Zimbabwe has not paid its debt, says Eskom – The Zimbabwean

29.6.2019 16:29

JOHANNESBURG – Eskom says it has not received payment from Zimbabwe, the power utility said on Friday.

1:36am

A Zimbabwean family plays card in Harare after the second power cut, which has hit most parts of the country.

AFP

The country’s state-owned power utility owes Eskom more than US$40-million (R563m) for electricity borrowed over the years.

“Eskom would like to state that no funds have reflected on its accounts for Zimbabwe’s outstanding debt as at 28 June at 15h00,” Eskom said in a statement.

“Once Eskom has received the funds, we will then enter into further discussions with Zesa [Zimbabwe Electricity Supply Authority],” Eskom Group Chief Executive Phakamani Hadebe said.

Zimbabwe also owes millions to Mozambique.

Last week, Zimbabwe energy minister, Fortune Chasi admitted that the situation was critical and the country should brace for hard times.

The country has been experiencing lengthy power cuts.

Where did that come from?

Post published in: Economy

Open Committee Meetings Monday 1st to Wednesday 3rd July – The Zimbabwean

PARLIAMENTARY COMMITTEES SERIES 25/2019

Although the National Assembly will be on a short break for the first two weeks of July, the three portfolio committees mentioned below will be meeting this coming week in order to fulfil prior commitments.  These committee meetings will be held at Parliament in Harare from Monday 1st to Wednesday 3rd July, and will be open to the public.

Members of the public may attend the meetings – but as observers only, not as participants, i.e. they may observe and listen but not speak. If attending, please use the entrance to Parliament on Kwame Nkrumah Ave between 2nd and 3rd Streets. Please note that IDs must be produced.

The details given in this bulletin are based on the latest information from Parliament. But, as there are sometimes last-minute changes to the meetings schedule, persons wishing to attend should avoid disappointment by checking with the committee clerk that the meeting concerned is still on and open to the public. Parliament’s telephone numbers are Harare 2700181 and 2252940/1.

Reminder: Members of the public, including Zimbabweans in the Diaspora, can at any time send written submissions to Parliamentary committees by email addressed to [email protected] or by letter posted to the Clerk of Parliament, P.O. Box 298, Causeway, Harare or delivered at Parliament’s Kwame Nkrumah Avenue entrance in Harare.

Monday 1st at 10.00 am

Portfolio Committee:  Budget, Finance and Economic Development

Oral evidence from the Minister of Finance and Economic Development on Statutory Instrument 142 of 2019.

Venue: Senate Chamber

Note by Veritas:  Statutory Instrument [SI] 142 of 2019 is available on the Veritas website [link], as is Bill Watch 32 commenting on it [link].   The SI contains the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe (Legal Tender) Regulations, 2019, made by the Minister of Finance and Economic Development, and gazetted on 24th June 2019.  The regulations lay down in section 2 that with effect from 24th June “the British pound, United States dollar, South African rand, Botswana pula and any other foreign currency whatsoever shall no longer be legal tender alongside the Zimbabwe dollar in any transactions in Zimbabwe” and that “the Zimbabwe dollar shall … be the sole legal tender in Zimbabwe in all transactions”.   Both statements are subject to the savings provisions of section 3 of the regulations referring to Nostro FCA accounts; payments that must be made in foreign currency of certain customs duties under the Customs and Excise Act and import tax or VAT under the Value Added Tax Act; and payments in foreign currency for international airline services.  There are also declarations “for the avoidance of doubt” that references to the “Zimbabwe dollar are coterminous” with references to bond notes and coins and the RTGS dollar, and that bond notes and coins and RTGS dollars are “at par with the Zimbabwe dollar”.

Tuesday 2nd July at 10 am

Portfolio Committee:  Lands, Agriculture, Climate, Water and Rural Resettlement  

Oral evidence from the  Manicaland Provincial Lands Committee on the land dispute between Mr Rememberance Mbudzana and Mr Richard Le Vieux.

Venue: Senate Chamber.

Wednesday 3rd July at 10 am

Portfolio Committee:  Defence, Home Affairs and Security Services

Oral evidence from the  Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Defence and War Veterans on the provisions of the War Veterans Act and pension and general welfare benefits of war veterans.

