Category: News Feeds

In all probability (which is something they, in all probability, understand much better than you), you are not as smart as the stupidest person who works at Renaissance Technologies, a hedge fund with more STEM Ph.Ds than most equivalent university departments, and where even the receptionists and landscapers are likely to have an advanced degree in something or other. So it is perhaps understandable, if a bit tiresome, that your puny brain cannot understand why a firm that has literally perfected printing money might have lost between 20% and 30% of the money you’ve entrusted it with. So allow Peter Brown to open his tenure at undisputed King of the Nerds put it as simply as his own massive cranium will allow. Try to keep up, dummies.

Finding your bearings as a newly minted attorney is always challenging – and even more so during an unprecedented pandemic year. While newbies aren’t expected to be experts in all areas of law, they are expected to learn quickly, communicate effectively, and act ethically and professionally. For those working remotely, this also means learning the ropes and building relationships on a screen instead of in person.

All of this makes 2021 a particularly essential time for Bridge-the-Gap (BTG) training. Practising Law Institute (PLI) is presenting its BTG programs through two live webcasts, each focusing on ethics and skills for newly admitted New York attorneys. These programs cover topics relevant to all practice areas and settings, helping new practitioners recognize tricky ethical situations, sharpen their communications, practice negotiations, develop confidence in their pro bono toolkit, and more. Speakers include an array of established experts, including law firm partners and others from private practice, legal services organizations, in-house, executive consulting, and the bench.

Stephanie Figueroa, Program Attorney for the first half of the BTG series, Bridge-the-Gap I: Ethics and Skills for Newly Admitted New York Attorneys, uses the word “grounded” to describe PLI’s approach to developing these programs. “It comes from conscientiously and seriously thinking about newly admitted attorneys and the tasks and issues they face. What do I wish someone had taken the time to explain when I was in their shoes? What lessons did I learn the hard way that could have been avoided? We aim to make sure that the advice and guidance given is pertinent and truly useful to someone beginning their legal career.”

Communication skills can be the most challenging to bridge between the theory of law school and the practice of law. “Whether it’s learning how to negotiate with someone whose natural personality is unlike your own, or discussing difficult questions with your supervising attorney or case matter team, knowing the best way to communicate and how to handle delicate situations don’t necessarily get discussed in law school,” Figueroa notes. With an understanding that all professionals can use pointers and practice to communicate more effectively, the BTG programs emphasize “common real-world scenarios and tough situations all attorneys find themselves in at one point in time or another,” she says.

A related topic of great concern for new attorneys is how to ensure their social media presence is compatible with their ethical obligations. Jesse Sands, Program Attorney for the second half of the series, Bridge-the-Gap II: Ethics and Skills for Newly Admitted New York Attorneys, notes that “there is a natural tension between junior attorneys’ need to establish their professional brand and reputation and the sometimes-opaque ethical rules around client confidentiality, communications with represented parties, and avoiding inadvertently providing legal advice.” Promoting yourself – or even just having a normal online social life – while avoiding those ethical pitfalls “is not something that is usually covered in law school but can be the easiest ethical trap for a new attorney to fall into,” Sands adds.

Recognizing these unprecedented times, PLI also makes sure to address issues of concern for new lawyers during the “new normal” of remote work. “In BTG I, we dedicate over two hours to the ethics segment, during which the panelists will discuss the nuances of being conscientious of where you are working remotely in terms of whether you are admitted to practice law,” Figueroa says, as well as a general discussion of how to be mindful of attorney-client privilege when working remotely.

Similarly, in BTG II “our pro bono skills session includes practical advice on tackling the unique challenges of remotely representing low-income clients,” Sands says, “and our interpersonal communications segment addresses the novel challenge of how to build productive relationships with supervising attorneys in a remote environment.”

All of this might seem like a lot to take in, but Figueroa offers some key words of wisdom: “First, even the simplest tasks can become complicated if they’re done carelessly. Always reach out to a senior attorney when you have a question or need help. Finally, always remember that you’re not alone in your situation – all lawyers were newly admitted at one point! – and there are answers available to you.”

