Category: News Feeds

This
AI
Tool
Is
A
Game
Changer:

You
won’t
want
to
comb
through
depositions
the
old
way
ever
again.

Taylor
Swift
Fights
Deepfakes
By
Announcing
Her
Ballot:

Be
like
Taylor
and
do
your
research!

See
Who
Is
Making
Pound
Over
Fist:

These
are
the
richest
UK
Biglaw
firms.

So
Much
For
A
Graceful
Exit:

Elon
owes
an
employee
$600k
after
his
shoddy
firing.

Blum
&
Co.
Successfully
Stop
Another
Group
From
Doing
What
They
Want
With
Their
Own
Money:

Bad
time
to
be
a
Black
female
business
starter.

Ed.
Note:
Welcome
to
our
daily
feature

Trivia
Question
of
the
Day!

According
to
recent
financial
disclosures,
which
current
Supreme
Court
justice
owns
stock
in
more
than
two
dozen
individual
companies?

Hint:
While
there
is
no
rule
prohibiting
stock
ownership,
it
could
lead
to
a
recusal.
In
fact,
this
justice
recused
themselves
from
15
cases
last
term,
more
than
any
other
Supreme
Court
justice
that
year.

See
the
answer
on
the
next
page.

Maintaining
a
business
can
be
difficult
—
about

half
of
them
fail
within
the
first
five
years.
But
you
know
what
can
be
even
harder?
Starting
the
damned
thing
as
a
Black
woman.
The
venture
capital
firm
Fearless
Fund
created
a
$20k
grant
specifically
for
Black
women
starting
businesses.
In
doing
so,
they
targeted
a
woefully
underserved
community:“[F]irms
started
by
Black
women
received
only
.0006%
of
VC
funding
raised
by
startups
between
2009
and
2017.”
Empowered
by
the
Supreme
Court’s

history-blind
reading
of
the
14th
Amendment,
Edward
Blum
sued
Fearless
Fund
for
daring
to
equitably
address
the
massive
underfunding
of
Black
business.
AJC
covered
their
recent
settlement:

In
a
2-1
ruling
in
June,
a
three-judge
11th
U.S.
Circuit
Court
of
Appeals
panel
ruled
against
Fearless
and
issued
a
preliminary
injunction
against
the
grant.

…

“The
American
Alliance
for
Equal
Rights
encouraged
the
Fearless
Fund
to
open
its
grant
contest
to
Hispanic,
Asian,
Native
American
and
white
women
but
Fearless
has
decided
instead
to
end
it
entirely,”
Edward
Blum,
the
president
of
the
Alliance,
said
in
the
statement.

Blum’s
statement
is,
of
course,
posturing.
Even
if
Fearless
Fund
licked
their
wounds
and
opened
up
the
grant
to
a
broader
audience
of
women,
the
next
suit
would
argue
that
the
grant
discriminates
against
men
and

we’d
be
back
at
the
Chicago
Bears
square.

The
setback
hasn’t
dampened
Fearless
Fund’s
purpose
of
“helping
and
empowering
women
of
color
entrepreneurs
in
need,”
but
it’s
unclear
how
they
will
do
so
with
Blum’s
Brigade
at
the
ready
to
sue
over
targeted
means
of
ameliorating
systemic
inequality.

Atlanta
VC
Firm
Ends
Business
Grant
For
Black
Women
After
Discrimination
Lawsuit
[AJC]

Earlier:

Got
A
Scholarship
For
Women?
Prepare
For
Trouble.

The
Slippery
Slope
Of
Ending
Affirmative
Action
Has
Moved
On
To
Its
Next
Target:
Women
And
‘Proxies
For
Diversity’

---

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.

During
his
election
campaign,
former
president
Donald
Trump
called
for
eliminating
income
taxes
on
tip
income
for
restaurant
workers.
It
was
mostly
dismissed
as
an
unlikely
campaign
promise.
But
when
Vice
President
Kamala
Harris
also
promoted
this
idea
during
her
presidential
campaign,
there
was
speculation
such
a
proposal
could
one
day
become
law,
likely
as
part
of
a
bigger
tax
reform
bill.