Venue: Committee Room No. 311.

Veritas makes every effort to ensure reliable information, but cannot take legal responsibility for information supplied.

Where did that come from?
Zimbabwe: Gender and elections experts discuss 50-50 representation in politics

Post published in: Featured

You Can Thank Justice Kennedy’s Retirement For The Supreme Court’s Gerrymandering Decision

Justice Anthony M. Kennedy (Image via Getty)

Justice Kennedy had always held the door open in prior partisan gerrymandering cases for the possibility that the court would find a manageable standard that courts could use. But with his retirement from the court and his replacement with Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who joined the majority today in basically closing the door on these challenges, that did make a difference.

Marcia Coyle, the National Law Journal’s senior Washington correspondent, during an appearance on the PBS “NewsHour,” where she spoke about retired Justice Anthony Kennedy’s role in the Supreme Court’s decision in the Rucho v. Common Cause case to essentially “throw up its hands” and rule that federal judges should take no part in deciding partisan gerrymanders.

Watch the full episode below.


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.

Livin’ In The Future

I’ve been trying to predict the future of the corporate legal function for a couple decades now, and one trick used by all good futurists is to find an analog — some area closely aligned with the area of the study — and take a look at what is happening in that area. Most frequently for legal ops, I’ve used eDiscovery as a leading indicator. But it’s occurred to me lately that intellectual property may be an even better analog.

Companies realized many years ago that intellectual property law (especially prosecutions and renewals) are highly process-oriented, and they have been employing technology-based solutions, alternative service providers, and smaller law firms for many years. The process-oriented nature of IP is also why so many companies adopted strong IP operations teams long before their counterparts in legal ops. Over the 11 years I’ve been publishing the Annual Law Department Operations Survey, however, I’ve never given them too much thought. That’s why I am thrilled to have partnered with CPA Global and Above the Law on the first-ever Demographic Study of IP Operations Professionals.

While lawyers tend to fight process and standardization — they are literally taught in law school to look for exceptions — operations professionals’ mission is to bring process and business discipline. And in intellectual property, the careful management of sometimes thousands of assets in hundreds of countries can make or break a company.

And that raises some interesting questions, the biggest one being: “Who are these people who have learned how to apply strong process to the legal function?” This first-ever IP Operations Demographic Study answers those questions.

We identified 221 IP operations professionals across 138 companies and broke them down by gender (mostly men, especially at the higher levels), education (almost half are JDs, more than a third have engineering degrees), geography (more in San Francisco than anywhere else), and much more. Here are some other interesting facts we uncovered, all of which will should seem familiar to those who follow legal operations.

• Roughly 46 percent of IP ops professionals hold JDs.
• While the field is peopled by approximately 60 percent men and 40 percent women, men dominate VP and director roles.
• “Budget constraints” were identified by IP ops professionals as their most pressing challenge.
• Nearly one-half of IP ops professionals predicted their departmental budget would stay flat in the coming year.

Not content to understand who these people are, we also conducted a flash survey to understand what they do and what they think. We learned that the average IP Ops budget is three times as likely to increase next year than decrease, that eight in 10 IP Ops professionals say their KPIs are related to portfolio growth and/or size, and that more than half are the first IP Ops professional their company has ever had. It’s clear that IP Ops is growing, and we look forward to keeping an eye on exactly how.

There’s a lot more valuable information in the study, which is based on an analysis of nearly 700 companies (a majority of the Fortune 1000, plus other significant IP-focused firms). It leverages an unprecedented amount of data about the makeup of the IP operations function.

To learn more, please download it for free here.


Brad Blickstein is principal of the Blickstein Group, which has two missions: to help legal service providers better understand and serve their clients and to provide information about law departments and legal operations. He is the publisher of the Annual Law Department Operations Survey, which for 11 years has provided the most comprehensive data and analysis on the Legal Operations function.

