Category: News Feeds

Oof, 2020, what a year! Amirite? I know, we still have three months left in this interminable year, but still, we know it’s been a doozy of a year. But however long 2020 has seemed, that hasn’t always translated into a boon of billable hours for Biglaw associates.

The pandemic has exploded everyone’s personal obligations and whether stymied by remote learning, illness of themselves or a loved one, the emotional turmoil of social injustice, or depression, lots of excellent attorneys have found it challenging to bill at pre-pandemic levels. And that’s assuming the hours are even there in the first place. With the economic downturn that accompanied the pandemic, if an associate is ready and able to work, sometimes the hours just aren’t there. Whether it’s particular practice groups that have taken a slump, clients that are particularly hard hit, or partners hoarding the hours, sometimes its more about the firm’s business model than anything an associate did wrong.

So, you might think that, given all these factors, if a Biglaw firm has billing thresholds to get year-end bonuses, they might loosen up some of those requirements in order to retain the best and brightest during this trying time — after all, not every firm even has these strict requirements. Well, when it comes to Arnold & Porter, welp, you’d be wrong.

Earlier this week, an email was sent out from firm leadership codifying a statement made in a town hall. The firm is encouraging associates to send in “hours messages” as part of their annual review process, for anyone who failed to hit the expected 2,000 hours threshold. Which, so far, so good. With all that 2020’s been, some consideration is warranted. But then the email goes on to explain that statement will only go towards whether an associate is still considered in good standing and the hours statement “will not impact bonus eligibility for 2020. The hours thresholds for bonus consideration remain unchanged.”

Yikes. I mean I guess it’s a step in the right direction that the firm won’t put an associate on a performance improvement plan or something just because they only managed to bill 1,800 hours in this crazy year, but I guess there’s a limit to Biglaw’s compassion.

And 2,000 hours is just nonnegotiable.

Read the full email below (click to enlarge).

---

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).

Ed. note: This is the latest installment in a series of posts on motherhood in the legal profession, in partnership with our friends at MothersEsquire. Welcome Amanda M. Fisher to our pages.

Prior to COVID-19, women entered law school at equal or higher rates than men but did not achieve the same level of professional success as men. Women constitute 38% of the profession and earn salaries that are 76% of male attorneys’ salaries. Male equity partners still make 27% more than female equity partners. These numbers are telling, but the day-to-day experiences of women in the profession are staggering. Imagine being financially penalized for taking maternity leave as allowed by firm policy despite meeting every obligation before and after your leave, or being told by an employer that you do not need a raise because you got married and now have two incomes. But we actually don’t have to imagine because these stories are real and they are recent.

Why do women lag behind men in the profession? The simplest answer is that the legal profession is resistant to change. A greedy institution is an institution that requires total commitment by its members. A common example is the military — by joining, you give up individual freedoms. Law is also a greedy institution. Not surprisingly, so is family, particularly for women because of traditional social expectations. For women in law, this often translates into a tug-of-war between family and career.

Law is steeped in tradition, but COVID-19 ravaged several pillars to which the legal profession was moored. For example, time at the office was the highest currency before the pandemic, despite many lawyers, often parents — usually mothers — requesting flexible schedules and remote options. Yet during COVID-19, employers were forced to reassess whether time in the office is worth more than the safety of their employees. So, if we can make changes to keep the profession running during a pandemic, we can also reimagine the profession in a less-gendered way. Here are five ideas to advance gender equity in the profession:

(1) Show compassion. Be flexible with schedules when you can, both in person and remotely. Understand that even when working from home parents may need to turn off cameras during meetings particularly when children are present. If there is a way to accommodate caretakers that does not affect their work performance, just allow it. Most people are working very hard to keep up with professional and personal obligations.

(2) Commiserate. Be vocal about your struggles with juggling everything during these strange times. Others who may not be dealing with the same struggles may be able to benefit from seeing what working parents handle. We can all develop more empathy for one another. When all of this began, I did my best to pretend that my son was not home with me. This meant I never turned on my camera for meetings because I was afraid he would come into the frame. I rarely spoke up about anything because I was afraid he would be heard in the background and my colleagues would be annoyed. I tried to schedule meetings during his nap-time or when he would be occupied by my spouse during his lunch break. This was unrealistic. Once I let the curtain fall, I found support from colleagues who have children, and empathy from those who do not, about what life looks like for me right now.

