Category: News Feeds

---

Olga V. Mack is the CEO of Parley Pro, a next-generation contract management company that has pioneered online negotiation technology. Olga embraces legal innovation and had dedicated her career to improving and shaping the future of law. She is convinced that the legal profession will emerge even stronger, more resilient, and more inclusive than before by embracing technology. Olga is also an award-winning general counsel, operations professional, startup advisor, public speaker, adjunct professor, and entrepreneur. She founded the Women Serve on Boards movement that advocates for women to participate on corporate boards of Fortune 500 companies. She authored Get on Board: Earning Your Ticket to a Corporate Board Seat and Fundamentals of Smart Contract Security. You can follow Olga on Twitter @olgavmack.

Judge Don Willett has graced Above the Law’s pages for years as a prolific Twitter user under the handle @JusticeWillett. Unfortunately, once he departed the Texas Supreme Court for the snootier environs of the Fifth Circuit, he’s curbed his tweeting and legal Twitter is all the poorer for it.

But there is some good news for the judge: the Forney, Texas school district where Willett graduated high school in 1984 is building a new elementary school and naming it after the jurist.

That’s an intense elementary school! My elementary school was a single row of classrooms connected by an outdoor covered walkway. This thing looks like a palace. Especially this random hallway where I’m pretty sure junior Will Hunting here just cracked Cayley’s Formula.

Congratulations to Judge Willett on this honor. Maybe if we’re all lucky he can retweet this story.

---

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.

The year 2020, plagued by COVID-19, has exposed all of our vulnerabilities to disease and death, regardless of age, gender, or socio-economic class. As a trusts and estates attorney I am used to planning for the worst-possible, albeit remote, scenario for most people. Over the past several months, I couldn’t allay clients’ concerns in the same way. More than ever, I am like a broken record, repeating, urging, and advocating that all individuals over the age of 18, regardless of age, level of wealth, or familial structure execute last wills and testaments, powers of attorney, and healthcare proxies. Sight unseen, everyone needs these documents, to protect wealth, children, spouses, family, and yourself.

The execution of legal documents comes at a financial cost. Sometimes this deters individuals from consulting with counsel. Other times, individuals are too busy and put the matter off for a later time. Sometimes people do not want to address issues of sickness and mortality and cannot bring themselves to think about the important matters that are the subject of the estate-planning documents.

Such issues plague all kinds of people, and even if they can afford to plan, addressing such difficult issues may deter document execution. In recent months, we have learned that several celebrities have died intestate, without a last will and testament.

Argentinian soccer star Diego Armando Maradona died in November at the age of 60. Many believe him to have been one of the greatest soccer players of all time. Argentina issued a three-day period of mourning in honor of his passing. He had amassed a fortune, including real estate and jewelry. Maradona’s life was filled with drama, and it is anticipated that events after his death will be just as, if not more, tumultuous. He had eight children from six different partners.

As no last will and testament has been produced, his eight children will divide the estate. Familial fighting is expected given the breadth of the estate and the various individuals who are now forced to review and distribute their deceased father’s estate.

Interestingly, Maradona has publicly stated that he wishes to donate his estate and not leave his children anything. Unfortunately, he died of a heart attack prior to putting such a plan in place. Under the laws of intestacy, next-of-kin, not charities, receive the decedent’s monies. Argentine law also holds that a spouse and children must receive a certain amount of a decedent’s estate under a last will. This is known as “forced heirship” meaning only a certain percentage may be willed outside of next-of-kin.

It has also been reported that former Zappos CEO Tony Hsieh died without a last will and testament. His estate is valued at approximately $840 million. He died at age 46 from smoke inhalation following a fire in New London, Connecticut. His brother and father have applied to serve as special administrators of his estate in Nevada where he was a resident. His estate administration will now be public, filed in probate court, and subject to court supervision. Hseih was survived by his two brothers and parents. Hsieh recently purchased eight houses in Park City, Utah. The purchase of real estate across state lines will make the administration of his estate even more complicated with a last will and trust. It has been reported that Hseih may have had drug and alcohol issues. He allegedly was fixated with fire. He also had instances of extreme dieting. His family was encouraging him to enter rehab, however, he died before receiving treatment. Hsieh at one point said he was going to a shed that was attached to the home, and asked the people in the house to check on him every five minutes, by the people’s account. They said he used a heater in the shed to lower the oxygen level.