Harvard Law School Alum And Managing Partner Raj De On The D.C. Market, Public Service, And Diversity In The Legal Profession

Raj De

“No one really knows how the parties get to yes / The pieces that are sacrificed in every game of chess / We just assume that it happens / But no one else is in the room where it happens.” Lin-Manuel Miranda, “The Room Where It Happens” (Hamilton)

Earlier this month, Mayer Brown appointed Raj De as the managing partner of its office in Washington, D.C. Before rejoining the firm in 2015, De held senior appointments in the White House and the Departments of Justice and Defense. Most recently, he served as General Counsel of the U.S. National Security Agency.

De was generous enough to spend some time with us this week and share some sage advice for up-and-coming attorneys. From his time in the White House to his current role, De has had quite a run. I learned quite a bit from our discussion and I believe you will as well. Here is a (lightly edited and condensed) write-up of our conversation:

Renwei Chung (RC): Congratulations on your recent appointment as the managing partner of Mayer Brown’s Washington, D.C. office. Are you excited about any particular activities or initiatives for the more than 200 attorneys that comprise your office? 

Raj De (RD): Thank you. I am thrilled about taking on this role. I’ve been with Mayer Brown Washington since 2006, having left for several years to serve in the government, and have worked here in a variety of roles from associate to partner to practice leader and now managing partner. So I’ve seen the office from a range of perspectives for well over the course of a decade. I am excited about continuing the strategic growth of the office, which has expanded dramatically in recent years. Our global clients increasingly rely upon the firm’s Washington office to help them navigate challenges ranging from congressional investigations and regulatory enforcement actions to trade disputes and high stakes litigation before the Supreme Court.

I am also particularly interested in strengthening the office’s diversity by redoubling our efforts in recruitment, mentoring, promotion, and retention. There can be no doubt that the diversity of backgrounds, perspectives, and experiences of our lawyers is essential to providing clients with excellent legal services. I am proud to be among the relatively few diverse managing partners of major law firms in the Washington DC area, and I invite clients who want to push our profession forward in this regard to consider Mayer Brown — and the Washington office, and me in particular — as a very willing partner in that endeavor.

RC: You had the opportunity to serve in the White House as Staff Secretary and Deputy Assistant to former President Barack Obama. What were these roles like?

RD: Working in the White House, and for President Obama in particular, was an amazing privilege. Serving as Staff Secretary was a unique experience, and one that provided unparalleled exposure to all aspects of how a White House functions. The role is to manage all memoranda, executive orders, and other written materials that need to be reviewed or approved by the President. There is a small margin for error. I did not sleep much, but I gained valuable insight into presidential decision-making.

Every single day I served in the White House I was very cognizant of how remarkable it was for the son of Indian immigrants to walk into an office in the West Wing, board Air Force One to travel with the President around the world (literally!), or step into the Oval Office on a regular basis. But of course the real honor was to be part of a team of dedicated and talented professionals who shared one mission — to serve the American people.

RC: As someone who has served across all three branches of the United States government, do you have any insights you’d like to share that our readers may not be aware of when they think about how our government operates?

RD: First, some have the misperception that the federal government is a monolithic entity rather than a multitude of departments and agencies, each with its own focus, mission, and priorities. For our clients, a nuanced appreciation of the relevant government stakeholders for any legal issue, and the interplay among them, is critical.

Second, every arena has its own formal — and informal — rules of the road, and our clients depend upon us to have the relevant skills and experience, whether managing an executive branch enforcement action, a congressional inquiry, or litigation in court — and, perhaps most importantly, all of the above at the same time.

Third, contrary to what one might hear in the news, the vast majority of government employees continue to perform their day-to-day roles in a nonpartisan manner, regardless of who is in office.

RC: Currently, law students from across the nation are participating in summer programs at Biglaw firms throughout the country. Do you have any advice for these summer associates?

RD: I would advise any summer associate to use the opportunity in front of them to learn more about the kind of lawyer they want to be, what they want out of a professional experience, and what career trajectory they can envision. Building a career needs to be a proactive rather than a passive endeavor. Seek out lawyers whom you want to meet, ask them about their careers, and find out what resonates. Try different types of projects. And when faced with the choice of working hard or enjoying the moment, do both.

RC: What advice do you have for attorneys who want to begin a career in public service?