Indeed,
a
bill
called
the

No
Tax
On
Tips
Act,
proposed
by
Sen.
Ted
Cruz
and
currently
in
Congress,
would
exclude
tip
income
from
income
and
employment
taxes.
While
the
bill
is
unlikely
to
immediately
pass,
it
provides
a
glimpse
into
what
can
happen
in
the
future.

Excluding
tip
income
would
provide
more
money
that
can
be
used
for
necessities
for
people
in
traditionally
low-paying
jobs.
This
may
also
stimulate
the
economy.

Despite
benefiting
working-class
Americans,
the
negatives
greatly
outweigh
the
positives.

In
the
past,
when
cash
was
the
preferred
method
of
payment
in
restaurants,
tips
were
directly
paid
to
the
server
rather
than
to
the
restaurant.
To
ensure
that
the
tips
were
part
of
the
payroll
calculations,
the
IRS
has
required
employees
to
report
their
tip
income
on
the
Form
4070
which
is
then
given
to
the
employer.
The
problem
was
that
many
restaurant
owners
did
not
know
about
this
requirement
and
simply
let
the
employees
keep
the
tip
money
and
deal
with
the
tax
consequences
themselves.
Nowadays,
due
to
the
increased
use
of
debit
and
credit
cards
in
restaurants,
tip
income
is
easier
to
track
and
report.

The
first
problem
is
that
it
will
make
the
tax
laws
more
complicated.
Thankfully,
many
years
ago,
the
IRS
defined
what
constitutes
a
tip
in
Revenue
Ruling
59-252.
For
a
payment
to
be
considered
a
tip,
the
payment
by
the
customer
must
be
voluntary
with
no
restrictions
and
not
subject
to
negotiation
or
dictated
by
employer
policy.
Generally,
the
customer
has
the
right
to
determine
precisely
who
shall
be
the
recipient
of
his
generosity.

For
example,
a
lawyer’s
contingency
fee
award
will
not
be
considered
a
tip
because
the
amount
is
generally
negotiated
prior
engagement.

States
may
opt
to
not
follow
federal
law
and
tax
tips
on
their
own
in
order
to
maintain
tax
revenue
and
unemployment
funds.

This
also
creates
problems
with
equity.
Restaurant
tips
are
paid
as
a
percentage
of
the
total
bill.
This
means
that
employees
of
expensive
restaurants
will
have
an
advantage
despite
more
or
less
providing
the
same
service.
Activists
might
pressure
expensive
restaurants
to
adopt
hiring
practices
that
promote
diversity,
equity,
and
inclusion
at
the
risk
of
being
review
bombed.

While
the
presidential
candidates
specifically
mentioned
tip
income
for
restaurant
or
food
service
employees,
the
tax
law
will
have
to
specifically
state
who
is
subject
to
tax-free
tip
income.
Otherwise
the
law
will
apply
to
everyone.
The
law
will
have
to
be
drafted
with
specific
and
precise
language
because
inaccurate
or
imprecise
wording
could
include
more
people
than
the
law
intended.

On
that
note,
other
trade
and
special
interest
groups
will
demand
that
other
professions
that
customarily
receive
tip
income
also
be
subject
to
tax-exempt
treatment.
As
Election
Day
approaches,
don’t
be
surprised
if
either
of
the
candidates
expand
the
list
of
people
and
professions
that
would
qualify
for
tax-free
gratuities.

Finally,
exempting
tip
income
from
taxes
will
hurt
Social
Security.
It
will
reduce
contributions
to
a
fund
already
in
danger
of
being
depleted.
Also,
from
the
employee’s
perspective,
this
may
be
their
only
contribution
to
retirement.
An
unfortunate
reality
is
that
most
people
in
jobs
with
tip
income
are
living
paycheck
to
paycheck.
If
their
income
is
not
subject
to
mandatory
contributions
done
through
employer
withholdings,
they
might
not
have
a
retirement
account
because
the
money
will
be
spent
on
food,
shelter,
medicine,
student
loans,
or
truffle-sprinkled
avocado
toast.