---

Practising Law Institute is a nonprofit learning organization dedicated to keeping attorneys and other professionals at the forefront of knowledge and expertise. PLI is chartered by the Regents of the University of the State of New York and was founded in 1933 by Harold P. Seligson. The organization provides the highest quality, accredited, continuing legal and professional education programs in a variety of formats which are delivered by more than 4,000 volunteer faculty including prominent lawyers, judges, investment bankers, accountants, corporate counsel, and U.S. and international government regulators. PLI publishes a comprehensive library of Treatises, Course Handbooks, Answer Books and Journals also available through the PLI PLUS online platform. The essence of PLI’s mission is its commitment to the pro bono community. View PLI’s upcoming live webcasts here.

(The Daily Orange is the student-run newspaper of Syracuse University. President Joe Biden is a 1968 graduate of Syracuse University College of Law. Biden is the first lawyer-president without a law degree from the T-14 in 100 years.)

---

Staci Zaretsky is a senior editor at Above the Law, where she’s worked since 2011. She’d love to hear from you, so please feel free to email her with any tips, questions, comments, or critiques. You can follow her on Twitter or connect with her on LinkedIn.

It’s been two weeks since the attempted coup staged by Trump’s supporters in Washington, D.C., and both lawyers and lawmakers have been identified as members of the mob that broke into the U.S. Capitol. An in-house attorney lost his job, a lawmaker resigned after being charged with a crime, and a solo practitioner has been arrested.

Today, we have news of a legal professional who stands accused of allegedly threatening to kill government officials and suggesting that his followers “go back to the U.S. Capitol when all of the senators and a lot of the representatives are back there” to “slaughter” them.

Meet Brendan Hunt, who works as an assistant court analyst in the New York State Office of Court Administration’s Attorney Registration Unit. Hunt, who goes by “X-Ray Ultra” on YouTube, is the son of retired Queens Family Court Judge John M. Hunt. Hunt was recently arrested after allegedly posting a video on YouTube on January 8 where he made various violent threats.

The New York Law Journal has some additional details:

In the Jan. 8 video, Hunt allegedly suggested that President-elect Joe Biden’s inauguration would be “probably the best time to do this,” according to a transcript of the video published in a court filing.

The video was allegedly created after Hunt made violent threats in social media posts in December, according to his arrest warrant. The warrant does not say that Hunt traveled to Washington, D.C., on Jan. 6 when a mob stormed the Capitol building.

Hunt has been suspended without pay from his job “pending further administrative action,” and will be detained while he awaits trial.

“Our democracy depends on the legislators who shoulder the responsibility of government,” said Acting U.S. Attorney Seth DuCharme. “By allegedly threatening to murder and intimidate elected officials, Hunt is striking at the core of our government.” DuCharme said his office would “prosecute offenders like the defendant to the fullest extent of the law.” If convicted, Hunt faces up to 10 years in prison.

NY Court Employee, Son of Retired Judge, Accused of Threat to ‘Go Back to Capitol’ and Kill Government Officials [New York Law Journal]

---

Staci Zaretsky is a senior editor at Above the Law, where she’s worked since 2011. She’d love to hear from you, so please feel free to email her with any tips, questions, comments, or critiques. You can follow her on Twitter or connect with her on LinkedIn.

Many of us have been in romantic relationships in our lifetimes. From such experiences, we all know the best, and really the only, thing to say to reconcile after a fight:

Honey, I did nothing wrong and I am not sorry. Therefore, in the future, I will not be changing anything at all about my behavior. Let’s move on. We have to unify. I assume you will never bring up this incident again, OK?

Yes, yes, that always works. Conflict permanently resolved!

Since many on the right do not seem to fully grasp the difference between actual sarcasm and unambiguous statements that one later regrets, let me clarify that what I just wrote is the former. Obviously, that doesn’t ever work, because we are not all having our first day as human beings.