(3) Be creative. Encourage your employees to come to you with problems so you can work together to forge a solution. I was recently interviewing a male firm partner for my dissertation. We were discussing why women seem to be behind in the profession, and he surmised that women miss out on experience when they are out of the workforce for caretaking obligations. I pressed him on this slightly, asking about whether women cultivate skills while on leave that would be beneficial in a firm environment. After a moment of reflection and some creative thinking, he then decided that yes, that was true. He told me about how his wife developed marketable skills from her time at home with their children, and if a potential employee cited those skills on a resume or in an interview, he would consider that to be more favorable than an unexplained gap. Allowing space to consider new ideas will help form creative solutions to complex problems, such as gender equality in the profession.

(4) Continue to challenge the status quo. I am not sure anyone believes we will “go back to normal” in the future, but we will settle into a new normal. Everyone, particularly people in positions of power and authority, should consistently reassess how their work environment can be improved.

(5) Put it in writing. Commit to your employees by putting policies in writing. For example, if your firm does not have a policy on parental leave and on how annual billable hours requirements, raises, and bonuses will be affected by an employee taking parental leave, then it is a perfect time to brainstorm the best fit for your workplace.

COVID-19 destroyed the profession’s cognitive scaffolding — truths we once knew are no longer valid. Now it is up to us to rebuild by shifting expectations out of tradition and into a more equal reality for current and future attorneys.

---

Amanda M. Fisher is a California attorney and a Ph.D. Candidate at the University of California, Irvine in Criminology, Law & Society. She is researching gendered stigma in the legal profession in the southern United States. Amanda is also a Visiting Assistant Professor at WMU-Cooley Law School in Tampa, Florida. You can follow her on Twitter or reach her via email at fishera@cooley.edu.

If you’re working in-house and dealing with bet-the-company litigation, you want the very best litigators in the world to be on your side. You want a firm with litigators so strong that opponents gasp in fear at the very mention of its name. You want a firm that is known internationally for going for the jugular and coming out on top.

But how can you ensure that you’ve picked the right firm? BTI Consulting Group just made it a little easier with the release of its annual ranking of the firms most likely to trigger dread in opposing counsel, as determined by a poll of in-house counsel. After reviewing all responses, BTI named the “Fearsome Foursome,” the most-feared litigation firms in the country.

So, which firms are being honored this year for their ability to strike fear in their opponents’ hearts and minds?

• Jones Day
• Kirkland & Ellis
• Latham & Watkins
• Quinn Emanuel

Per BTI President Michael Rynowecer, this is why these firms give GCs nightmares:

1. Tie Claims Together in New Ways
   The sudden WFH and other pandemic-related demands create new circumstances and claims. The Fearsome Foursome are quick to spot these and use them to their client’s advantage.
2. Very Early Assessments
   No one ever has all the facts they want. The Fearsome Foursome operate with fewer known facts. They may adjust and pivot where needed but get out of the gate quickly — and have a strong record for being on the right track.
3. Decisive and Confident
   Confidence comes with being comfortable with fewer facts, drawing on experience, and trust in their intuition. This enables the most feared firms to act quickly — often interpreted as aggressive and time consuming by the other side — adding to the fearsome persona.
4. Unbound by Convention
   No rinse and repeat here. These firms always have a new approach. These unanticipated approaches throw the opposition off guard and offer an advantage.

The BTI report also named six firms as “Awesome Opponents” — firms full of lawyers corporate counsel would prefer to steer clear of in litigation (in alphabetical order):

• Cravath, Swaine & Moore
• Lanier Law Firm
• Morgan & Morgan
• Pillsbury
• Skadden
• Williams & Connolly

Congrats to these hard-working firms, and good luck to those who oppose them.

21 Law Firms Clients Fear Most in Litigation — Post Pandemic [Mad Clientist / BTI Consulting Group]

---

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.

The pandemic has changed just about everything related to the legal profession, and the Clio Cloud Conference is no different. Easily the largest and most popular conference in the legal technology sector, Clio is bringing all of its exciting offerings online this year, from October 13 through October 16, and their team has been working hard to pull out all the stops. From compelling keynote speakers to carefully curated panelists — each thoughtfully selected to challenge the ways you think about your practice, operate your business, and engage with your clients — this will not be just another online meeting. This is an event that you will not want to miss.

I recently had the pleasure of speaking with Jack Newton, founder and CEO of Clio, about what people can expect to happen at the virtual Clio Con and how the legal profession has changed, much for the better, during the coronavirus crisis. Here’s a write-up of our lively conversation.

Staci Zaretsky (SZ): What would you like people to know about the 2020 version of Clio Con? What makes this different from any other year, aside from the obvious fact that it’s all online?

