Ex-Biglaw Associate Becomes Accidental Millionaire Thanks To Daily Fantasy Sports

Picture this: You’re a seventh-year attorney at a Biglaw firm, and you’re getting tired of the never-ending rise and grind that goes along with associate life. You may be raking in a six-figure salary, but you’re exhausted, and you’re longing for change. You want to get out, but you’re not sure how. In what little spare time you have, you turn to playing daily fantasy sports (DFS) on DraftKings. And then, just like that, one football game changes your life forever.

That’s exactly what happened to William Elder Jr., 38, a former Dechert associate. “I’m one of the luckier guys you’ll ever meet,” he says. Bloomberg Law has the details:

[Elder’s] life suddenly changed—while watching a football game, on Nov. 18, 2018.

Elder’s hometown Philadelphia Eagles lost 48-7 to the New Orleans Saints. But the 10 catches for 157 yards and a touchdown by Saints receiver Tre’Quan Smith helped the fantasy squad he assembled win a weekly contest sponsored by DraftKings Inc.

His winnings? One million dollars. That’s why DraftKings, a Boston-based fantasy sports company that went public last year, calls the contest the Millionaire Maker.

Elder left Dechert in February 2019, and took some time off to figure out what to do next with his life. He founded BillyVonElds LLC, a DFS consultancy, and spent hours upon hours playing DFS daily so that he could make ends meet. Aside from his million-dollar win, his best single-day win was $40,000. And then along came COVID, which forced him into the world of e-sports. Things were getting difficult, and Elder thought it may be time for yet another career change.

In a happy coincidence, this past May, one of his old Dechert clients, Diffusion, came calling, and a few months later, he became the company’s general counsel.

Elder will receive $250,000 in annual base salary with an initial target bonus equal to 30% of that sum, according to a Diffusion securities filing. He currently owns more than $16,000 in Diffusion stock, per Bloomberg data. …

Diffusion’s employment of Elder has curtailed his DFS activities, he said, although he still manages to squeeze in some games when he has time.

Elder’s got some Super Bowl advice for those who still have time to play DFS: “As part of my DFS stuff I have NFL power rankings. I started doing them about Week 10, right when there’s enough data, and the Bucs have been at the top.”

Will you be betting on Tom Brady and the Bucs? If you’re lucky, you could turn yourself into a millionaire just like this lawyer.

Super Bowl Reminds Lawyer of Game That Forever Changed His Life [Bloomberg Law]


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.

Latest NIL Bill Is A Perfect Compliment For The Return Of A College Football Video Game

(Image via Getty)

Yet another college athlete name, image, and likeness bill has been introduced in Congress, but this latest proposal may have the best chance of becoming a national law.

On February 4, U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT) and U.S. Representative Lori Trahan (MA-03) introduced the College Athlete Economic Freedom Act, which is a 12-page bill that intends to prevent colleges and the NCAA from precluding college athletes from marketing the use of their publicity in a commercial manner and specifically states that group licensing must not be restricted. The latter element is very timely, considering that EA Sports just announced its intention to bring back its college football video game within the next few years.

“The legislation Representative Trahan and I are introducing today provides unrestricted rights for college athletes to make money off their name, image and likeness by signing endorsement deals, running camps, or other means,” Murphy said in a prepared release. “It’s simple: this is about restoring athletes’ ownership over the use of their own names and likeness. They own their brand, not their school or the NCAA. Giving students a right to make money off endorsements is just one part of a much broader package of reforms that need to be made to college athletics, but it’s a good start.”

A broader package of reforms has already been proposed by various lawmakers including Sens. Cory Booker and Richard Blumenthal, who have spearheaded an effort to create a national “College Athletes Bill of Rights,” which would also require that athletes receive a share of the revenue received by athletic departments. There has been little-to-no momentum attached to that bill since its text was revealed in December 2020.

The new legislation introduced by Murphy and Trahan has the support of many respected sports industry veterans, including basketball broadcaster Jay Bilas.

“Senator Murphy and Congresswoman Trahan have laid a necessary marker down with the College Athlete Economic Freedom Act in ensuring athletes have the same economic rights as literally everyone else, including every other student,” Bilas said. “I commend Senator Murphy and Congresswoman Trahan on this thoughtful and comprehensive approach to providing athletes with the same economic rights and protections as everyone else.”

Under this most recently revealed legislation, college athletes would have the ability to retain legal counsel and athlete agents of their choosing to assist in the procurement and negotiation of deals that concern the exploitation of the athletes’ publicity rights. More restrictive state laws would be preempted should this bill become law.


