Category: News Feeds

Ed.
Note:
Welcome
to
our
daily
feature

Trivia
Question
of
the
Day!

According
to
reporting
by
the
Daily
Report,
Biglaw/midsize
firms
with
origins
in
the
Southeast
are
growing
their
incoming
class
of
first-year
associates
by
about
how
much?

Hint:
Recruiter
Lauren
Wu,
of
Foxstone
Recruiting,
said
this
means
firms
are
“cautiously
optimistic
for
the
coming
year.”

See
the
answer
on
the
next
page.

Joe
Biden
could
forestall
Trump’s
efforts
at
retribution
by
pardoning
the
people
that
Trump
says
he’s
likely
to
prosecute.
Those
people
might
include,
for
example,
Adam
Schiff,
a
vocal
Trump
opponent
in
Congress.
Or
Liz
Cheney
and
Adam
Kinzinger,
the
Republicans
on
the
January
6
Committee.
Or
Anthony
Fauci,
loathed
by
MAGA
for
his
role
in
the
COVID
response.
Or
Mark
Milley,
the
former
chairman
of
the
Joint
Chiefs
of
Staff,
who
supposedly
committed
“treason”
near
the
end
of
Trump’s
first
term
in
office.

Jack
Smith,
the
special
counsel
who
prosecuted
Trump,
and
Smith’s
staff
are
probably
safe.
Federal
prosecutors
have
broad
immunity
for
actions
taken
in
their
prosecutorial
roles.
And
I
assume
that
Alvin
Bragg,
the
New
York
state
prosecutor,
and
Fani
Willis,
the
Georgia
prosecutor,
are
also
safe.
But
Biden
might
choose
to
pardon
these
people
anyway.
These
folks
can’t
be
charged
for
anything
having
to
do
with
their
prosecutions
of
Trump
but,
in
the
words
of
Stalin’s
head
of
the
secret
police,
“Show
me
the
man,
and
I’ll
show
you
the
crime.” 
Who
knows
what
a
politicized
FBI
and
Department
of
Justice
intent
on
prosecuting
people
might
dig
up
as
alleged
crimes
committed
by
Smith
and
the
others?
Pardons
would
avoid
that
possibility.

Even
beyond
that,
there
are
plenty
of
other
possible
targets
for
Trump.
Couldn’t
the
Department
of
Justice
gin
up
charges
against
E.
Jean
Carroll,
who
sued
Trump
twice
for
defamation
and
has
recovered
judgments
worth
a
little
more
than
$88
million
(plus
interest)?
Or
Joe
Scarborough?
Or
Mika
Brzezinski?
Or
hundreds
of
other
folks
who
have
said
nasty
things
about
Trump?

For
purposes
of
this
column,
the
question
is
whether
Biden
should
pardon
Rachel
Maddow.
That’s
just
an
example,
of
course.
The
real
question
is
whether
Biden
should
pardon
any,
or
all,
of
the
folks
at
risk
of
Trump’s
retribution.

When
I
say
retribution,
I
mean
that
Trump,
who
will
be
at
the
helm
of
the
Department
of
Justice
on
January
20,
could
order
the
DOJ
to
investigate
and
file
criminal
charges
against
people.
Trump
could
also
do
lesser
things,
such
as
ordering
the
IRS
to
audit
his
political
enemies,
but
let’s
focus
on
the
big
one
—
criminal
charges.