Jack Newton (JN): This is the most accessible Clio Con ever, in every sense of the word. It’s the lowest cost that it’s ever been. You don’t need to invest in a plane ticket or a hotel. You don’t need to take the entire day off. We’re spacing it out over the course of four days in very digestible chunks. And you can dip your toe into the pieces of content that you’re most interested in. What’s exciting is that if you’ve heard great things about Clio Con, and you want to get a flavor of what it’s like, this virtual conference is a really exciting opportunity to do that. I think when you look at the speakers, you’re getting unbelievable value for your money. It’s going to be an opportunity to interact with your peers, and it’s going to be more than just a Zoom conference. It’s going to be an opportunity to connect with people that you maybe never met, but you’re going to be joining a really important community.

SZ: Clio always does a fantastic job of thinking outside of the legal tech box when it comes to its slate of speakers. This year’s keynote speakers include Seth Godin, Angela Duckworth, and Ben Crump. What do you hope they’ll impart to your audience?

JN: I think Clio Con has always been about more than just Clio. We think about it as being something that is much bigger than just a legal technology conference or just a Clio user conference. In the eight years we’ve been doing Clio Con, it’s grown into something that is truly about creating what the future of the legal practice looks like and what the future of being a productive lawyer that is engaging clients in completely new and innovative ways looks like. That’s really the frame that we look at with Clio Con and think about it as a conference where we’re co-creating what the future of the legal industry will look like with forward-thinking legal professionals. And to that end, we try to bring speakers to the conference that offer a perspective around what innovation and excellence look like outside the legal industry and to offer perspective that will help lawyers walk away from the conference richer in their knowledge about how ideas from outside legal might inform what’s what’s happening inside legal.

This year, we’re thrilled to have Angela Duckworth, author of the bestseller Grit, talk about adopting a growth mindset and how to persevere and overcome obstacles through difficult times and different difficult situations, which is an apt keynote for 2020. Seth Godin, one of the foremost thought leaders on marketing and the bestseller of so many books on the topic, will share how legal professionals can think differently about their practices, clients, and careers in a digital world. And finally, Ben Crump, known for his landscape-changing civil rights cases, will speak about access to justice and equality within the justice system. I think Ben will offer a really inspirational and powerful perspective on how lawyers, and legal professionals more broadly, can help drive the change that’s needed in our society today. So just a few examples of the speakers of a much larger slate of speakers, both from inside and outside of the legal industry, who will inspire the attendees of Clio Con.

SZ: I know Clio wants to transform the practice of law, for good. So what does that mean for you going forward with regard to diversity and inclusion and access to justice? Where’s Clio going in the future?

JN: I think part of what we see as our mission is to drive that transformation within an industry that is so fundamental to society. And there’s obviously a massive access to justice gap. The World Justice Project data that tells us that 77 percent of consumers with legal issues did not see those legal issues solved by lawyers. Our Legal Trends Report data tells us that 80 percent of lawyers tell us the number one thing they need is more clients. So there’s this clear disconnect between legal demand and legal supply, and they’re not able to meet and connect effectively. We see that as a massive opportunity for Clio to help bridge that gap. We think that a foundational component of improving access to justice and improving access to legal services is built on the foundations of technology, and we’ll be able to better connect consumers with lawyers through technology. We see in the future more and more legal services being delivered over the internet. We see that as being a democratizing force for access to legal services. We see it as a model where lawyers will be able to deliver legal services much more efficiently and improve their reach.

“If you really think about it in broad terms, the law is the operating system of society and lawyers help administer that operating system, help represent citizens that need justice.”

And when we talk about transforming the practice of law for good, we really see a win-win-win scenario where we can improve access for consumers. We can make consumers happier and more satisfied with their legal experience and maybe even on a more foundational level, able to access legal representation at all. I believe we’re able to make lawyers happier and more satisfied and more fulfilled. And finally, the third win is we’ll be able to improve access to justice.

We think that’s a really noble mission to pursue and helping paint a vision of what we think that looks like is one of the big reasons we put on Clio Con. Because this conference is about more than software. Technology alone will not solve the access to justice problem. There is a really profound and seismic mindset shift that needs to happen in the legal industry in terms of how lawyers and legal professionals think about delivering legal services, how they think about the market opportunity, and how they think about product market fit in the legal sphere. And that’s really at the heart of what we’re trying to build is with Clio Con.

And finally, a big part of improving access to justice is providing access to equal outcomes and better outcomes. And there’s a huge amount of work to be done on that front. The legal industry should be one of the most diverse and inclusive professions around, and unfortunately, it’s the complete and utter opposite. We all know the legal profession is one of the least diverse, least inclusive professions in the world. And we think that needs to change. I think a big part of that can be realized by improving diversity and inclusion within the broader justice system.