While
the
idea
has
good
intentions,
exempting
tips
from
income
tax
will
further
complicate
the
tax
laws,
incentivize
businesses
to
convert
to
a
tip-based
compensation
structure,
deprive
a
subset
of
people
of
future
social
security
benefits,
and
exacerbate
tip
culture.

---

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




[email protected].
Or
you
can
connect
with
him
on
Twitter
(@stevenchung)
and
connect
with
him
on LinkedIn.

Ed.
note:
Welcome
to
our
daily
feature,

Quote
of
the
Day.

There
is
no
state
in
this
country
where
it
is
legal
to
kill
a
baby
after
it’s
born.

—

Linsey
Davis,
co-moderator
of
the
ABC
News
presidential
debate,

fact-checking
Donald
Trump’s
far-fetched
diatribe
about
abortion,
where
he
claimed
that
in
some
states,
babies
are
being
“executed”
after
birth.

---

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

X/Twitter
and

Threads
or
connect
with
her
on

LinkedIn.

This
week’s
episode
of
Thinking
Like
A
Lawyer
is
all
about
the
wild
decisions
made
by
federal
judges.
First
up
is
a Trump
judge
doing
Trump
judge
things
—
but
don’t
tell
him
that.
There’s
a
Ninth
Circuit
judge
who
keeps

using
his
dissents to
make
political
stump
speeches,
much
to
the
chagrin
of
his
colleagues.
And
the
Second
Circuit
comes
out against
libraries,
because
we
live
in
the
dumbest
timeline.

Funny
thing
about

letting
the
Earth
decide
—
you’ll
eventually
find
out
that
consequences
are
global.
It
is
easy
to
think
about
Elon’s
Twitter
meddling
as
an
American
problem,
but

Brazil
taking
away
~20M
Tweeters
(Xers?)
because
Elon
failed
to
appoint
a
legal
representative
shows
that’s
not
the
case.
Managing
the
world’s
public
forum
means
being
subject
to
the
world’s
laws
and
an
Irish
court
just
ruled
that
Elon
owes
a
former
employee
$600k
over
a
wrongful
termination.

Tododisca
has
coverage:

A
former
Twitter
employee
in
Ireland,
Gary
Rooney,
won
compensation
of
approximately
US$600,000
after
winning
a
case
for
unfair
dismissal.

Shortly
after
the
“let
that
sink
in”
memeing,
Elon
sent
out
an
email
blast
asking
them
to
commit
to
arduous
work.
If
they
didn’t
respond,
they
would
be
kicked
off
the
team
with
a
severance
package.
Three
days
later,
Twitter’s
HR
informed
Rooney
that
they
assumed
his
resignation
and
acceptance
of
the
severance
package.
Rooney
then
filed
for
wrongful
termination:

The
commission
ruled
in
his
favor,
noting
that
Musk’s
initial
email
did
not
provide
clear
terms
about
the
changes
in
working
conditions
and
that
there
was
no
evidence
that
Rooney
had
voluntarily
resigned.

Things
that
could
have
been
easy
predicted
by
a

hardcore
litigation
department
for
$300?
Each
passing
day
makes
it
harder
for
Elon
Musk
fans
to
push
the
angle
that
he
is
some
3D
chess
Tony
Stark
by
another
name
and
not
just
some
monied
fool
whose
companies
succeed
despite
him.
Except
Twitter
—
that
decline
is
purely
on
him.

Elon
Musk
Must
Pay
$600,000
To
A
Former
Employee
Who
Was
Fired
For
Not
Replying
To
An
Email
[Tododisca]

---

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.

Well,
the
good
news
for
Jay
Ashcroft
is
that
he
didn’t
get
held
in
contempt
by
the
Missouri
Supreme
Court.
The
Missouri
Secretary
of
State
shambled
out
of
his
disastrous
attempt
to
abort
the
abortion
amendment
ballot
initiative
without
terminating
his
license
to
practice
law.
So,
congrats,
big
guy!