RD: This may sound strange coming from the managing partner of a major law firm office, but I would say go for it. When I was finishing law school, I had an offer to return to the firm where I had spent the previous summer. It was a great place, with interesting work and interesting people. But I had in my third year applied to the Attorney General’s Honor Program and was fortunate enough to have been offered a position at the Department of Justice. I was torn. I spoke to the managing partner of the Washington office of the firm, looking for his best advice but expecting him to twist my arm to come back to the firm. Instead, he inquired about my interests and about the DOJ position (it was in the Antitrust Division, a particularly active element of DOJ in the late 1990s), and said: “Follow your interest and go where the action is.”

I chose to go to DOJ right out of law school. Several years later I chose to leave private practice to serve as counsel to the 9/11 Commission, and then years later I again left law firm life to join the Obama Administration. I am proud of my public service, and it has undoubtedly made me a better lawyer. Every lawyer needs to carve their own path, and I would simply tell young lawyers that public service can be an important aspect of that journey.

RC: What was the most intense job you have had?

RD: I have learned over my career that you never know what you can handle until you are tested. I thought early on that working for the 9/11 Commission, under significant time pressure and with significant public scrutiny, was pretty intense. We had to produce a final report, and it had to provide the American people some sense of understanding about what had happened, and why. Then several years later I found myself in an intense role in the White House, in a job that can only be described as a grind. By that point in my life I had a family with two kids, so the strain was not insignificant.

I left the White House to serve as General Counsel for the National Security Agency thinking that my life might return to a bit of normalcy, but then the Snowden disclosures happened and the media, congressional, and global spotlight was more intense than anything that I had ever experienced. It just goes to show, you never know what is around the corner.

RC: Much of your career has been spent in D.C. From your perspective, what makes the D.C. legal market unique?

RD: Apart from clerking, all of my professional experience has been in the Washington, D.C. legal market — working in private practice, at the White House and Departments of Justice and Defense, as a Congressional staffer, and as counsel for independent bipartisan investigations such as the 9/11 Commission. Washington has been and remains the risk capital of the world from a legal, policy, and regulatory perspective. For clients, that risk can unfold by way of investigations, enforcement actions, regulations, litigation, trade disputes, sanctions compliance, or a host of other challenges.

Our job is often to assist our clients anticipate, identify, mitigate, or ultimately defend against such risk. And to do that well, legal skills matter, experience matters, and judgment matters. Not all lawyers have that combination of skill, experience, and judgment, but I would submit that the Washington legal market puts a premium on such lawyers. We certainly do at Mayer Brown.

RC: How do you think we can effectively advance diversity and inclusion efforts in today’s political climate?

RD: In my view, leadership is essential. Diversity and Inclusion are essential in a competitive market, and — at least in Biglaw — the needle will not move fast enough on its own without committed leadership, force of will, proactive effort, creativity, persistence, and education. We cannot sit idly by and expect such momentous change. Leaders of the profession have a responsibility to shape the profession. This has nothing to do with politics, but it does have everything to do with providing clients with the best legal services possible.

The Cybersecurity & Data Privacy practice that I lead is one of the most diverse practices at our firm, and likely across the market. That is not an accident. Such success can be accomplished on a broader scale in our profession. Mayer Brown stands for excellence, and in Washington I intend to draw the best of the best from the broadest pool of talent possible.

On behalf of everyone here at Above the Law, I would like to thank Raj De for sharing his experience and wisdom with our audience and wish him continued success in his career.


Renwei Chung is the Diversity Columnist at Above the Law. You can contact Renwei by email at projectrenwei@gmail.com, follow him on Twitter (@renweichung), or connect with him on LinkedIn.

Scott Gottlieb joins Pfizer board, but not everyone is celebrating – MedCity News

FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb speaks in a fireside chat at BIO 2018.

Less than four months after resigning as Food and Drug Administration commissioner, Scott Gottlieb has taken on his latest gig: board member of one of the world’s largest drugmakers.

New York-based Pfizer said Thursday that Gottlieb had joined its board of directors and was also appointed to the boards regulatory and compliance and science and technology committees.

