Category Added in a WPeMatico Campaign
Ed. note: Welcome to our daily Trivia Question of the Day feature.
Which president of the United States is the only one to serve at least a full term and never appointed a justice to the Supreme Court?
Hint: Two of his Court of Appeals nominees eventually went on to serve on the Supreme Court.
See the answer on the next page.
(Image via Getty)
On the heels of Massachusetts declaring that they’ll write their own test if they have to in order to offer students an online option, the California Supreme Court issued a letter outlining its thoughts on the licensing process for this cycle and also expressed its interest in an online option.
Technically, California committed to “work with the National Conference of Bar Examiners to facilitate the online administration of the September 2020 Multistate Bar Examination (MBE), or some variation thereof,” meaning it didn’t go as far as Massachusetts and declare that it would go rogue and compose its own test. But the statement can only be read as a shot across the NCBE’s bow, with the testing organization consistently downplaying even the possibility of an online exam.
Of all the states pushed into the traffic of the crossroads of reform by recent events, California is the most intriguing. While all states are now taking a look at their licensing regimes, California’s mess was already the subject of mounting criticism before a virus rendered status quo testing an impossibility. The cut score is far too high for the stated goal of protecting the public and functions primarily to serve a guild system controlling the flow of new entrants, it’s contributed to a massive access to justice issue, and simultaneously discriminates along racial lines and exacerbates the harm to minority candidates by accrediting sub-par law schools that primarily suck tuition dollars from minority students without affording a viable path to license.
If any state needs the diploma privilege knock-on effect of forcing a crackdown on law schools that don’t produce students capable of meeting minimum subject matter proficiency standards, it’s California.
And while it doesn’t appear as though the state is ready to fully lean into the opportunity presented by this crisis, at least it’s pushing the NCBE on the online option which is the bare minimum that any jurisdiction can offer right now. It’s not something the NCBE necessarily wants because few entities have as much wrapped up in keeping everything exactly as it is right now, they may want to consider loosening their stranglehold on how this test is administered because states like Massachusetts and California have no problem going their own way if they don’t get what they want.
California Supreme Court Orders Bar Exam Delayed, Administered Online [California Courts Newsroom]
Earlier: With NCBE Quibbling Over Online Bar Exams, Massachusetts Says They’ll Just Write Their Own
Who’s To Blame For School’s ‘Horrific’ Bar Results? Maybe The California Bar Examiners.
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.
(Image via Getty)
Who would have guessed that a crime about school-budget fraud in Roslyn, Long Island, could make a compelling movie subject, but it does in Bad Education, a movie released online last weekend. (Spoilers ahead.)
With great acting, slow buildup, real-to-life characters (it’s based on a true story) and a comeuppance for all at the end, it’s a slow-burn crime drama well worth watching.
The story intertwines white-collar crime, schoolboard politics, a can-do school superintendent, and a budding high school journalist to create a fascinating look at how huge amounts of taxpayer money were stolen and kept secret for a decade.
And we’re not talking about chump change gambled away at a Las Vegas teacher’s conference, but over $11 million.
First, there’s the walk-on-water school superintendent, Frank Tassone, played masterfully by Hugh Jackman (once you get used to his only partially successful Long Island accent). He’s handsome, smooth, and charismatic in an understated way. He speaks to parents, co-workers, and teachers with deference and appears to really be listening. In reality, he’s leading a double (even triple) life.
Behind his Mr. Rogers friend-to-all persona, Tassone is diverting taxpayer money to underwrite, among other things, an Upper East Side apartment for him and his male lover, a house in Arizona for a different boyfriend, trips with his partner on the Concorde to conferences in London, the purchase of fancy suits, and his own plastic surgery.
Next, there’s his enabling assistant, Pamela Gluckin, the assistant superintendent of business affairs who cooks the books with such finesse that it’s not until an ambitious reporter from the high school paper starts digging that the scandal comes to light. Gluckin, played by Alison Janney (who also struggles with a Long Island accent), is less sympathetic. In her unthrottled greed, she bought herself and her family luxury cars, a beach home in Westhampton, and condos in Florida. Scriptwriters don’t give her as much back story as Tassone ,who rationalizes his theft as payoff for the frustrations for having been a good teacher, overlooked and underpaid.
Tassone convinces the school board that Gluckin’s fraud amounts only to $250,000. Hardly worth bringing down the school’s much vaunted reputation and the high property values that followed. “Harvard will just turn around and reject the students they’ve already accepted if we make this public,” Tassone says.