But don’t take my word for it. Because science is a thing (yes, even social science, occasionally), we know that there are six components of a great apology:

• Expression of regret
• Explanation of what went wrong
• Acknowledgment of responsibility
• Declaration of repentance
• Offer of repair
• Request for forgiveness

You don’t necessarily need all of these elements for an apology to land, but one certainly stands above the rest. “Our findings showed that the most important component is an acknowledgement of responsibility,” said Roy Lewicki, one of the lead authors of a series of psychological studies which confirmed that all apologies are not equally effective. “Say it is your fault, that you made a mistake.”

Donald Trump hasn’t ever taken responsibility for any of his mistakes, so it wasn’t all that surprising when he repeatedly said that the speech he gave to incite a D.C. mob to attack the U.S. Capitol on his behalf was “totally appropriate” (as though we all didn’t hear him making up falsehoods about fake election fraud, antifa, the “deep state,” immigrant caravans, Barack Obama’s birthplace, and the million other toxic fantasies disgorged from his imagination over the decade leading up to that speech). We’re not going to be getting an apology or an acknowledgement of responsibility from Trump himself, so there is no use in holding out hope there.

Trump’s supporters, on the other hand, are finally, painfully, minimally, peeling away from him. His approval rating is at an all-time (but still too high) low, of 29 percent, and 10 Republican members of the House even found the courage to vote for his impeachment.

There’s a delightful Irish saying along the lines of, “I forgive and forget, but I never forget that I forgave.” Maybe asking run-of-the-mill Trump supporters, who were enticed to follow a lunatic, to eat more crow than they have already isn’t strictly a necessity. But, if Republican leaders are going to cry about “unity” while discouraging further action against their criminal president for the dumpster fire he turned our democracy into, well, they need to just shut up. They don’t want unity, they want everyone to kowtow to their demonstrably wrong positions that Donald Trump is a living god and that it’s OK to storm your own nation’s Capitol to overturn a democratic election result because mirror-image patriotism or something. There is not going to be unity with these people until they acknowledge what is clear to the vast majority of Americans: anyone who followed Donald Trump into this mess made a mistake.

So, I’m not demanding an apology from Republicans, and I don’t expect that most of them will ever acknowledge any responsibility for what happened. But unless and until they do, they need to shut up about unity, because they don’t really want it, and can’t really get it. Republicans don’t have to give up their policy positions, they don’t have to stop disagreeing with Democrats, and they don’t have to feel bad about themselves. But if they actually want unity, they first have to say what have become the seven most unifying words in the English language: “I was wrong to follow Donald Trump.”

---

Jonathan Wolf is a civil litigator and author of Your Debt-Free JD (affiliate link). He has taught legal writing, written for a wide variety of publications, and made it both his business and his pleasure to be financially and scientifically literate. Any views he expresses are probably pure gold, but are nonetheless solely his own and should not be attributed to any organization with which he is affiliated. He wouldn’t want to share the credit anyway. He can be reached at jon_wolf@hotmail.com.

As expected, late on the last night of his presidency, Donald Trump issued a swath a pardons, and, there are lots of things to be said about those he chose to absolve. (And he wasn’t done wielding his pardon power — he added Al Pirro to the pardon list with minutes left in his presidency.) Though this list did not (thankfully) include himself or his family on the list, there are some notable names. Of particular note for the legal industry is the pardon of former Nixon Peabody partner, David Tamman.

Tamman was convicted in 2012 in connection with a Ponzi scheme that was alleged to defraud investors to the tune of $22 million. And he was sentenced to seven years for his crimes. As reported by Law.com:

His license to practice law was suspended earlier in 2013 by the California State Bar, the Justice Department said. Tamman, represented by Harvard Law School professor Alan Dershowitz, appealed the sentence. But the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld it in 2015. Tamman was released from federal custody in February 2019.

Ah, there it is. Tamman’s connection to Alan Dershowitz — one of the few attorneys still willing to be associated with the now former president. No wonder Tamman was on the pardon list.

At the time of his conviction, Nixon Peabody said Tamman “betrayed our trust, and failed to live up to the ethical standards our firm demands.” Before his conviction Tamman said he was “thrown under the bus” by the firm.