SZ: Do you think that the legal industry is finally heading in the right direction when it comes to matters of diversity?

JN: I think we’re seeing improvement and I think that the events of 2020 have helped catalyze a large amount of change around the world. And thankfully, the legal industry is not isolated from that sea of change that we’re seeing around the world. So I believe there’s certainly cause for optimism on that front. A huge amount of work is still needed, but we’ve seen good progress over the course of 2020. I think it’s important that the industry as a whole goes into 2021 with eyes wide open, realizing that the real work has just begun and a lot of hard work that will need to last years remains to be done. So, my hope is that the conviction around this being truly a multi-year effort exists within the profession.

SZ: What do you think is the greatest challenge currently facing the legal industry in terms of technology? After all, 2020, because of the pandemic, has been a year where lawyers have been forced to adopt some technologies they never would have considered using before.

JN: I think the biggest threat to some law firms may be in believing that the technological adaptations they and their clients have made  will be transitory and that everything will return to “normal” as soon as the pandemic passes.

“I think what is really important to recognize is that we have seen a profound and permanent shift in how consumers want to use technology.”

I think lawyers need to realize, for example, that the days of the brick-and-mortar office, while they’re not over, are certainly numbered. The brick-and-mortar law office does not need to exist in the same way it did in January 2020, and that will not change post-pandemic.

I think when we look at the kinds of permanent shifts in consumer preferences, for example, most consumers would rather be interacting with their lawyer, according to our Legal Trends Report data, over a Zoom call rather than driving to their brick-and-mortar office downtown and meeting with them in person. Save for a fairly limited number of use cases, those consumer preferences will prevail beyond COVID-19. Lawyers that are expecting to be able to return to some of their previous client acquisition strategies in six or 12 months — for example, networking at the local Chamber of Commerce meeting — are likewise going to be in for an unpleasant surprise. We’ve reached a new equilibrium in terms of how the world is operating and the technological changes that we’ve seen are going to be permanent.

I do think, though, that the pendulum will swing part of the way back. It’s not that this pandemic reality will necessarily be the new normal. But I do think we’re going to see a better normal in a lot of ways in the long term — lawyers are going to be more accessible thanks to the internet, thanks to video conferencing. We’re going to be able to see lawyers working out of their homes or coworking spaces on a more permanent basis when we’re on the other side of the pandemic. We’ll be able to see more lawyers working out of rural locations, for example, at a lower cost overhead while still being able to serve clients in those areas. I think those are some of the structural changes and some of the technological changes that we’ve seen consumers and law firms embrace that are going to be permanent changes.

There are certainly law firms out there that have battened down the hatches and kept things running more or less the way they did pre-pandemic, hoping that things will return to normal soon. The uncomfortable reality for those law firms is that the world is changing permanently around them and they need to adapt to survive.

SZ: What is the most salient point from the Legal Trends Report that you think people need to know about prior to Clio Con, where the full report will be released?

JN: I think for me, one of the most surprising data points from the Legal Trends Report and the real time statistics we released  on COVID-19’s impact on the legal industry is that many consumers believe law firms are effectively closed for business and that 30+ percent of consumers believe that law firms aren’t operating. And I believe there’s some very off-base and incorrect perceptions due to court closures and other headline news that made consumers believe that legal services aren’t actually available during the pandemic. So one of the simplest and most powerful marketing messages that individual law firms and law firm organizations like bar associations could be putting out there is simply, hey, we’re open for business.

The most surprising finding in this year’s Legal Trends Report is the rate of technology adoption across both consumers and law firms. If you asked me what year those statistics were from in January 2020, I probably would have guessed the year 2030. It is literally a decade’s worth of technological transformation that’s happened in a handful of months.

On behalf of everyone here at Above the Law, we’d like to congratulate Jack Newton on what’s sure to be the most innovative Clio Cloud Conference yet. Click here to purchase your passes today. Use the promo code JACK-ATL to get 50% off Clio Cloud Conference passes. We hope to see you there!

---

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.

Anthem will pay $39.5 million in a settlement related to one of the biggest healthcare data breaches to date. Between December 2014 and January 2015, the insurer was hit by a cyberattack that resulted in the personal health information of nearly 79 million people being compromised, including their names, addresses, social security numbers and medical identification numbers.

According to an investigation by the Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of Civil Rights (OCR), hackers gained access to Anthem’s system through targeted phishing emails sent to one of its subsidiaries. Last year, the Department of Justice indicted two people in connection with the hack, though little was shared about their motives or affiliation.