It isn’t clear what started the fire. When the others at the house tried to get to him, they couldn’t. One emergency worker was heard telling others he was barricaded inside. Hsieh died from complications of smoke inhalation, the coroner said.

His death was ruled accidental.

Chadwick Boseman’s wife, Simone Ledward, has petitioned the California courts to be named the administrator of her husband’s estate. Boseman and Ledward, who had dated for five years, married in early 2020. The marriage gives Ledward the standing to petition the court for control of the estate, and it also positions her as the estate’s sole beneficiary as Boseman does not have any children.

---

Cori A. Robinson is a solo practitioner having founded Cori A. Robinson PLLC, a New York and New Jersey law firm, in 2017. For more than a decade Cori has focused her law practice on trusts and estates and elder law including estate and Medicaid planning, probate and administration, estate litigation, and guardianships. She can be reached at cori@robinsonestatelaw.com.

The bar was low when I voted for Joe Biden. My top goal was to get Donald Trump out of the White House and put a grownup back in charge. That seems to be proceeding as planned.

Another goal was to undo the extensive damage that the Trump administration has done to the basic human rights of immigrants. I had every reason to expect that Biden would do this, because he directly said he would. In particular, he said his administration would, within its first 100 days or “on day one,” end “Remain in Mexico.” That’s the program that forces asylum-seekers to wait months in dangerous parts of northern Mexico before they are even permitted to make an asylum claim.

But for some reason, the Biden transition team is backpedaling on ending it. Just before Christmas, incoming domestic policy advisor Susan Rice and incoming national security advisor Jake Sullivan gave a detailed interview to EFE, a Spanish-language wire service (like the AP), that included a lot of comments about immigration. Some of those comments are deeply disappointing. Take Sullivan’s answer when the interviewer asked how soon “remain in Mexico” will be canceled:

MPP [the Trump administration’s Orwellian name for the program] has been a disaster from the start and has led to a humanitarian crisis in northern Mexico. But putting the new policy into practice will take time. The current administration dismantled much of the necessary capacity to ensure the safe and orderly processing of migrants. We need time to increase processing capacity and to do so consistent with public health requirements.

Or Rice’s answer to a similar question about the pandemic-related public health order that the Trump admin used to keep asylum-seekers out. The order has so little legal (or public health) basis that a federal judge in November ordered the Trump administration to stop, although they’ve apparently been ignoring that order:

Processing capacity at the border is not like a light that you can just switch on and off. Migrants and asylum seekers absolutely should not believe those in the region peddling the idea that the border will suddenly be fully open to process everyone on Day One. It will not.

Look, I’ll admit that it is going to take some time to rebuild the asylum system, which Trump pretty much set on fire, and modify it to deal with COVID-19. But “processing capacity” was also the Trump administration excuse for Remain in Mexico and the related policy of “metering,” which limits the number of asylum seekers CBP will accept on any given day. It is nonsense. There is no reason why U.S. Customs and Border Protection, which has seen budget increases almost every year of its 20-year existence, should lack “processing capacity.” I also doubt that the people who work there have lost all record of how things were done five years ago. This doesn’t need to take six months.

Nor should it. It’s not an exaggeration to say that lives are at stake. Parts of northern Mexico are so dangerous that the State Department tells Americans not to go there. Most of the people who appear at the border asking for asylum are extremely poor, so they’re not waiting it out in hotels; they often live in tent cities where they lack basic hygiene and are sitting ducks for crime and COVID-19. This (intentionally, I’m sure) incentivizes people to try crossing illegally, which has a decent chance of killing them, and allows the government to tar them as “criminals” and steal their children if they’re caught. It’s an obscene human rights violation with no basis in the law.