But
other
than
that,
it
was
an
ignominious
shitshow
debacle,
typical
of
nationwide
efforts
by
Republican
officials
to

protect
the
ballot
from
the
voters.

Ashcroft,
son
of
Bush-era
Attorney
General
John
Ashcroft,

certified
the
abortion
initiative
for
the
ballot
on
August
13.

The
proposed
amendment
says:

No
person
shall
be
penalized,
prosecuted,
or
otherwise
subjected
to
adverse
action
based
on
their
actual,
potential,
perceived,
or
alleged
pregnancy
outcomes,
including
but
not
limited
to
miscarriage,
stillbirth,
or
abortion.
Nor
shall
any
person
assisting
a
person
in
exercising
their
right
to
reproductive
freedom
with
that
person’s
consent
be
penalized,
prosecuted,
or
otherwise
subjected
to
adverse
action
for
doing
so.

Days
later,
anti-choice
activists
sued
Ashcroft,
claiming
that
the
ballot
language
violated
Missouri’s
constitutional
requirement
that
a
proposed
amendment
specify
exactly
which
laws
it
will
repeal.
Missourians
for
Constitutional
Freedom,
the
group
that
spearheaded
the
petition
process,
was
allowed
to
intervene,
since
Ashcroft,
a
staunch
opponent
of
abortion
who
has
already
been
ordered
to

stop
lying
about
the
ballot
in
official
communications,
would
have
been
only
too
happy
to
countermand
his
prior
administrative
certification.

On
September
6,
Cole
County
Circuit
Court
Judge
Christopher
Limbaugh

agreed
with
the
plaintiffs,
holding
that
the
failure
to
specifically
state
that
the
law
would
repeal
Missouri’s
draconian
abortion
ban
doomed
the
initiative.

Yes,
the
judge is
the
cousin
of
the
deceased
conservative
talkshow
host
—
because
what
this
story
needs
is more
reminders
that
the
90s
were
a
soul-sucking
dress
rehearsal
for
today’s
nightmare
political
hellscape.

Judge
Limbaugh
ordered
the
amendment
struck,
but
stayed
his
ruling
until
Tuesday,
the
deadline
to
print
the
physical
ballots.
Many
people
are
under
the
impression
that
a
stay
requires
the
parties
to not
do
stuff,
particularly
since
the
state
Supreme
Court
issued
its
own

stay
on
Sunday
instructing
the
parties
that
“The
circuit
court’s
stay
remains
in
effect
until
further
order
of
this
Court.”
But
Jay
Ashcroft
knew
better,
so
on
Monday
he
put
out
a

letter
purporting
to
have
unilaterally
decertified
the
initiative
and
removed
it
from
the
ballot.

“I
administratively
certified
Amendment
3
for
inclusion
on
the
ballot
on
the
backdrop
of
serious
concern
about
whether
the
proposed
petition
satisfies
the
legal
requirements
for
adequate
notice
to
the
public,”
he
wrote.
“On
further
review
in
light
of
the
circuit
court’s
judgment,
I
have
determined
the
petition
is
deficient.
Therefore,
this
office
has
decertified
the
petition
for
the
November
5th
2024
ballot.”

The
petitioners
were mad
impressed.
In
a

motion
filed
the
next
day
requested
that
the
court
hold
the
Secretary
in
contempt.

“Secretary
Ashcroft’s
letter
directly
tends
to
interrupt
this
Court’s
proceeding
and
impair
respect
for
this
Court’s
authority,”
they
argued.
“Secretary
Ashcroft
should
be
held
in
contempt
and
ordered
to
maintain
the
status
quo
and
rescind
his
contumacious
letter.”

That
was
not
meant
to
be.
The
next
day,
the
high
court

denied
the
contempt
motion.
But
it
did
tell
Ashcroft
to
quit
acting
like
such
a
bloody
idiot
and
put
the
initiative
back
on
the
ballot.