A coverup ensues with the board announcing Gluckin’s resignation due to a serious illness. Life goes on as normal until an article runs in the school paper drawing not only media attention but indictments against all the major players.
Hugh Jackman does a great job as the aging, vain, former teacher, now superintendent, who justifies what he did in the name of providing the best education he could for his district. His mixture of charm and hustle is so compelling, you’re left thinking he really believed his own bullshit.
In one particularly poignant scene, as investigators pour through boxes in the office next to his to make their case, Tassone is confronted by a mom insistent that her son get into an accelerated class. His world is imploding, yet he struggles to remain calm until he no longer can. It’s a funny, horrible scene that plays off the kid’s inability to pronounce the word “accelerate.” Tassone launches into a biting harangue about teaching children everything, giving it your all, being undervalued, unappreciated, and ultimately forgotten as parents and students move on with their lives. “But we never forget you,” he says.
None of it justifies the crime committed, but the viewer leaves understanding how the well-intentioned former teacher rationalized his misdeeds and kept them under the radar for so long by producing quality education, the reward of students getting into Ivy League schools, and higher property values.
In a sense, everyone who knew the high budgets that were being approved and saw the still-dripping ceilings in the hallways should have suspected fraud. Nobody wanted to look too closely.
Catch the movie not only for the satisfaction of watching what happens to the greedy but seeing how easy it is to become complicit in crime when nobody’s looking and everybody’s benefiting.
According to the New York State comptroller, Roslyn goes down as “the largest, most remarkable, most extraordinary theft” from a school “in American history.”
Ultimately, it prompted then-Governor George Pataki to impose new oversights on how all school budgets statewide are handled.
Toni Messina has tried over 100 cases and has been practicing criminal law and immigration since 1990. You can follow her on Twitter: @tonitamess.
Business and law — it’s a marriage that has been in counseling for … well, forever. In the end, they will always stay together. Business and law are so intertwined that separating them is like decoupling french fries and ketchup or soap and water. Because there’s no one without the other, modern general counsels who can balance both business and legal issues have plenty of opportunities to shine.
Sarah Feingold, a co-founder of The Fourth Floor and former General Counsel of Etsy, correctly points out that business issues become abundant in transitions. For example, a striking difference between practicing at a law firm and in-house is how much more rooted in business each decision is. This, of course, makes sense — after all, in-house, you are so much closer to a business.
Feingold further points out that business issues are abundant at start-ups. When you navigate novel issues without a blueprint, business realities are a good place to start. They can certainly frame the challenges and define successes.
Similarly, conflict management often requires navigating and understanding business realities and priorities. Managing yourself, your responses, and timing often makes the difference between managed and mismanaged conflict. As Feingold pointed out, you can always dial up the intensity when you start from a nice and civil place. However, it is very hard to go the other way around.
Of course, crises and sudden changes to the status quo also provide opportunities for a business/law marriage to thrive. As in-house counsel, you can have an unparalleled impact on your legal department, your company, and ultimately the world if you can master navigating the business and law worlds simultaneously.
For example, numerous legal leaders are coaching and supporting members of their departments to serve their clients without interruptions and in considering the “new normal.” After all, how does one assess various business and legal risks when only uncertainty is certain?
As companies rethink the value of safety, predictability, and business continuity, in-house counsel will see opportunities to participate in the reconstruction efforts. To be clear, I am deliberately not using the word “recovery” because the COVID-19 experience has fundamentally shaken our assumptions and beliefs. Any sense of “recovery” and “back to normal” will be impossible for affected nations, companies, and individuals; instead, there will be a period of “reconstruction,” “redesign,” and “rebuilding.” During this period, savvy, modern general counsels, and in-house counsels who can seamlessly navigate business and legal issues will see plenty of opportunities to shine.
This opportunity to “reconstruct,” “redesign,” and “rebuild” is a rare one, and we all should make the most of it. Ultimately, many in-house lawyers are either decision-makers or influencers. As such, you will have an opportunity not only to ask what’s good for me, for my department, and my company, you will also have an opportunity to ask: What is good for the world? What is good for all of us? What is sustainable? What is the right thing to do? How can I make things better? Ultimately, how can I make a positive impact.