I hate with every fiber of my being that my tax dollars are were used to create this situation. I voted for Biden because I thought that provided my best chance of ending it. And — despite the gleeful criticisms they are now facing from the left — I still think so. Dragging a center-left president left is clearly more possible than attempting to reason with an authoritarian racist who hates facts. But this interview shows that it’s going to take some work.

---

Lorelei Laird is a freelance writer specializing in the law, and the only person you know who still has an “I Believe Anita Hill” bumper sticker. Find her at wordofthelaird.com.

* An appellate court was divided about whether a lawyer should be given slack for missing a filing deadline because of COVID-19. The judges not giving this attorney a break are real “juristicklers”… [Texas Lawyer]

* A West Virginia lawyer has been disbarred for attempting to barter sex in exchange for handling a stripper’s divorce case. [Bluefield Daily Telegraph]

* The Manhattan District Attorney is reportedly hiring forensic accountants as the criminal probe into President Trump’s activities deepens. [Washington Post]

* A new lawsuit alleges that a black man was misidentified and jailed due to facial-recognition technology. [NBC News]

* The Space Force is delaying a $12 billion deal after a court found that a contractor may have engaged in fraudulent conduct. Steve Carrell must be behind this conscientious move… [Hill]

---

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.

Today is the second-to-last day of 2020, and what a year it’s been. It’s had a few highs, but it’s had oh so very many lows. On the first day of 2020, I was on maternity leave, and by the time I returned to work, I was only able to venture to the Above the Law office in Manhattan a few times before the city was shut down. Working parents, I’ve felt your pain, because like many of you, I’ve been working full-time while homeschooling and taking care of a baby at the same time. Thankfully, I’ve had Joe Patrice and Kathryn Rubino on my “quaranteam” (plus all of our wonderful columnists), and I’m happy to say we made it out of this cursed year happy, healthy, and able to bring our readers the latest and greatest in legal news.

Since I started working for ATL in 2010, we’ve wrapped up the year that was with a list of our top 10 stories. Because this year was so different, we’re doing things differently — each of the editors will be making their own top 10 lists. You’ve seen Joe’s, you’ve seen Kathryn’s, and now it’s my turn. Get ready for some of our best human interest stories, law school rankings, and your favorite thing of all: CHARTS.

10. This Lawyer Has New York’s Second Confirmed Case Of Coronavirus

The legal profession was tied to the pandemic from the moment it started in New York. Often referred to as “patient zero” for community spread of COVID-19, Lawrence Garbuz went from being in critical condition to making a full recovery. To this day, he still doesn’t know how he caught the coronavirus.

9. Law Students Forced To Urinate While Being Watched By Proctors During Remote Ethics Exam

Thanks to the pandemic, law students and recent law school graduates across the world were faced with a difficult decision: take exams online with stringent rules or sit the year out and delay starting their careers. Those who opted to take virtual tests were subjected to offensively embarrassing and demeaning situations. Take, for example, the would-be lawyer who had to urinate into a bottle without breaking eye contact with his screen — all while being watched by a proctor. Un-pee-lievable!

8. Florida Lawyer Shows Up To Federal Court In Full Hazmat Suit

How far would you go to help one of your clients during a pandemic? If you’d throw on a hazmat suit to represent one of them during a sentencing hearing, then you just might be a hero of the coronavirus crisis. Unprecedented times like these call for unprecedented measures — and this was one of the most unprecedented fashion choices for a court appearance we’ve ever seen.

7. Pregnant Woman Takes Bar Exam While In Labor, Finishes Test From Hospital After Giving Birth

Speaking of the extreme lengths that recent law school graduates went through to take online exams, Brianna Hill finished the first day of the bar exam while in active labor, gave birth to healthy baby, and then finished the second day of the test from the hospital. Not only did our original story go viral and spread across mainstream media and television outlets like CNN, the New York Times, the TODAY Show, and Good Morning America, but it has a happy ending — she passed the bar exam. Congrats!