“Respondent
Ashcroft
certified
the
petition
as
sufficient
prior
to
that
deadline,
and
any
action
taken
to
change
that
decision
weeks
after
the
statutory
deadline
expired
is
a
nullity
and
of
no
effect,”
the
court
wrote
in
a
terse
order
filed
just
hours
before
the
printing
deadline.
They
promise
a
longer
opinion
is
coming,
and
presumably
it
will not
praise
the
secretary
for
his
creative
legal
stylings
and
responsible
public
service.

Meanwhile,

polling
showed
a
bare
majority
in
support
of
the
amendment
last
month.
But
perhaps
that
will
change
thanks
to
Ashcroft’s
dogged
efforts
to
keep
the
story
front
and
center
for
several
more
news
cycles.

Coleman
v.
Ashcroft
[MO
Supreme
Court
Docket]

---

Liz
Dye lives
in
Baltimore
where
she
produces
the
Law
and
Chaos substack and podcast.

Legal
AI
is
here,
but
how
can
lawyers
cut
through
inflated
expectations
and
realize
productivity
benefits
today?

Join
our
friends
at
Thomson
Reuters
on

September
12th
at
1pm
ET
for
this
webinar
exploring
specific
examples
of
how
transactional
lawyers
are
transforming
their
day-to-day
drafting
work
with
generative
AI.

We’ll
explore
how
to
get
the
most
out
of
AI
for
legal
drafting:

• Choosing
  the
  right
  AI
  tool
  for
  your
  needs
  and
  leading
  AI
  implementation
  in
  your
  organization
• Understanding
  ethical
  uses
  of
  AI
  in
  legal
  practice
  and
  ensuring
  data
  accuracy
  and
  security
• Explaining
  how
  GenAI
  improves
  client
  service
• Drafting
  a
  new
  merger
  agreement,
  customized
  to
  your
  client’s
  goals,
  backed
  up
  by
  Practical
  Law
  content
  and
  expertise
• Freeing
  up
  more
  time
  for
  strategic
  legal
  work
  such
  as
  crafting
  winning
  negotiation
  strategies
  and
  providing
  insightful
  client
  counseling

Savvy
lawyers
are
already
finding
themselves
ahead
of
the
game. 
Join
us
to
see
how
you
can
be
one
of
them.

Filevine
announced
a
plethora
of
new
features
and/or
products
at
this
week’s
Lex
Summit
event
in
Salt
Lake
City.
The
company
also
previewed
its
vision
for
a
platform-driven
legal
tech
landscape,
with
CEO
Ryan
Anderson
using
his
opening
remarks
to
invoke
Steve
Jobs,
replaying
the
announcement
of
the
original
iPhone
as
three
devices
all
in
one
product.
Platforms,
Filevine
believes,
are
the
inevitable
future
of
technology
and
it
aims
to
become
the
single
pane
of
glass
for
running
matters,
managing
documents,
and
handling
timekeeping
tasks.

So
there’s
a
touch
of
irony
that
one
of
the
most
noteworthy
offerings
seems
destined
to
be
a
point
solution
that
Filevine
can
offer
to
any
number
of
litigation
practices
outside
the
customer
base
for
its
full
suite.
Because
based
on
the
glimpses
shown
at
the
unveiling,
this
is
a
product
that
every
litigation
practice
will
need…
and
soon.

Filevine
packaged
its
rundown
of
all
the
new
features
added
to
the
platform
as
an
homage
to
the
Eras
tour
with
a
heavy
hand
on
Taylor
Swift
references.
Would
keynote
speaker
Jake
Gyllenhaal
later
walk
out
to
“All
Too
Well”?

No.
Of
course
not.
They
didn’t
want
any…
ugh…
“Bad
Blood.”