The COVID-19 crisis has rocked our world to its core. The suffering, fear, and uncertainty so many of us are feeling have made clear that things will never be the same, and certain underlying vulnerabilities must be addressed. However, it’s still too early to know what those changes look like. Different sectors will have different ideas. It will be up to forward-thinking general counsels to listen to those conversations and bring different sectors — most importantly, businesses and law — into the conversation. They will be the ones to chart the road ahead.
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.
Law firms realize the problem mental health issues present, and are making progress towards tackling the consequences, but are completely failing to take preventative action to stop the issues arising in the first place. [Biglaw] firms will continue happily running associates into the ground, and then offering them therapy.
— an anonymous respondent to ALM’s Mental Health and Substance Abuse Survey, offering insight on exactly where law firm mental health programs are going wrong. Respondents criticized billable hours requirements and unrealistic deadlines as some sources of the legal sector’s mental health meltdown.
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.
Deutsche Bank is not a significant repository of expectations, either its own or others’, these days, as over the last several years it has led the financial services industry in dashing them. Hopes? Sure. Those spring eternal, and Deutsche Bank has plenty of them: to finish its firings, continue doing business in London (for some reason), to not get fined on an hourly basis, to find a not-necessarily-wealthy suitor to sweep it off its feet, to not see police cruisers en masse coming to a stop on the Taunusanlage, that none of its current clients will be revealed to be notorious sex criminals, that it will eventually figure out how to not launder money, that someone young and cool and with other prospects might one day deign to work for it, to be anything other than what it currently is, to live to see another day.
But it would be a fool’s errand to actually expect any of those things, or really anything good, for Deutsche Bank. Still, the Germans occasionally manage to do something with a passing resemblance to good, like passing a stress test (however dubious an achievement that may be), striking a favorable deal with regulators, telling the Justice Department to go screw itself, or coming up with a half-decent idea. And now, the remarkable twin feats of both posting a profit and the magic trick of exceeding expectations where none exist.
Deutsche Bank AG said late Sunday that it will beat analyst expectations and report a first-quarter profit as higher revenue and lower expenses have helped it offset a €500 million charge it is taking for credit losses resulting from the coronavirus outbreak…. In an unscheduled announcement late Sunday, days ahead of its official earnings release scheduled for Wednesday, Deutsche Bank reported a 12.8% CET1 ratio at the end of the quarter, down from 13.6% at year-end. It said its net income for the three months ended March 31 was €66 million on revenue of €6.4 billion and noninterest expenses of €5.6 billion. That compares with net income of €201 million on revenue of €6.35 billion and noninterest expenses of €5.91 billion a year prior.
Of course, this is Deutsche Bank, so it prudently moved to exterminate any expectations that might arise that this good fortune would continue.
Its provisions for soured credit were probably the highest in six years and the bank scrapped its minimum target for capital buffers as fallout from the virus spreads./Chief Executive Officer Christian Sewing has been trying to reassure stakeholders the bank is entering the crisis stronger than it has been in a long time after he cut risk and refocused on financing Germany’s exporters. Yet many of those clients are now hit hard by widescale lockdowns and disruptions of global supply chains, reviving old fears about the ability of the country’s largest lender to weather another severe crisis./“This extraordinary economic environment suggests that we will see a higher level of credit defaults,” Deutsche Bank said.
Deutsche Bank Says Results Will Beat Expectations, Eases Capital Targets to Face Coronavirus [WSJ]
Deutsche Bank Warns of Loan Defaults After Surprise Profit [Bloomberg]
Life comes at you fast. And if you thought that was true in ordinary times, that’s been supercharged in a COVID-19 world. Just a few weeks ago, Am Law 100 firm Sheppard Mullin (ranked 54th on the most recent Am Law 100) announced they were furloughing a small number of staff members. Now the firm has made what is hopefully the last austerity measure they’ll need during the global pandemic, salary cuts.
In a statement from the firm (available in full on the next page), Sheppard Mullin Chair Guy Halgren had this to say about the most recent cost-cutting measures:
“The adjustments we are making today are fair and equitable and will help secure our strength through this challenging time. We reiterate our intent to not RIF or furlough our associates, special counsel and staff attorneys; not RIF or further furlough our staff; and commit that the partners will shoulder a meaningfully larger percentage compensation reduction than associates, special counsel, staff attorneys and staff.”