6. All Rise: Hundreds Of Lawyers Protest On Steps Of Supreme Court To Demand ‘Impartial Justice’ In Trump’s Impeachment

In case you somehow forgot, Donald Trump was impeached by the House for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress in late December 2019. His impeachment trial started in the Senate in January 2020, and lawyers gathered to protest when it seemed as though things were about to go sideways. Trump was ultimately acquitted by the Senate, but nonetheless, lawyers still did their best to stand up for justice.

5. Law School Grad Who Failed Bar Exam Files Lawsuit Against State Bar, Threatens To Beat Judges ‘Unconscious’ Unless They ‘Follow The GOT DAMN LAW!!!!!!!’

This legal work of art needs no introduction. Please sit back, relax, and enjoy reading one of the most entertaining pro se filings of 2020.

4. The 2021 U.S. News Law School Rankings Are Here

There’s nothing like a little rankings insanity to break up the regular insanity of a pandemic. Lawyers and law students alike love comparing their law school’s prestige to that of the competition, and in a year with little else to do while social distancing and living online, everyone truly relished the opportunity to do something normal again. (On a personal note, when the rankings were released, I wrote this story with one hand while rocking a baby … and now I’m writing this blurb with one hand while balancing a 1-year-old on my knee. Law moms: we get the job done!)

3. Associate Compensation Scorecard: Biglaw’s 2020 Bonus Bonanza

Considering the horrible year the legal sector has had, it’s a wonder that bonus season has been so bountiful. With regular year-end bonuses ranging from $15,000 to $100,000 combined with special bonuses ranging from $7,500 to $40,000, lawyers at many firms were able to rake in obscene amounts of cash, despite the ongoing pandemic. How does your firm measure up? Based on the number of times people have looked at this chart, that’s what every lawyer wants to know.

2. Law School To Permanently Close Its Doors

From closing their campuses to holding classes and exams online, law schools across the country have gone through an incredible amount of change in 2020 thanks to the pandemic. Unfortunately, one law school faced the greatest change of all, a permanent closure as it struggled under the weight of “financial distress,” stranding unsuspecting law students in the process. This story had a happy ending after all, when another law school swooped in to rescue all the students who’d been left without an alma mater.

1. The COVID Crisis Law Firm Layoff Tracker: What’s Your Firm Doing To Survive?

The coronavirus really took the legal world by surprise, and as the economy tumbled downhill at breakneck speed, law firms quickly attempted to manage their expenses by taking major cost-cutting measures ranging from salary cuts to furloughs to layoffs. Legal staff often took the biggest hit when firms decided to trim their headcounts, but lawyers suffered too, with some seeing salary cuts of up to 50 percent. This big chart was the big information hub that everyone in Biglaw needed to see in 2020, making it Above the Law’s most-read story of the year. (Don’t forget to take a look at its sister chart, the salary cut rollback tracker. After their initial cuts, many law firms not only survived, but went on to thrive as 2020 unfolded.)

Thank you so much for spending 2020 with us here at Above the Law. We look forward to sharing what we hope will be a happier and healthier 2021 with you!

---

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.

Joe and Kathryn discuss the big stories in law this past year. Is it all COVID? Yes, it is. But there were several different repercussions to discuss from firm business to office architecture to bar exams. And there was a new Supreme Court justice whose nomination nearly destroyed the White House. So there was that.

Special thanks to our sponsors, Paper Software, LexisNexis® InterAction®, and Lexicon.

One morning about three weeks ago, I had an unexplained cough. The coughs continued occasionally throughout the day. While annoying, they were not frequent enough to be a cause for concern.

The next morning, the coughs continued and I felt a little “off.” I suspected something might be wrong and thought about getting tested to determine whether I was infected with the coronavirus. That afternoon, my suspicions were confirmed. I was feeling worse. The coughing got more frequent. I had a headache as well as aches in other parts of my body. I was beginning to have trouble breathing. By late afternoon, I was unable to work. I had chills and felt like I had a fever. I had leg pain and was barely able to walk.