Anyway,
back
to
the
important
event:
the
products
announcement.
While
the
crowd
enthusiastically
cheered
all
of
the
new
products,
everyone
knows
that
any
concert
set
has
its
true
showstopper
and
the
absolute
banger
of
Filevine’s
new
product
Eras
tour
was
Depo
CoPilot,
an
AI
deposition
tool
that
allows
the
user
to
set
goals
for
the
interview
and
then
monitors
the
deposition
in
real-time
to
let
the
lawyer
know
if
the
testimony
is
meeting
those
goals
and
flagging
where
answers
are
unclear
or
inconsistent.

It’s
that
five-minute
recess
attorneys
take
at
the
end
to
try
to
sift
through
six
hours
of
associate
notes
to
make
sure
nothing
gets
missed,
except
happening
in
real-time
and
chronicled
by
a
machine
that’s
laser
focused
on
the
testimony
the
whole
session.
A
lot
of
lawyers
are
in
denial
about
their
ability
to
retain
the
absolute
focus
necessary
to
stay
on
top
of
this
for
several
hours.
I
used
to
work
with
a
highly
experienced
attorney
who
spent
depositions
and
interviews
drawing
sketches
of
the
participants
instead
of
taking
notes
(he
would
have
an
associate
keeping
a
traditional
set
of
notes).
It
threw
other
lawyers
for
a
loop,
but
over
time
I
realized
it
actually
kept
him
sharper
by
setting
aside
the
furious
scribbling
and
allowing
him
to
serenely
take
in
the
ebb
and
flow
of
a
multi-hour
deposition.
I
wouldn’t
necessarily
recommend
trying
it
at
your
next
deposition,
but
there
is
something
to
be
said
for
the
inability
of
the
human
mind
to
process
everything
when
it’s
distracted
by
notetaking
and
checklists
and
Post-it
Notes
at
all
times.

Depo
CoPilot
doesn’t
have
those
problems,
because
it’s
constantly
evaluating
the
transcript
holistically.

Not
sure
what
it
would
do
with
Joe
Jamail:

Probably
become
self-aware
like
Skynet.

As
shown
in
that
screenshot,
Depo
CoPilot
is
also
generating
potential
relevant
follow-up
questions
based
on
the
assigned
goals
and
the
transcript
as
it
happens
and
provides
the
unflinching
set
of
ears
that
can
clue
you
in
when
an
answer
might
sound
right
to
you
in
the
moment
but
that
will
be
unusable
gibberish
when
it’s
time
to
make
designations.

Because
a
lot
of
lawyers
leave
depositions
thinking
they
secured
a
golden
snippet
of
testimony
before
they
try
to
clip
it
and
have
that
realization…

The
significance
of
what
Filevine
presented
wasn’t
lost
on
the
audience.
When
the
Depo
CoPilot
section
of
the
presentation
ended,
a
QR
code
flashed
on
the
screen
for
attendees
to
learn
more.
Phones
darted
up
around
the
hall.
The
attendees
were
in
for
another
treat:
four
free
months
of
access
to
the
offering
but
only
for
firms
in
attendance.
A
nice
incentive
for
users
out
there
to
send
a
representative
to
the
show.

Michael
Anderson,
Filevine’s
Chief
Product
Officer,
admitted
that
this
is
an
offering
that
will
by
necessity
have
life
as
a
point
solution
in
a
platform
world.
But
this
is
an
absolute
value
add.
Even
an
AI
skeptic
would
be
hard
pressed
to
dismiss
the
idea
of
a
guardian
robot
monitoring
the
transcript
and
providing
real-time
feedback
based
on
your
guidance.
What’s
the
downside?
If
you
don’t
like
one
of
its
follow-up
questions,
just
don’t
ask
it
—
but
you’re
still
better
off
having
considered
the
option.

Depositions
slid
largely
under
the
radar
as
a
use
case
amid
a
frenzy
of
effort
around
legal
research
and
contract
drafting.
But
this
is
one
of
the
most
compelling
use
cases
for
legal
so
far.
An
untiring
and
vigilant
junior
associate
at
your
elbow
for
one
of
the
more
mentally
taxing
activities
in
litigation.

---

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.