The breach resulted in Anthem paying a $16 million HIPAA settlement to OCR and settling a class action lawsuit for $115 million in 2018.

The recent settlement is related to a separate investigation brought forth by a group of state attorneys general, including New York, Connecticut, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Massachusetts and Missouri.

In addition to paying nearly $40 million, the insurer will also make changes to its security protocols, including implementing a comprehensive information security program, and setting up specific requirements for segmentation, monitoring, encryption and employee training. Anthem must also schedule third-party security assessments and audits for three years.

In a statement released on Wednesday, Anthem said it would continue to invest in its security, and said no evidence has been found that the attack has resulted in fraud.

“The company is pleased to have resolved this matter, which is the last open investigation related to the 2015 cyber-attack. Anthem does not believe it violated the law in connection with its data security and is not admitting to any such violations in this settlement with the State Attorneys General,” the company stated.

Photo credit: Getty Images, weerapatkiatdumrong

Everyone is entitled to an attorney and lawyers are free to take on unpopular positions in pursuit of zealous advocacy. Now that we’ve got the platitudes out of the way, in reality, major law firms don’t pick up multiple millions from hard luck clients walking in off the street, they actively seek out the sort of legal work they take on. Indeed, firms build expertise in specific practice areas that they want to be in.

A new report from Law Students for Climate Accountability set out to answer a simple question: how much do the Vault 100 firms contribute to anthropogenic climate change? The answer is, as you might imagine, a lot.

• Worked on ten times as many cases exacerbating climate change as addressing climate change: 286 cases compared to 27 cases.
• Were legal advisers on five times more transactional work for the fossil fuel industry than the renewable energy industry: $1.3 trillion of transactions compared to $271 billion of transactions.
• Lobbied five times more for fossil fuel companies than renewable energy companies: for $36.5 million in compensation compared to $6.8 million in compensation.

It’s not surprising that the deep pockets in the energy sector would reflect its dirtiest technologies. Decades on top leaves these technologies with more financial wherewithal that alternatives and unfortunately Biglaw operates as the shadow of the the most powerful global business entities. It might be nice to see more firms cross into the other lane:

“The fossil fuel industry does everything it can to avoid responsibility for the massive damage it’s done to our planet. One of the strongest weapons in that fight is litigation carried out by some of the most established law firms in the legal world,” said Senator Sheldon Whitehouse. “It’s past time these firms reconsidered how they represent one of the most destructive industries in history, and there’s no reason law students should not consider this representation in deciding how to direct their careers. I applaud this important effort.”

Convincing some high-powered firms to lend their services to technologies of the future would offer a tangible benefit to the planet and having the pool of law students educated on what individual firms choose to do to make money can hit firms in the only place they care about almost as much as the bottom line: recruitment.

The website allows you to search individual firms for their climate report card, which looks like this:

It’s worth digging into all the data that they’ve compiled. The full report is available here, but we’ve got the appendix with every Vault 100 report card here.

---

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.

Paul Singer isn’t a stranger to the media business. He’s a backer of the Washington Free Beacon, the online right-wing rag best known for birthing the Steele dossier against President Trump. He also once dabbled in radio, although not exactly in a way that was likely to make him a mogul. Now, however, some are wondering whether he’s planning to go the full Mercer.

Matt Drudge is the latest media mogul rumored to be looking for a cash infusion in the form of a partial sale of his popular news website Drudge Report…. Paul Singer, the billionaire hedge fund founder and Republican donor whose name has surfaced as a potential buyer of a stake in Drudge’s popular news website, adamantly denied any involvement.

“There is nothing to this rumor,” a spokesman for Singer, founder of $41 billion hedge fund Elliott Management, told Media Ink. “We have not heard anything about Drudge looking for investors, and we are not involved in any way.”

* An Irish court has held that bread used in Subway sandwiches is too sugary to meet the legal definition of bread as a “staple” food for tax break purposes. Maybe they should put more “dough” into their bread… [New York Post]

* The Kentucky Attorney General will need to release materials related to grand jury proceedings over the death of Breonna Taylor by tomorrow. [CNN]

* An attorney for the alleged Kenosha shooter Kyle Rittenhouse announced plans to sue Joe Biden’s campaign over ads which purportedly depict Rittenhouse as a white supremacist. [Fox News]

* The Nevada Attorney General has warned that he will prosecute the type of poll watching allegedly suggested by President Trump at Tuesday’s presidential debate. [Hill]

* A lawyer was suspended from practice for failing to pay bar dues or filing a registration statement for years and practicing law while administratively suspended. Pay your bar dues everyone! [Bloomberg Law]

---

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.