Darren Heitner is the founder of Heitner Legal. He is the author of How to Play the Game: What Every Sports Attorney Needs to Know, published by the American Bar Association, and is an adjunct professor at the University of Florida Levin College of Law. You can reach him by email at heitner@gmail.com and follow him on Twitter at @DarrenHeitner.

A Q&A with Availity’s senior counsel on data-sharing and the impact of Covid-19 – MedCity News

As part of our focus to highlight the confluence of healthcare and legal news, we are featuring interviews with inside counsel at life sciences and other healthcare companies. The first of these interviews features Erich Drotleff, senior counsel for Availity. As the nation’s largest health information network connecting health plans, providers and patients, Availity facilitates over 4 billion clinical, administrative, and financial transactions annually.

At Availity, Drotleff is responsible for negotiating profitable agreements, promoting company growth and profitability, minimizing business risk, ensuring legal compliance, and managing non-lawyer staff. In a phone interview with MedCity News, he weighed in on the role of data-sharing in public health, his path to an in-house role, and the benefits of bonsai gardening.

(This interview has been edited for length and clarity.)

Headshot of Erich DrotleffWhat is the most crucial issue facing health and life sciences lawyers, today, and how would you go about addressing it?

I would have to say information-sharing.

There is so much regulation on data rights, ownership, privacy, and protection that I don’t think we will be able to tap into revolutionary healthcare advancements, such as advanced data analytics using AI and machine learning, until healthcare data can be shared universally.

I know there are serious concerns centered around data privacy and its use that raise many ethical issues. And let us not forget about how truly valuable healthcare data is to hackers; the healthcare sector is one of the largest industries with nonstop data breaches. But for healthcare outcomes to truly advance, we need to have the ability to build a national “data lake” based on inputs from all  stakeholders.

Although the prior administration took steps to lower information blocking, it is still woefully inadequate in providing a meaningful use of and access to necessary healthcare data. Despite the changes initiated by ONC and CMS, too many roadblocks still exist.

The FDA just held a meeting to discuss how to manage data in the development of artificial intelligence for medical devices, and the fact is that you can’t develop anything if everyone’s going to be holding onto their data and saying: “You can’t do anything with it unless it falls within these exact three enumerations under this contract.”

I get that perspective from a company-protection standpoint. And then I get the ethical dilemma from a patient’s perspective — “it’s not your data, it’s my data, it’s about me and my body.” But we need to address it. There’s a lot of discussions around what to do but no solutions, yet. Until we solve this issue there is so much health innovation that’s just going to remain untapped.

What legal industry trends have had the greatest impact on your practice?

When the market crashed in 2008, I was a first-year associate in a small firm. I knew I wanted to go in-house while I started contemplating going to law school and becoming a lawyer as a second career.

However, I didn’t know if many in-house counsel positions were available for someone such as myself, given my prior career as a health plan contracts negotiator.

The 2008 market crash really shook up the legal industry. At law firms, second- and third- to fifth-year associate blood-letting was at an all-time high. Unemployed BigLaw associates were everywhere.

More and more companies were taking their legal work in-house and outsourced less and less once they realized how much they could save for the bottom line by bringing on full-time in-house counsel.

So I guess my first career non-legal work experience combined with a law degree and law firm experience was attractive to many employers seeking to bolster their legal department headcount.

What COVID-19-related change do you think will most impact health and life sciences legal practice, moving forward?

I think telemedicine and remote patient monitoring will continue to grow in both interest and popularity.

But as a result, a significant number of issues will arise. Patient confidentiality, data privacy and data rights, an increase in both use and development of apps, consumer-driven healthcare, and healthcare concierge services. And of course the issue of medical licensing issues across jurisdictions — which state’s medical licensing laws apply?

What is your proudest legal accomplishment (that you’re allowed to talk about)?

I would say my biggest accomplishment since graduating from law school and becoming an attorney was passing the California State Bar the first time!

But as far as during my working career, I took a position in the fall of 2014 at a newly acquired healthcare entity whose parent company had no healthcare legal leadership. My biggest success story was being a one-man legal department and building out the subsidiary so it was aligned with the parent company’s business rules while also making sure the organization was running consistently with necessary healthcare regulations.

They needed a good healthcare attorney with business acumen that understood the landscape as it applied to the healthcare industry, and I was proud to be that person.