Gottlieb resigned as FDA commissioner in March, following a nearly two-year stint at the agency that saw the approvals of numerous novel treatments, including the first CAR-T cell therapies for cancers, the first gene therapy for an inherited disease and the first RNA-interference therapy. Following his resignation, National Cancer Institute Director Ned Sharpless was appointed acting commissioner. Meanwhile, Gottlieb went back to his previous roles, at conservative think tank the American Enterprise Institute and at the venture capital fund New Enterprise Associates, both organizations he had worked for prior to his appointment at the FDA.

“Scott’s expertise in healthcare, public policy and the industry will be an asset to our company and enable our shareholders to continue to benefit from a board representing a balance of experience, competencies and perspectives,” Pfizer Executive Chairman Ian Read said in a statement.

However, the announcement also provoked several negative reactions, particularly on social media, from those who saw the move as an example of a “revolving door” between government and industry. “It’s going to be pretty cool to watch all those $PFE drugs win FDA approval on mouse data. Good work, Scott!” STAT biotech journalist Adam Feuerstein wrote on Twitter Thursday.

“Our country needs to stop the revolving door between our government and the organizations they are mandated to oversee. #Soldout,” wrote Twitter user Marci Venable under Gottlieb’s tweet announcing the new role.

Numerous other comments on Gottlieb’s tweet and elsewhere on Twitter were also highly critical.

Gottlieb did not respond to a request for comment. Pfizer did not provide a comment in time for publication.

Concerns about Gottlieb’s ties to the drug industry arose during his 2017 confirmation hearings, raising questions about his ability to be impartial. However, he agreed to recuse himself of decisions involving companies he had worked for. And once he had taken his post, he devoted considerable energy to using the FDA’s existing powers to tackle the issue of high drug costs, despite the agency historically not being focused on pricing.

Photo: Alaric DeArment, MedCity News

Top 5 Reasons Why You Need To Flesh Out Your LinkedIn Bio

If you don’t flesh out your bio on LinkedIn, you should expect others to assume the worst about your background. From pitching for new business to considering job opportunities, the decision maker on the other side is judging your LinkedIn profile before you even show up. Would you show up to a business pitch with a hole in your suit, scuffed up shoes, and toilet paper hanging out of your pants? Then how can you have a bare-bones LinkedIn profile that reflects the same about you, your experience, and presentation?

Have you looked at your LinkedIn recently? What’s it look like? Is your photo professional enough? How about your “About” section? Current experience, education up-to-date? Any recommendation from colleagues? Are you a member of specific clubs and organizations? These are the type of things that decision makers look at in the modern, internet-driven, millennial world we live in today. As important as your physical résumé is, your LinkedIn bio is THAT much more important.

If your LinkedIn bio needs work, you are in luck.  Lateral Link is here to help make sure your LinkedIn doesn’t get in the way of you and your next “yes” moment.

  • What does your photo say about you?

The first thing employers see when opening your LinkedIn page is your headshot. Keep in mind that LinkedIn is not Facebook or Instagram.  Even John Quinn, whose name really speaks for itself, still fleshes out his bio including a professional headshot. On the other hand, and leaving names aside, those downing shots on your Cabo trip with the Mariachi band, will say the opposite. Make sure your photo is similar to what you would look like the day you walk in for the in-person interview. Also, right below the photo, is your current title. Keep it short and right to the point. Save the detailed information about yourself for the “About” section. Check out Michael Allen’s profile, for example.

  • Tell your story in under 200 words.

Do you think it is important for people to know exactly what your title in the above section entails? Of course, it is! The “About” section is what you want people to know about you. Are you a CEO like Michael Allen? Great! CEO of what? What does your current position mean? This section should have a short write-up of you, what you do currently and how people can reach you. Sell yourself and make yourself easily reachable.

  • Where have you worked?

This section has the potential to separate you from all other applicants. It is vital that your experience is up-to-date and accurate. List all former employers, the correct duration you were at each job and a brief description of what you did at each job. You might find yourself repeating some of the tasks, but that is okay. Also, I cannot stress enough to list all the jobs where you have worked. Mary Barra, CEO of General Motors (GM), not only lists all the different positions she has held during her GM career but provides a full description of what each position required. Look at our CEO, Michael Allen, and how he displays, with great detail and accuracy, all he has done in his working career.  For example, here are just his most recent positions.

  • Do you come with a recommendation?