Maddow
(and
the
like)
have
of
course
done
nothing
criminal.
Maddow’s
well
within
her
rights
to
criticize
Trump;
many
would
say
that
Maddow’s
criticisms
are
correct,
and
Trump
merits
criticism.
But
that’s
really
beside
the
point.
If
the
DOJ
were
simply
to
open
an
investigation
of
Maddow,
issuing
a
subpoena
compelling
Maddow
to
appear
before
a
grand
jury,
Maddow
would
incur
expenses.
If
Trump
were
to
convince
the
DOJ
to
commence
a
criminal
case
against
Maddow,
she
would
be
forced
to
spend
tens
of
thousands
of
dollars
defending
herself,
even
if
she
were
able
to
get
the
case
dismissed
at
an
early
stage.
And
if
Trump
ordered
the
DOJ
to
file
the
case
against
Maddow
in
a
deep
red
state,
with
many
Trump
appointees
serving
as
judges,
a
judge
might
not
dismiss
the
charges
at
an
early
stage,
which
would
force
Maddow
to
spend
hundreds
of
thousands
of
dollars
defending
herself
at
trial,
despite
the
case
being
ridiculous
from
the
start.
Lastly,
of
course,
once
a
case
goes
to
trial,
there’s
always
a
chance
that
a
red-state
jury
might
convict,
no
matter
how
silly
the
charges.

Maddow
is
worth
a
lot
of
money,
so
she
could
afford
to
defend
herself.

But
Cheney,
or
Schiff,
or
Milley
don’t
have
that
kind
of
money.

Trump’s
decision
simply
to
start
an
investigation
of
those
people
would
be
burdensome.
The
DOJ’s
pursuit
of
a
criminal
case
could
bankrupt
these
folks.

And
Biden
could
preempt
all
these
things,
simply
by
granting
pardons.
Should
he?

This
is
actually
a
pretty
tough
question.

On
the
one
hand,
Biden
could
pardon
Maddow
(and
the
like).
Maddow
would
have
the
right
to
decline
the
pardon,
leaving
herself
at
risk.
Or
she
could
accept
the
pardon,
avoiding
the
possibility
that
she
would
be
investigated
or
charged.

If
Maddow
(and
the
like)
accepted
a
pardon,
the
right-wing
media
would
immediately
have
a
field
day:
“Maddow
(and
Cheney,
and
Milley,
and
the
like)
is
obviously
guilty
as
sin!
Think
what
she
must
have
done
to
have
Biden
issue,
and
then
have
Maddow
accept,
a
pardon!
Criminality
among
these
radical
left
lunatics
is
rampant!
The
only
way
they
could
avoid
jail
is
by
having
the
president
issue
pardons!
Maddow
belongs
in
jail!
The
pardon
proves
it!
Scum.”

Hmmm.
That’s
not
so
good.

So
Biden
could
do
the
opposite:
He
could
choose
not
to
issue
pardons.

That
would
avoid
having
the
right-wing
media
scream
that
folks
on
the
left
had
plainly
committed
crimes.

And
if
Trump
is
just
bluffing,
and
doesn’t
actually
seek
retribution
against
his
political
enemies,
there
will
be
no
criticism
of
anyone.
The
problem
will
have
disappeared.

But
it
could
turn
out
that
Trump
is
not
bluffing.
He
might
actually
order
the
DOJ
to
investigate,
and
charge,
hundreds
of
his
political
enemies.
Those
folks
would
incur
the
huge
expense
and
risk
that
I’ve
just
outlined,
even
though
they
had
done
nothing
wrong.

Pundits
on
the
left
would
criticize
Biden
mercilessly
for
his
choice
not
to
issue
pardons:
“How
could
Biden
have
been
such
a
fool?
Trump
announced
in
advance
that
he
was
out
for
retribution.
He
appointed
loyalists
to
every
key
position
in
the
Department
of
Justice.
Biden
knew
full
well
that
all
these
people
were
going
to
be
prosecuted.
He
had
the
power
to
forestall
this,
simply
by
issuing
pardons.
And
he
didn’t
do
it!
What
a
fool!
The
guy
must
be
senile,
after
all!”

Biden
has
a
choice
to
make.

It
is
not
at
all
an
easy
choice.
He’ll
be
criticized
either
way
—
unless
Biden
chooses
not
to
pardon,
and
Trump
then
chooses
not
to
pursue
his
enemies,
which
is
a
huge
gamble
for
Biden
to
take.