What do you wish you could teach your younger self about health and life sciences law, before you went in-house?

That question is a bit difficult to answer since I knew from the moment that I decided to commit to prepping for applying to law school that I wanted to be an in-house counsel and bypass the law firm track.

Unfortunately, most in-house positions require some law firm experience in order to have a well-rounded in-house candidate. So I would tell my younger self to be patient and just realize that all good things take time. Even if that means working at a law firm first before getting that first in-house position.

Having spent years as a health plan contracts manager, what I learned from working at a firm was a better perspective of balancing and managing business risk.

In BigLaw practice, you do everything to ensure your client has slim-to-no risk when they enter into a transaction, but if you continue with that mentality as in-house counsel, you’ll bring the company to a screeching halt. Working at a firm, I developed that necessary understanding that every transaction has a certain risk and applied that to my existing business experience to astutely quantify that risk, evaluate the danger, and advise leadership on the path forward.

There are few business situations that are simply an obvious yes or no, from a risk analysis perspective.

In-between, you can have high return and a high level of risk but low likelihood of a bad outcome. In these cases, you can balance those perspectives and move forward having the ability to tell the organization yes, this does carry a risk, and yes, repercussions could be significant, but the likelihood of it occurring is low.

In my prior career, risk wasn’t on my radar — my marching orders were to negotiate the contracts, close the deals, and move on.

My experience in BigLaw gave me the perspective: “Oh, if this happens, the resulting outcome could be severe.” Most traditional BigLaw attorneys are very risk-averse and carry that mentality into the organization as their in-house counsel.

Historically, an organization’s legal department was often called the “Department of No.” Sometimes they get a bad rap, but I think that’s evolving.

If you could snap your fingers and have the general public understand one thing about health and life sciences, what would it be?

It would have to be for people to understand when they say “don’t let the government take over my healthcare,” that while the two largest health plans in the United States are Medicare and Medicaid, these government programs are administered by private health plans such as Humana, Anthem and United. So when I hear people say they don’t want a nationalized single payer, government-run health system, I have to laugh. Little do they know how Medicare and Medicaid are run.

What three titles would be on your Zoom bookshelf if you were interviewed by CNN?

The three titles would be: “Tribal Leadership” by Dave Logan and John King, Philip Roth’s “The Plot Against America,” and “Cultivating and Growing Bonsai,” because I am a gardener and find it incredibly therapeutic.

“Tribal Leadership” gives a good perspective of high-performing versus low-performing organizations. The authors discuss the different levels of tribal leadership. It’s all about “me,” then it’s all about “us,” and at the higher levels of organizational leadership who “wins” doesn’t matter.

“The Plot Against America” was adapted into a miniseries on HBO, but I read the book first and it had a tremendous impact on me. It’s fiction but pulls on a lot of events that occurred in the 1940s regarding the Jews being persecuted.

In the novel, Charles Lindbergh defeats FDR and serves as the henchman to protect the U.S. from Germany during the 1930s and ’40s. With what’s been going on these past four years, with how the administration allowed white supremacists to get a free pass, it’s an interesting analogy to read this fiction based on real-life events and see how it unfolded.

Bonsai falls in with my passion for gardening and plants; you’ve just got to have the space to keep them outside. If I hadn’t become a lawyer, I would have probably become the owner and operator of a small café, bookstore, garden shop and nursery.

Photo: DrAfter123, Getty Images

Unlike Her Client, Rosemary Vrablic Did The Right Thing And Resigned

Some months ago, Rosemary Vrablic was confronted with evidence of her wrongdoing, specifically her purchase of an apartment from a client, one Jared Kushner, and her machinations to avoid the discovery of this fact. Unlike that client’s father-in-law, another client by the name of President Donald Trump, against whom coincidentally there is a mountain of evidence of wrongdoing, up to and including inciting an insurrection against the government he nominally led until a couple of weeks ago, Vrablic chose to take the (relatively) honorable way out.

Annual Reminder: You Can Probably Just Call The Super Bowl The Super Bowl

It’s that special time of year again where we here at Techdirt need to remind you that, no, the NFL cannot keep you from referring to The Super Bowl as The Super Bowl, full stop. While the NFL stomps around the entire country every year, slapping down bars and churches for hosting Super Bowl parties, all while an extremely unhelpful media plays along, the truth is that most of the bullying the NFL does isn’t over actual trademark infringement. Sure, if some business advertises some association or endorsement by the NFL, that would be trademark infringement. Or if they claimed endorsement of the game or the NFL, that too would be infringing use. But a church simply hosting a Super Bowl party is not trademark infringement.