I contemplated going to the hospital but due to the recent surge of coronavirus cases in my area, I had a feeling that I would have to wait a long time before I was seen. The idea of waiting hours in the ER waiting room seemed more painful than what I was going through at the time. So I decided to just hang in there unless I really needed to go.

The next day, I was starting to feel better. While the fever subsided, I was still coughing and breathing was still difficult. I felt fatigued, lost my appetite, and still had some body aches.

Later that day, I got a coronavirus test and tested positive.

I spent the remainder of the day making phone calls. I called my doctor, and she advised me to take some aspirin for the pain and over-the-counter cold medicine for the coughs. She also told me to quarantine myself for two weeks from the time the symptoms first appeared. I then called family members and two people who I have seen in the last week to tell them I tested positive.

For the first few days of my quarantine period, I wondered how I got infected. I seldom leave my house except to get food and walk around for exercise. I wear masks every time I go out and I wash my hands almost every time when I return home. I didn’t go to any anti-mask rallies, or any other protests. Nor did I go outside celebrating when President-elect Joe Biden was projected to win the election as some people in my area did. Only one member of my immediate family also tested positive, but I have not seen him in weeks so I don’t think I got it from him.

I concluded that it was a matter of being at the wrong place at the wrong time, and I let my guard down. Currently, one in 17 Americans have tested positive for the coronavirus and one in 1,000 has died as a result. With the current surge in cases in the heavily populated Los Angeles County, I wouldn’t be surprised if the ratio of infected people was actually one in 10.

For a while, I thought the worst in people. To be honest, I don’t think a lot of people are taking the virus as seriously as they should. And I’m not just talking about people who think the coronavirus is a hoax. Every day I see at least one person wearing a mask incorrectly. I look around and traffic is as bad as ever – I doubt some of these people are doing something “essential.” I also see people eating in restaurants when they should be ordering take-out or having the food delivered. Sure they are socially distanced and the restaurant meet safety guidelines. But this is not foolproof. And I just shake my head at what some people are posting on social media. It seems like there are a lot of people who talk a big game about “flattening the curve” but do something totally different. And then there are those who flat out don’t give a [crap] about infecting others because of their personal issues with the world or just being straight-out crazy.

I suppose I could have done better too. As stated earlier, I take precautions to minimize my chances of getting infected. But maybe I could have been more disciplined. Did I really need to go to McDonald’s to get a McRib sandwich or the dollar coffee? Maybe I could have done jumping jacks at home instead of walking around the neighborhood.  

Thankfully, while the virus took a lot out of me for a few days, I did not experience the worst symptoms nor was I hospitalized. A week after my symptoms, my condition improved to the point where I could work again although it was limited to sending emails and filling out paperwork. Talking to clients or government personnel was done sparingly as my cough still lingered.

As for my recovery, once my condition improved, I tried to stay in bed as little as possible as being sedentary would not help. I did breathing exercises several times daily. And I also tried sleeping on my stomach instead of lying on my back. And drank a lot of water.

A week ago, I took the coronavirus test again and tested negative. While this is good news, I did not see anyone during Christmas. Because of my cough, I did not call anyone either. I’ll continue my isolation until after the new year begins, and even then I’ll see people only on an as-needed basis.

I wish my last column for 2020 could have been about a more positive topic. But at least it ended up on a positive note. Given the vast number of cases in the U.S. today, even people who take adequate precautions can get infected. While social distancing and mask wearing can help, it is not guaranteed to prevent infection. So please stay safe, keep New Year’s Eve festivities to a minimum, and let’s hope that 2021 brings better days ahead.

---

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 sachimalbe@excite.com. Or you can connect with him on Twitter (@stevenchung) and connect with him on LinkedIn.