By
January,
we’ll
know
which
route
Biden
chose.
If
he
issues
pardons,
the
reaction
on
the
right
will
be
immediate
and
loud.
If
he
doesn’t
issue
pardons,
and
Trump
in
fact
orders
the
DOJ
to
investigate
and
prosecute,
the
response
will
start
once
the
fact
of
the
investigations
become
public.
The
response
from
the
left
will
thus
come
a
little
bit
later,
but
it
will
nonetheless
be
fierce.

Whichever
way
it
plays
out,
you
can
watch
with
both
interest
and
dread,
because
you
saw
it
coming.

---

Mark Herrmann


spent
17
years
as
a
partner
at
a
leading
international
law
firm
and
later
oversaw
litigation,
compliance
and
employment
matters
at
a
large
international
company.
He
is
the
author
of



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

Ed.
note:
Welcome
to
our
daily
feature,

Quote
of
the
Day.

We
maintain
exceptionally
high
standards
for
promotion
to
partnership,
and
each
of
our
new
partners
exemplifies
our
firm’s
dedication
to
practice
excellence
and
client
service,.

—
A
spokesperson
for
Paul
Weiss,
in
comments
given
to

Bloomberg
Law
on
the
firm’s
most
recent
partnership
class,
promoting
34
associates
to
partner,
just
about
tripling
the
size
of
its
class
over
last
year.
This
is
the
first
year
that
the
firm
is
using
a

nonequity
partner
tier,
and
Paul
Weiss
did
not
confirm
how
many
of
its
new
partners
were
elevated
to
its
equity
tier
over
its
new
nonequity
tier.

---

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 Bluesky, X/Twitter,
and Threads, or
connect
with
her
on LinkedIn.

The
consequences
of
Diddy’s
freakoffs
are
bigger
than
rap,
but
there
may
have
been
some
other
prominent
rappers
involve.
On
Sunday,
a
civil
suit
accused
Jay-Z
of
drugging
and
raping
a
13
year
old
girl
with
Diddy
in
back
in
2000.

NPR
has

coverage:

The
anonymous
plaintiff,
identified
as
“Jane
Doe,”
said
the
assault
took
place
at
an
MTV
Video
Music
Awards
after-party.
…
Tony
Buzbee,
the
Texas
attorney
who
filed
the
complaint,
has
filed
several
lawsuits
against
Combs
in
recent
months
accusing
the
hip-hop
mogul
of
physical
assault
and
rape.
Buzbee’s
lawsuit
accused
Carter
of
filing
his
own
lawsuit
against
Buzbee,
which
Buzbee
called
“frivolous.”

While
Jay-Z
has
yet
to
come
forward

as
the
anonymous
public
figure
that
accused
Buzbee
of
extortion,
Jay-Z’s
public
response
to
the
allegations
track
with
what
was
written
in
the
complaint:

“These
allegations
are
so
heinous
in
nature
that
I
implore
you
to
file
a
criminal
complaint,
not
a
civil
one!!”
he
said.
“Whomever
would
commit
such
a
crime
against
a
minor
should
be
locked
away,
would
you
not
agree?
These
alleged
victims
would
deserve
real
justice
if
that
were
the
case.”

“My
only
heartbreak
is
for
my
family,”
Carter
added.
“My
wife
and
I
will
have
to
sit
our
children
down,
one
of
whom
is
at
the
age
where
her
friends
will
surely
see
the
press
and
ask
questions
about
the
nature
of
these
claims,
and
explain
the
cruelty
and
greed
of
people.
I
mourn
yet
another
loss
of
innocence.”

No
question
that
explaining
the
nature
of
the
suit
will
be
a
challenge,
but
the
upside
is
that
he
isn’t
alone.
It
appears
that
Tina
Knowles
–Beyonce’s
mother
—
is
informed
enough
on
the
issue
to
like
posts
on
Instagram
involving
the
suit:

Nobody
wins
when
the
family
feuds.