And, of course, the silliest output of this confusion is people and companies using half-baked euphemisms to refer to the Super Bowl instead. Everyone knows what they’re talking about and, yet, this somehow isn’t infringing. So, were there any confusion, it would still exist, and yet the NFL relents. The most common of these has been “The Big Game”, of course, and its use continues to this day.

Restaurants have taken to calling it the Big Game because the NFL trademarked the name “Super Bowl” and jealously defends its use. But whatever you call it, Dallas restaurants are offering a superabundance of specials and takeout options for Sunday’s game. We’ll just call them Super Bowl specials because we can.

And so can everyone else. Really. Go ahead. This “the Big Game” nonsense is modernity’s “fire in a crowded theater.” But, because trademark bullying works, and everyone is so terrified of the NFL, instead you get this…

Not to be tripped up by trademark hassles, GAPCo got creative in naming their game-day deal. The Superb Owl Sampler includes 12 garlic knots, 12 toasted ravioli (six cheese, six beef), 12 pizza poppers with large ranch and sauces for dipping. The sampler ($55) feeds up to 10 people.

How the hell do you even parody something like that?

But if you really want to get yourself irritated, actual United States government agencies are getting in on this euphemistic bullshit. And the US Consumer Product Safety Commission actually made this all sillier with its own messaging on Twitter.

Why in the name of Tom Brady’s sweaty jock strap would you put out a tweet that names the Super Bowl and then put out an image that uses a euphemism for it? And, related: “the Large Football Game”? I’m frankly tempted to see that graphic as an attempt to poke fun at the NFL for its protectionist nonsense, but somehow I don’t think the USPSC has that much of a sense of humor.

Stop. STOP. Stop giving the NFL a power it doesn’t actually have. Stop acting like the league can somehow gatekeep reality. It can’t. Just call the Super Bowl by its damned name. It’s not Voldemort, after all.

Annual Reminder: You Can Probably Just Call The Super Bowl The Super Bowl

More Law-Related Stories From Techdirt:

Various States All Pile On To Push Blatantly Unconstitutional Laws That Say Social Media Can’t Moderate
Utah Theme Park Sues Taylor Swift Over Album Title After Exploiting It
Microsoft Offers To Break The Web In A Desperate Attempt To Get Somebody To Use Its Widely-Ignored Bing Search Engine


HeadshotJoe Patrice is a senior editor at Above the Law and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer. Feel free to email any tips, questions, or comments. Follow him on Twitter if you’re interested in law, politics, and a healthy dose of college sports news. Joe also serves as a Managing Director at RPN Executive Search.

Morning Docket: 02.05.21

Missing Merrick. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty)

* Merrick Garland said he will sell his stocks after he is confirmed as Attorney General. Maybe he is just unloading his GameStop shares… [Barrons]

* A Roger Ailes accuser is alleging that lawyers for Fox News are using improper litigation tactics against her. [Daily Beast]

* Two Attorneys General of Alaska have resigned in around six months. And it’s not because of the weather… [New York Times]

* A New Jersey attorney has been disbarred for using client money on personal expenses, including items at Walmart and Home Depot. [New Jersey Law Journal]

* The supermarket Market Basket is facing a lawsuit over allegedly misstating the number of cups that can be made with a container of coffee. Maybe the plaintiff just likes strong brew… [CBS News]


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.

Brightflag Adds Qualitative Reports for Companies to Better Evaluate Outside Counsel

The Ireland-based company Brightflag, whose platform uses artificial intelligence to help corporate legal departments better manage their legal spend and legal matters, is adding a set of new reports to its existing reporting feature that are designed to provide companies with a more nuanced perspective for assessing their relationships with outside counsel.

The news comes fresh on the heels of the company’s news in December that it had raised $28 million in a growth equity investment, which followed an $8.5 million Series A round in April 2019. The company launched in 2015.

With the new reports, for each matter managed on Brightflag, the designated matter leads can rate the associated law firm across five qualitative criteria:

  • Communication.
  • Quality of advice.
  • Business alignment
  • Budget adherence.
  • Overall recommendation.

These ratings are incorporated into dashboard reports, where legal department leaders can compare vendors across one or more
metrics as they weigh critical resourcing decisions.

“By enabling customers to capture qualitative nuances in objective reports, we’re making it easier than ever to conduct holistic performance evaluations and identify top business partners,” Brightflag cofounder and CEO Ian Nolan said in a statement.