According to the White House, Tamman’s pardon was also supported by former FBI Director Louis Freeh and former U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida Kendall Coffey. And the statement went on to note:

“Mr. Tamman accepts full responsibility for his actions and numerous friends and colleagues have attested that he is a decent man who experienced a terrible lapse in judgment for which he has already paid a significant price,” the Trump White House said.

Which is… basically every single criminal, ever. But they’re not connected to Alan Dershowitz, so, they don’t get a pardon.

---

Kathryn Rubino is a Senior Editor at Above the Law, and host of The Jabot podcast. AtL tipsters are the best, so please connect with her. Feel free to email her with any tips, questions, or comments and follow her on Twitter (@Kathryn1).

In the dead of night, the White House issued a press release announcing 73 pardons and 70 commutations for a grand total of 143 acts of presidential clemency. Generally speaking, clemency is a good thing. The American criminal justice system is driven by a cruel vindictiveness that runs through both major political parties, making the pardon process one of the few checks on a system addicted to criminalization.

But Trump’s final list is peppered with notable names that look like he’s bailing out his cronies — which, to some extent he is — or that there may have been some “pay for pardons” bribery scheme — which we have every reason to believe — but there’s an overarching theme that ties all of this together.

Before the pardons came out, CNN spoke with one source who offered this chilling observation:

This source said Trump also resonated with cases in which individuals who went to trial got significantly more prison time than co-defendants who cooperated with law enforcement.

“I don’t think he likes when people get screwed just because they go to trial,” this source said.

CNN didn’t frame this as chilling, of course, despite the fact that a source straight up said that Trump is using his pardon power based rewarding people for not being rats. That’s a mob boss mentality.

Again, there are a lot of problems with the criminal justice system and, yes, the fact that some people are left without an opportunity to get a good deal or that unscrupulous actors can plead out to peg responsibility on innocent people are concerns, but one of the bedrock principles that real justice requires is that cooperating with authorities should be incentivized. According to this person, Trump’s motivation for pardons revolves around making sure that the bosses — the big fish who people flip on — aren’t penalized.

Steve Bannon was the mastermind behind Trump’s rise to power and has engaged in all the sycophantic activity required to stay in Trump’s good graces — like using social media to call for beheading Anthony Fauci — but what he really has going for him is that he’s the alleged mastermind of a fraud that siphoned money from a “Build the Wall” charity. He was headed to trial in a couple of months. But he didn’t rat anyone out. Prosecutors tagged him as the brains behind the operation so he’s going to go free. Notably, Bannon’s codefendants Brian Kolfage, Andrew Badolato, and Timothy Shea did not make the clemency list. They should’ve had higher profiles!

Alan Dershowitz and Ken Starr stuck up for Dave Clark, who sounds like a stand up guy:

Fred “Dave” Clark – President Trump commuted Dave Clark’s remaining term of incarceration after serving over 6 years in Federal prison for a first-time, non-violent offense. Mr. Clark’s commutation is supported by Professor Alan Dershowitz, Ken Starr, the Aleph Institute, his family of seven children, and former business colleagues and investors, among others. While in prison, Mr. Clark has lead Bible Study and developed a “Promising People” program to teach inmates technical skills and connect them with faith-based support.

What that description glosses over is that the “remaining term of incarceration” was about 35 years and owed over $306 million in restitution and fines for running a massive fraud scheme. In keeping with Trump’s sympathy for the bosses, Clark was convicted at trial after two of his lieutenants took guilty pleas. For good measure, the feds caught Clark trying to transfer assets to Honduras in advance of his conviction, meaning Trump has rewarded not just the leader of a fraud but efforts to flea justice. Dershowitz isn’t listed as the advocate for the pardon of former Nixon Peabody partner David Tamman, though he did represent the attorney on appeal where he sought a shorter sentence for Tamman’s efforts in covering up a client’s Ponzi scheme.

GOP fundraiser Elliott Broidy — who many believe to be at the heart of the redacted “bribery for pardons” document — had already entered a guilty plea in the 1MDB money laundering action. Even though he took a plea, there’s a difference between cooperating and just bowing out in hopes of leniency. Whether his gambit would have worked or not will never be known because he hadn’t been sentenced yet.