Lawsuit
Accuses
Jay-Z
Of
Raping
A
13-Year-Old
With
Sean
‘Diddy’
Combs
In
2000
[NPR]

Earlier:

Tracking
Down
Collaborators
Or
Diddy
By
Association?

---

Chris
Williams
became
a
social
media
manager
and
assistant
editor
for
Above
the
Law
in
June
2021.
Prior
to
joining
the
staff,
he
moonlighted
as
a
minor
Memelord™
in
the
Facebook
group Law
School
Memes
for
Edgy
T14s.
 He
endured
Missouri
long
enough
to
graduate
from
Washington
University
in
St.
Louis
School
of
Law.
He
is
a
former
boatbuilder
who
cannot
swim, a
published
author
on
critical
race
theory,
philosophy,
and
humor,
and
has
a
love
for
cycling
that
occasionally
annoys
his
peers.
You
can
reach
him
by
email
at [email protected] and
by
tweet
at @WritesForRent.

Writing
that
you
want
to
be
the
“first
Black,
female
Supreme
Court
justice
to
appear
on
a
Broadway
stage”
on
your
college
application
seems
like
the
kind
of
cutesy
statement
that
gets
admissions
officers
to
remember
you
and
your
varied
interest.
Because,
I
mean…
those
goals
aren’t
two
great
tastes
that
taste
great
together
—
those
are
pretty
disparate
career
goals.
But
Ketanji
Brown
Jackson
is
not
a
mere
mortal.

KBJ
wrote
those
words
in
her
Harvard
University
application.
And
now
they’re
coming
true.
The
Supreme
Court
justice
is
making
a
one-night-only
appearance
on
the
Broadway
stage
this
month
in

&
Juliet.
The
jukebox
musical
posits
what
might
have
happened
to
Juliet
if
she
didn’t
kill
herself
after
the
events
of
Romeo
&
Juliet,
set
to
a
rocking
pop
score.
Brown
Jackson’s
ensemble
role
was
created
specifically
for
the
justice,
and
audience
members

will
also
be
able
to
attend
a
Q&A:

The
producers
have
announced
that
Jackson’s
special
appearance
will
occur
during
the
production’s
8
p.m.
show
on
Saturday,
December
14.
Following
the
show,
audience
members
will
be
able
to
stay
for
a
talkback
with
the
Justice.

If
you’re
lucky
enough
to
score
tickets
for
this
very
special
performance,
maybe
you
should
ask
Brown
Jackson
about
her
powers
of
visualization
—
she’s
got
that
on
lockdown.

---

Kathryn
Rubino
is
a
Senior
Editor
at
Above
the
Law,
host
of

The
Jabot
podcast,
and
co-host
of

Thinking
Like
A
Lawyer.
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 or
Mastodon

@[email protected].

Chief
Judge
R.
David
Proctor
of
the
Northern
District
of
Alabama
recently
issued
a
timeout
to
some
attorneys
appearing
before
him,

ordering
both
sides
to
the
lunch
table.

Welcome
to
the
most
awkward
“It’s
Just
Lunch”
date

ever.

Thankfully
for
the
parties,
the
order
contemplates
that
this
event
gets
handled
before
Alabama’s
New
Year’s
playoff
game…
wait,
what’s
that?
ReliaQuest
Bowl?

The
Chief
Judge
has
a
history
of
refusing
to
suffer
pettiness
in
his
courtroom.
In
2023,
he

savagely
roasted
a
lawyer
trying
to
strike
a
response
brief
for
being
15
minutes
late.
That
story
received
enough
coverage
that
one
might

think
that
attorneys
practicing
before
Proctor
would
think
twice
before
giving
even
the
appearance
of
pettiness.
But
apparently
the
message
didn’t
reach
the
parties
in

McCullers
v.
Koch
Foods.

Plaintiff’s
counsel
had
conditioned
consent
to
an
extension
upon
the
defense
pledging
not
to
move
to
dismiss.

