she has to retire as physically unfit for office, but when the man with a history of seizures busts his head open it’s lost in a news dump.

Gabe Roth of Fix the Court issued this statement:

“The ‘need to inform the public’ is more substantial than Roberts pronounces. Regular health disclosures would give us faith that our nation’s top jurists are capable of handling the rigors of their jobs, and they may even help the justices themselves reflect on their abilities to continue in their positions,” Roth added. “I’m glad Roberts is okay, but based on the way this came out, amid the court’s consistent lack of transparency, I’m appalled.”

Look, it’s actually terrible that there’s a public interest in even the minor private health records of a government official. Unfortunately, that’s what the country signed up for when it turned a life-tenured priesthood into the arbiters of the most important conflicts over government policy. Until we embrace the wisdom of term limits for active judgeships, the public is entirely justified in expecting reports on the justice’s morning stool samples like the royal stand-ins they are.

Thankfully, thanks to quick action and attentive hospital service, Roberts was healthy enough today to strip millions of women of their access to health care.

Chief Justice Roberts recently spent a night in a hospital [ABC News]

---

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 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.