Duke Cunningham, Rick Renzi, and Robin Hayes — three former GOP House members — all got their corruption marks cleared. All had completed their prison terms. Former Detroit mayor Kwame Kilpatrick got a pardon for his racketeering beat because Diamond and Silk vouched for him.

At least the White House got in one more disingenuous jab at Mueller:

Paul Erickson – President Trump has issued a full pardon to Paul Erikson. This pardon is supported by Kellyanne Conway. Mr. Erickson’s conviction was based off the Russian collusion hoax. After finding no grounds to charge him with any crimes with respect to connections with Russia, he was charged with a minor financial crime. Although the Department of Justice sought a lesser sentence, Mr. Erickson was sentenced to 7 years’ imprisonment—nearly double the Department of Justice’s recommended maximum sentence. This pardon helps right the wrongs of what has been revealed to be perhaps the greatest witch hunt in American History.

Paul Erickson — or “Erikson” as the proofreaders in Kayleigh’s office have it — was facing charges over defrauding investors in a wheelchair company and was sentenced to 7 years for defrauding oil investors. The only connection to Russia here was the fact that Erickson was ALSO the boyfriend who embedded Russian agent Maria Butina in the NRA but that had nothing to do with the actual fraud.

And, obviously L’il Wayne. Joe Exotic wasn’t famous enough apparently.

That’s not to say that every one of the pardons Trump issued is unjustified. Some of the sentences listed here are egregious, especially the drug ones. But the the negative space is what speaks loudest here. In so many of these cases, the exact same crime sees the architects receive forgiveness while the soldiers are left to languish.

Trump’s pardons largely repeat an ongoing tragedy of the criminal justice system that over relies upon incarceration for the have-nots and nervously resists putting the haves in jail. And yet for those with money to burn the only punishment that can even resonate is to limit freedom. But once again, America will let the big fish off.

---

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

Whether or not Hayman Capital Management’s Kyle Bass can say what he likes about real-estate investment trust manager United Development Funding—and those things include that it is a worthless Ponzi scheme engaged in all sorts of self-dealing, among others—remains an open question. What has been rather definitely settled, by a rather pissed-off judge, is that Kyle Bass and his representatives cannot say what they like about UDF’s lawyers, at least without being rather roundly sanctioned.

Back in December, special bonuses reigned supreme as a part of Biglaw firms’ year-end bonuses; after all, associates had worked themselves to the bone through the repeated vagaries of the pandemic, and this extra cash served as a way to thank them for their many sacrifices. The vast majority of firms offered these special bonuses without hourly requirements, but quite a few did tie them to billables, and some firms opted not to offer special bonuses at all.

As can be imagined, associates at those firms were quite angry; not only was their work not being rewarded, but their bonuses were officially below market. One firm that originally refused to offer special bonuses recently announced that appreciation money was officially in play.

The firm in question is Sheppard Mullin, and while more money is now on the table for associates, the additional bonus compensation is being offered on a sliding scale based on billable hours. Check out the firm’s scale, below:

As you can see, the firm is offering the prevailing market rate special bonuses to associates who have billed 2,000 hours. Associates who billed 1,900 hours will receive half that amount, while those who billed 1,950 hours will receive a bit more. This may not be the market standard for special bonuses, but hopefully this is enough to assauge associates at the firm.

All bonuses at Sheppard Mullin will be paid out on January 22.

(Flip to the next page to see the Sheppard Mullin special bonus memo.)

Remember everyone, we depend on your tips to stay on top of important bonus updates, so when your firm matches, please text us (646-820-8477) or email us (subject line: “[Firm Name] 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 all of your help!

Earlier: No Special Bonuses At This Am Law 100 Biglaw Firm, And Associates Are PISSED

---

Staci Zaretsky is a senior editor at Above the Law, where she’s worked since 2011. She’d love to hear from you, so please feel free to email her with any tips, questions, comments, or critiques. You can follow her on Twitter or connect with her on LinkedIn.