There
is
generally
no
good
reason
that
an
extension
such
as
this
should
be
opposed,
let
alone
denied.
The
Golden
Rule—do
unto
others
as
you
would
have
them
do
unto
you—is
not
just
a
good
rule
of
thumb
for
everyday
life.
It
is
a
critical
component
of
legal
professionalism.
Sadly,
in
recent
years
compliance
with
the
rule
is
becoming
rarer
and
rarer
in
the
litigation
arena.
It
is
time
to
reverse
that
trend,
even
if
it
is
only
in
this
case.

But
lunch
dates
are
fraught
with
complications.
Earlier
this
year,
we
reported
on

a
motion
to
compel
lunch
brought
by
a
party
trying
to
force
the
other
side
to
engage
in
a
meet
and
confer.
This
seemed
like
a
pretty
good
idea
from
afar,
but
several
people
wrote
in
afterward
to
say
that
there
are
underlying
issues
in
that
case
that
made
the
idea
of
lunch
utterly
unreasonable.
Though
it
would
seem
like
the
best
way
to
avoid
that
would
be
to
bite
the
bullet
and
go
ahead
with
the
meet
and
confer
if
you
don’t
want
to
take
a
more
literal
bite.

Will
plaintiff’s
counsel
try
to
get
the
2
for
$20
deal
at
Applebee’s?
If
not,
will
defense
counsel
start
ordering
at
a
nicer
restaurant
to
pop
a
couple
bottles
of
Dom
Perignon?
So
many
questions.

On
the
other
hand,
if
either
side
pulls
any
shenanigans,
I’d
imagine
Chief
Judge
Proctor
would
have
a
very
entertaining
response.

(The
full
order
is
on
the
next
page.)

Earlier:

Federal
Judge
Utterly
Done
With
Lawyer’s
Pettiness

‘Motion
To
Compel
Lunch’
Makes
Case
For
Ordering
Attorney
To
The
Lunch
Table

---

Joe
Patrice is
a
senior
editor
at
Above
the
Law
and
co-host
of

Thinking
Like
A
Lawyer.
Feel
free
to email
any
tips,
questions,
or
comments.
Follow
him
on Twitter or

Bluesky
if
you’re
interested
in
law,
politics,
and
a
healthy
dose
of
college
sports
news.
Joe
also
serves
as
a

Managing
Director
at
RPN
Executive
Search.

Big
money
isn’t
just
for
Biglaw
—
boutique
law
firms
are
continuing
to
get
in
on
the
compensation
action,
and
associates
are
very
happy
about
it.
Yet
another
successful
boutique
law
firm
is
making
sure
that
its
associates
will
have
a
very
happy
holiday
season
by
matching
Milbank’s
generous

year-end
bonuses
and

special
bonuses.

The
latest
firm
to
award
bonuses
to
hardworking
associates
is
Houston
litigation
boutique
of
Ahmad,
Zavitsanos
&
Mensing
P.C.,
a
firm
that’s
more
commonly
known
as
“AZA.”
What’s
interesting
about
this
bonus
match
is
that
a
legal
publication
announced
it
a
full
two
weeks
before
the
firm
officially
made
its
internal
announcement
to
associates.
An
AZA
associate
confirms
that
the

Texas
Lawbook
was
right
on
the
money
when
it
came
to
the
firm’s
bonus
match.
Here’s
what
the
grid
looks
like
at
AZA,
for
its
first-
through
fourth-year
associates:

• Class
  of
  2024
  –
  $15,000
  /
  $6,000
• Class
  of
  2023
  –
  $20,000
  /
  $6,000
• Class
  of
  2022
  –
  $30,000
  /
  $10,000
• Class
  of
  2021
  –
  $57,500
  /
  $15,000

A
source
tells
us
that
bonuses
for
elder
class
years
at
the
firm
are
more
individualized.