LinkedIn has a feature that allows others to toot your horn for you. Self-puffery isn’t credible. I came across a legitimate M&A partner from a Valley firm the other day who was more than generous pounding his chest with his achievements. That’s a turnoff. But, if Brad Smith of Microsoft said the same about the partner, that would go a long way. Letter of recommendations are still important to employers, and LinkedIn makes that process easy. The website has a section at the bottom of your page that displays reviews and recommendations about you and your job skills from credible sources (which requires you to know credible sources).

  • How about your accomplishments?

This part might not help everyone, but if you are a member of interesting organizations and have other accomplishments, then list them. Not everyone belongs to country clubs and wine societies, but these kinds of memberships say a lot about a person (where the frequent, who they know, and what they like). For example, if you are a member of the Confrérie des Chevaliers du Tastevin, like our CEO, Michael Allen, then you want to share that in case there are others who also belong and share this affinity. For example, there are more than a few chairman of firms and prominent lawyers in this group, and sharing membership to this society creates a bond. The same applies to non-profits, social organizations, and the like. If you are aiming for that board position, you can really separate yourself from other candidates by listing your outside activities. Take a quick look at the accomplishments of our CEO, Michael Allen. I imagine there are lots of folks reading this article who also share the same ones. That makes use feel closer to one another and creates a warm affinity.

By just going through this short exercise, you know more about Michael Allen’s professional background and accomplishments than probably most of his family members. Most people don’t share these types of things when first meeting in person or over Thanksgiving. That’s crude. But it’s not crude, and in fact, is expected that you broadcast your background on LinkedIn. Decision makers will review your bios. They will pass judgment quickly. Within 30 seconds of looking at a candidate’s LinkedIn page, you can tell if they are qualified and credible. The sad part is when someone who is otherwise qualified is judged incorrectly for not having fleshed out their bio on LinkedIn. It is as important a tool as anything today and you should use it to its fullest potential.

Ed. note: This is the latest installment in a series of posts from Mainspring Legal’s team of expert contributors. Sarkis Adajian manages marketing and business development for Lateral Link.


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.

Deutsche Bank Passes Fed Stress Test, Proving That The Stress Test Does Not Work

Maybe Trump is right about this Fed…

The Law Firm Boutiques That Are Dominating With Startups

Providing legal services to startup companies is a highly specialized practice, so it doesn’t come as too much of a shock that boutique law firms that focus solely on that area are killing it with that segment. Kruze Consulting, a CPA, tax and consulting firm, has already looked at the best Biglaw firms for startups, now they’re turning their attention to the best boutiques for startups. They created their list from an analysis of over $40 million in professional services spending across 180 seed, to Series C US startups with more than $1.4BN in combined funding.

Kruze’s analysis reveals three tiers of boutiques doing startup work. At the top of the heap, tied for first are Silicon Legal Strategy and Atrium. In tier 2 are SPZ LegalVLP Law Group, and Hopkins & Carley. Receiving honorable mentions are Fathom Law, Paradigm Counsel, Silicon Counsel, Tango Law, and Capes Sokol Goodman.

Hans Kim, managing partner at Atrium, reflected on his firm’s guiding principles that have led them to success:

“Just as startups strive to use technology to drive innovation, Atrium is building technology to innovate the delivery and quality of our legal services,” said Hans Kim, Managing Partner at Atrium. “We are on a mission to better leverage our legal team’s expertise by ensuring they’re focused on the value-added client work and in turn that our technology eliminates the burdensome administrative work. With over 400 happy clients in just two years, I think we’re on to something, and we’re honored to be recognized by Kruze Consulting as a leader in the startup legal space.”

And founding partner of Silicon Legal Strategy, Andre Gharakhanian, said:

“Representing emerging tech companies is a highly specialized practice that requires deep market experience, a relentless dedication to client service and a practical, “get-the-deal-done” perspective.” said Andre Gharakhanian, Founding Partner at Silicon Legal Strategy. “Just as Kruze Consulting’s clients benefit from an intense focus on startups, Silicon Legal’s clients can count on us delivering advice that is tailored to their unique needs and informed by the most up-to-date trends in the startup ecosystem.”

Congratulations to all the firms recognized for their hard work.


headshotKathryn 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).