Practising Law Institute (PLI) has long been a leader in providing essential, up-to-the-minute information lawyers need for their practice. Whether it’s a look at legal issues arising from COVID-19, analysis of changes to tax and immigration law, or resources to help you advocate for justice, confront implicit bias, and stand up for civil rights, PLI works with experts to deliver timely, relevant programs and publications. Watch the video below to learn more about PLI’s commitment to keeping you ever current.

---

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.

In perhaps the most consequential congressional runoff in modern history, Raphael Warnock is taking on incumbent Kelly Loeffler for one of Georgia’s two Senate seats. We’re all fatigued at this point by crowing about the historical importance of every upcoming election, but Georgia’s Senate runoff, scheduled for January 5, really does seem to live up to the hype. Along with a parallel Georgia Senate runoff between Jon Ossoff and incumbent David Perdue, the Warnock-Loeffler race will determine control of the Senate, and in turn, whether President-elect Joe Biden is likely to have a first term full of successes or one that is completely stymied by obstructionism.

Even beyond, you know, the future of American democracy, this Georgia runoff election is important for another reason. You’re forgiven if you don’t remember this, because every day of 2020 felt like a hundred years, but Loeffler was one of several U.S. senators who dumped significant investment holdings at a time when senators were being forewarned about the seriousness of the coming pandemic, but average U.S. citizens were not. Loeffler not only avoided falling off the stock market cliff that crushed retail investors in mid-March of 2020, she also ploughed some of her newly sheltered assets into shares likely to do well in COVID-19 lockdowns, like those of telework company Citrix.

To be fair, Loeffler was investigated by the Justice Department, and the Senate Ethics Committee, and was not charged with any legal wrongdoing. Of course, both the Senate Ethics Committee and the Justice Department were Republican-led at the time (and were ineffectual and hopelessly partisan, respectively) and this was just prior to the most contentious presidential election in recent memory. Loeffler’s Republican colleagues were champing at the bit to exonerate a senator who has repeatedly bragged of being “the only U.S. senator that has voted 100 percent with President Trump.” Perdue was also investigated by the Justice Department over his large volume of stock trading at the outset of the coronavirus pandemic, and he did not have any charges brought against him either.

Still, in any investigation, the Justice Department declining to bring charges doesn’t mean a person did nothing wrong. Sometimes there is not enough evidence to file a criminal action, sometimes a person does a horrible thing that is not technically illegal, sometimes Bill Barr decides to use the Justice Department to punish perceived enemies and reward political allies. The moral measuring stick in this country should not be (even if it is, at this particular moment in history): “I was not convicted of a crime; therefore, I have done nothing wrong.”

Loeffler is easily, based on known assets and financial disclosures filed with the Senate, the richest congressperson. She and her husband (who is chairman of the New York Stock Exchange and holds a significant ownership interest in its parent company together with Loeffler) have an estimated combined net worth of between $800 million and $ 1 billion. They don’t need money. Even if a Bill Barr-run Justice Department thought it was legal to get a bunch of insider information in your role as a U.S. senator about the economic toll COVID-19 was about to take, and to then make a number of very suspiciously timed stock trades to build an already-enormous fortune at the expense of other investors who didn’t know what was coming, it’s still not exactly a public service.

Congress has unsuccessfully bandied about laws to ban its members from owning individual stocks. People who regulate themselves tend to do a pretty bad job of it. But even if Congress won’t just ban senators from trading in individual stocks, senators shouldn’t be doing it anyway, and especially not right at the outset of a pandemic when the nature of their trades is pretty much the definition of the appearance of impropriety.

At this point, the Senate Ethics Committee is not going to hold Loeffler accountable. Neither is the Justice Department. The only group left with any agency, the very last check on Loeffler’s immense financial and political power, is Georgia voters. I hope they announce to the world, as 2021 dawns on January 5, that we’ve moved beyond the lax moral standard for our leaders that has taken root over the past four years. In the United States of America, just barely escaping criminal conviction should not be good enough.

---

Jonathan Wolf is a litigation associate at a midsize, full-service Minnesota firm. He also teaches as an adjunct writing professor at Mitchell Hamline School of Law, has written for a wide variety of publications, and makes 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.