Bonuses
are
due
to
hit
associates’
bank
accounts
on
December
13.
Congratulations
to
everyone
at
AZA!

Remember
everyone,
we
depend
on
your
tips
to
stay
on
top
of
compensation
updates,
so
when
your
firm
announces
or
matches,
please
text
us
(646-820-8477)
or email
us (subject
line:
“[Firm
Name]
Bonus/Matches”).
Please
include
the
memo
if
available.
You
can
take
a
photo
of
the
memo
and
send
it
via
text
or
email
if
you
don’t
want
to
forward
the
original
PDF
or
Word
file.

And
if
you’d
like
to
sign
up
for
ATL’s
Bonus
Alerts
(which
is
the
alert
list
we
also
use
for
salary
announcements),
please
scroll
down
and
enter
your
email
address
in
the
box
below
this
post.
If
you
previously
signed
up
for
the
bonus
alerts,
you
don’t
need
to
do
anything.
You’ll
receive
an
email
notification
within
minutes
of
each
bonus
announcement
that
we
publish.
Thanks
for
your
help!

Baker
Botts,
AZA,
Akin,
V&E
Announce
Associate
Bonuses
Up
to
$140K
[Texas
Lawbook]

---

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 Bluesky, X/Twitter,
and Threads, or
connect
with
her
on LinkedIn.

---

---

If
you’re
a
transactional
attorney
looking
to
supercharge
your
practice,
this
webinar
is
your
roadmap
to
leveraging
AI
for
maximum
impact.
Learn
how
to
overcome
the
everyday
obstacles
that
slow
deals
down
and
unlock
new
levels
of
productivity
and
client
satisfaction.

Join
us
for
an
exclusive
Above
the
Law
webinar
on
December
11
at
1
p.m.
EST
presented
in
partnership
with
Litera,
where
we
explore
how
GenAI
can
help
transactional
attorneys
tackle
common
challenges
in
their
day-to-day
work.
From
navigating
complex
due
diligence
to
optimizing
drafting
and
negotiation,
this
session
will
showcase
real-world
AI
solutions
that
make
your
work
faster,
more
accurate,
and
more
efficient.

We
will
discuss
how,
with
the
help
of
GenAI,
transactional
lawyers
can:

• 
  Boost
  Productivity
  in
  Due
  Diligence
  and
  Drafting:
  Discover
  how
  AI-powered
  technology
  enables
  streamlined
  contract
  review
  and
  optimized
  drafting,
  empowering
  legal
  teams
  to
  eliminate
  repetitive
  tasks
  and
  focus
  on
  higher-value
  work.
• 
  Leverage
  Data
  for
  Smarter
  Negotiations
  and
  Research:
  Learn
  how
  to
  access
  past
  deal
  data
  and
  tap
  into
  your
  firm’s
  collective
  knowledge
  to
  make
  informed,
  data-driven
  decisions—enhancing
  your
  negotiation
  strategies
  and
  precedent
  research.
• 
  Elevate
  Client
  Service
  and
  Collaboration:
  See
  how
  integrating
  AI
  into
  your
  workflow
  can
  deepen
  client
  relationships
  by
  delivering
  faster,
  more
  comprehensive
  legal
  insights
  and
  expanding
  the
  scope
  of
  your
  services.

Whether
they’re
responding
to
basic
questions,
keeping
track
of
contract
deadlines,
or
simply
searching
their
own
email
archives,
in-house
lawyers
face
numerous
distractions
from
their
most
valuable
tasks.

Which
got
us
asking:
How
are
legal
departments
performing
when
it
comes
to
getting
high-level
legal
and
business
guidance
from
their
in-house
attorneys? 

Are
your
lawyers
buried
in
administrative
chaos,
or
are
they
operating
at
peak
efficiency? 

Please
share
your
thoughts
in
this
(always)
brief
and
anonymous
survey.
Respondents
will
receive
a
chance
to
win
a
$250
gift
card.