Brightflag’s product competes with legal operations products such as Legal Tracker from Thomson Reuters, LexisNexis CounselLink, and SimpleLegal.

Its platform provides e-billing, invoice management, invoice review and accruals management. Its AI technology reads invoices submitted by outside counsel and highlights breaches of billing guidelines. Its software tracks accruals and work-in-progress and provides a variety of reports. It also tracks historical matter billing and uses analytics to help in negotiating fees.

The company was founded in Dublin under its original name Legalshine by Nolan, who was formerly business development manager at another case management company, and Alex Kelly, now COO and formerly an associate attorney at Matheson in Dublin.

Rudy Giuliani Menaces Lincoln Project With His Wizened Chram

Rudy Giuliani will not dignify the Lincoln Project with a response. He refuses to sully himself by answering their preservation demand and threat of an imminent defamation suit. The president’s lawyer would never stoop so low.

“I’m writing them a letter back telling them that I will not respond to their letter because they make this one rather sketchy, defamatory allegation about a tort that I committed,” he told Steve Bannon.

That’s … never mind.

During Giuliani’s last appearance on Bannon’s talk show, he accused the Lincoln Project of planning the January 6 Capitol Riot, disguising themselves as Trump supporters to stoke violence. That’s the very accusation which precipitated that nastygram from the group’s lawyer, Caplin & Drysdale’s Matthew Sanderson, warning that “You have until Wednesday, February 3rd to retract your statement fully and to apologize publicly to The Lincoln Project. Refuse at your peril.”

So it’s only fitting that Giuliani would return to the scene of the crime to defend himself.

“So I wrote back to him, ‘You know, son, I’ve represented Dow Jones, Barron’s, the Wall Street Journal, the New York Daily News. I did this for a living. And you’ve made a classic mistake,’” he blustered.

Never get involved in a land war in Asia!

Oh, sorry, we meant, never go in against a Sicilian, when death is on the line!

Just kidding.

“At the very end of the letter, you claimed that I defamed the Lincoln Project. Except in the first seven paragraphs of the letter, you defamed me at least four or five times,” is what he really said.

Which is better than “I know you are, but what am I?” But only marginally.

To the extent this claim is rooted in objective reality (always a dicey proposition with our Roodles), he’s probably talking about this description of his part in the riot:

You told your zealots what to do. They listened. They vandalized. They terrorized. They injured. They killed.

You are responsible for an armed occupation of the U.S. Capitol and an insurrection against the United States. You are responsible for our nation’s first non-peaceful transfer of power since the Civil War. You are responsible for 140 injured Capitol Police. You are responsible for five dead Americans. You incited a riot on January 6th and then stood back to watch. Your immediate reaction to the dreadful scene that day was to phone fleeing Senators to request that they further extend the vote-counting delay that you helped manufacture, which is a treacherous act the public knows about only because you cannot operate a smartphone.

Well. There is that.

Because we are in the fourteenth month of 2020, we will now be subjected to months of grandstanding motions by a pack of aging silverbacks, at the conclusion of which the court will tell everyone to go away and think about their sins.

Credit to the profession!

Rudy Giuliani Responds to Lincoln Project’s Litigation Threat: ‘I’m Writing Them a Letter Back Telling Them I Will Not Respond to Their Letter’ [Law & Crime]


Elizabeth Dye lives in Baltimore where she writes about law and politics.

Trump Gets Invited To Lie — Errrr… Testify At His Own Impeachment Trial

(Photo by Mark Wilson/Getty Images)

Two days ago, you filed an Answer in which you denied many factual allegations set forth in the article of impeachment. You have thus attempted to put critical facts at issue notwithstanding the clear and overwhelming evidence of your constitutional offense. In light of your disputing these factual allegations, I write to invite you to provide testimony under oath…. …

If you decline this invitation, we reserve any and all rights, including the right to establish at trial that your refusal to testify supports a strong adverse inference regarding your actions (and inaction) on January 6, 2021.

— Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD), the former constitutional law professor leading the Democrats’ case, in a letter inviting former President Donald Trump to testify either before or during the Senate impeachment trial. Raskin included this mic drop in his letter: “[T]he Supreme Court held just last year that you were not immune from legal process while serving as President—so there is no doubt that you can testify in these proceedings. Indeed, whereas a sitting President might raise concerns about distraction from their official duties, that concern is obviously inapplicable here. We therefore anticipate your availability to testify.”


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.