So what is going on at the firm? First are foremost, they’re furloughing an additional 17 staff members (in addition to the 33 previously furloughed). Plus there are salary cuts, because, of course there are salary cuts. Here’re the deets:
The salaries of associates, special counsel and staff attorneys will be reduced by 12% through the end of the calendar year. Given that the reduction is for two-thirds of the year, that calculates to an annualized reduction of 8%. The firm will conduct a special look-back at the end of the Measuring Year to recognize busy associates. The 2020 associate bonus program will more take into account non-billable activities and will include more focus on the discretionary component. Promotions in class at the end of 2020 will take into account that not all associates could effectively Work From Home.
Staff members making between $70,000 and $90,000 will have their salaries reduced by 5%/3.33% annualized (not to be reduced below $70,000) and those making more than $90,000, by 10%/6.67% annualized, through the end of the calendar year. We are not decreasing the salaries of any staff members making less than $70,000.
The firm will also institute a Workshare program for staff members without a full-time load of work available. This will allow the firm to cut the hours/compensation of those staff members by 20 percent (those employees would also be eligible for unemployment and other federal benefits).
Partners are also having their salary cut. Though there aren’t specific percentages provided, the firm says the partner cuts will be at a “meaningfully greater percentage.”
If your firm or organization is slashing salaries, closing its doors, or reducing the ranks of its lawyers or staff, whether through open layoffs, stealth layoffs, or voluntary buyouts, please don’t hesitate to let us know. Our vast network of tipsters is part of what makes Above the Law thrive. You can email us or text us (646-820-8477).
If you’d like to sign up for ATL’s Layoff Alerts, please scroll down and enter your email address in the box below this post. If you previously signed up for the layoff alerts, you don’t need to do anything. You’ll receive an email notification within minutes of each layoff, salary cut, or furlough announcement that we publish.
Kathryn Rubino is a Senior Editor at Above the Law, and host of The Jabot podcast. AtL tipsters are the best, so please connect with her. Feel free to email her with any tips, questions, or comments and follow her on Twitter (@Kathryn1).
%PDF-1.4 %���� 1 0 obj << /Creator (Apache FOP Version 2.3) /Producer (Apache FOP Version 2.3) /CreationDate (D:20200427130440Z) >> endobj 2 0 obj << /N 3 /Length 3 0 R /Filter /FlateDecode >> stream x��gPTY��{� �M���I��$�$A��@w�i��AQdpFI� ���AFQŀ((��N#��2�”**K�٭�U[�g��x�sO�s�[��1������M��:�1��C�H�(�JN�����!���c����sϑ��>��qy�v�y����%��.��ʱlN2k�w�r4;�-�� 8=%1�{�i��W�-�o�!�o�V��k������Z�kL�0+���t�j� +���|iA/�o3���`?�(��O��f+�y�S/T�����7����o��r�L@�ʿr��`�Q�WN��=t����8@W)��X���o9���Ȁ��
r���”�dQ�(s�+*�JG�*PM��5�(j��F���hS�:��F����ї���)�”���hc,1^�pL �S�9����Lc>` X�!� ��b��l/v;�]Ɖ�Tq�8/��+�5�zpwqӸe�^o�����w�+�m�k�’�A�`F�!�v* g7���D Q�hO%��O/ߒH$5� )��B�Oj&]%=#}��芸��ErEjD:EFD^�qdU�-y+9�A>G�K�ʼn��ڋ����=/:.�(F3�K+k�)6K�P�(�6%�r�r�2EEP���Tu��z�:MC��i��XZ�G�mA�”n$ �!^#~Q�OG����xz �,}��IBN�V�#�O�MbDbIRF�F�#Y(�.9*�I�!�(‘u@�K�4RZK�G:]��5�y���K�P��cYXVK�W6[��좜������U�yy���|�|�|��U�J!F���K�8ÖϨd�3e]S����ԕ��ڕ�*㕙ʑ���}�* *�*9*�*�Uq�L�h�ê�Kj�j�j{պ�f�%�]ճ�[՟h�4�5�44h�5��q�G4�i�Z�Z�Z5Zw�am��#���P���q�5��!�����L��u=t�t�t_������o��ߨ?a@1p3�3�1��PːeXc�`=i��������iq��=4�{�5�3�bbj�3i3�3U1 3�5gҘ��b� 3���Y�����&�)�g���б��h��ݠ����qÔ��e�e�%ߊafůo�hn�`��Fنm�d3c�ik{��Ϯ�n���~��e���C�Ð#��߱�S�S�ӂ��s��e�����qW9W�k�낛���~w��&�j��Z<�O����瓍��������A�����I�}�}j|^����l�nڶ�e�{?;�� �T��r@h@s�R�C`Y ?H/hG��`����LH@HS��f�͇6O����mQߒ���V��[/n#o�v.��9�+�!|1�5�6b�e�:�zŶa���8��2�L�edY�l�e���h������7�.�u�Kq^q'�V���� a �n�����Éډ��$�CI<�?�p<< /Type /Metadata /Subtype /XML /Length 6 0 R >> stream
application/pdf x-unknown 2020-04-27T13:04:40Z Apache FOP Version 2.3 1.4 Apache FOP Version 2.3 2020-04-27T13:04:40Z 2020-04-27T13:04:40Z
endstream endobj 6 0 obj 964 endobj 7 0 obj << /Name /Im1 /Type /XObject /Length 8 0 R /Filter /FlateDecode /Subtype /Image /Width 157 /Height 26 /BitsPerComponent 8 /ColorSpace /DeviceGray >> stream x�͗ilTU��L[J[`b[ k��m�Vٔ��Җ�%”K�%@@Y�”e'(“�”�JD���.�@� �D ��B$(hd *3��u��s�{3ShC�i8��s�]��s�{C�ˀ�5 �ު�^�N��_*�BM���d^�B�$�o�!��n�A���4�)�F.��f2e���t�|��ty>O�핒�֖�a� ۻܠY1��}�j��V�y�����FŐ���Q�m��c�D%NJ�]Hm;[o�ׄ�h���n�U��70�#j���”�xUzkH����v�����I�=G�.�d�`A0�^.7���”�X��)�&�����7:G�(+~T�”�N�+��”v,!z���5�F� %j |�^�;qKw��p�G74���O�v�I�m’Z��N]�W��g�-�ix�L���b�B�U�C�J�D���e�9�}�Jgkp� 8��&���)��f��ψ��a��g��4�<'p���-��pU̿@Ϣ9�P�>‘��2�h.�n8Z����)��l�|��Ft�$��zdr��%[V�3+;�*8r��Z4�_��Q�tR��D�ţ�Q�y1/�w����eS5�z��i��=��@� J�2�&b�T�2�W�5�����F�;”�&*’�c.�����I�)����b�q]jd��a�c�o���^��Eg����u6��^��q{}�̙-�袋20���1U�܉��p(�?�|Ρ�4�cC��7;�E�y����I��Y�dOR�J�r��RhN��������P�U>Q�XJ�{��5X��G�A�4G�WX �1�c�h .���=u�UjL���T*Ki�Z��U�� �j|t�Q��Y�f3�9X�_PP0��'[��+�,q���-����L8�y�_�S�����Xē��$�z�����ke�c,�x�O�T�/��9U��V�L3���pD��e� J�#ʄ�)�=��b�|�0��#8_eR^�����(���0S4�$���D=,R�zV�ͻ�����(r��M��R�KB�%V�7�N�]kG�%6�V�����q�z�����#=���^DG�g�v��_ S��*`���)um��’�A�� �]��X���jU�LU�`82D�,HQ1����J�*�ɔF7��_>’ф��J�JX�����7��%���JeS�.W�q�>A���M�b~St��l�:r�b���_UO���)&�O4���Ҙ�=�f�|��t��NF�ӥ����x����b����Y����6�l�9C��x��GZ(�99���7���[l��/nz�� [vgs�%��u�����dnw�xW�?j��$a�;�ϟ��412�$A�?i endstream endobj 8 0 obj 1384 endobj 9 0 obj << /Name /Im2 /Type /XObject /Length 10 0 R /Filter /FlateDecode /Subtype /Image /Width 157 /Height 26 /BitsPerComponent 8 /ColorSpace [/ICCBased 2 0 R] /SMask 7 0 R >> stream x���kL�W�#2�ˢ�n�ܢ��)ZT��Nq�O��dʭЋ@[[h��֖�fs���m’8]����^U.�)-���dYf�,�Y̲%[^�6��M���Ó����$7 %?ɪz߮�km��v��8 �m�Nk�qB�����a�Ѐ�ߘ���1�D>��’f:kk4���p�);����[���j�`�ɉT�d��n��nc�����g�P�(:| �G���P�P�R6Ec�S±B�i2����ݝ��gU ��’�[���v����˞@�yp�Ɏ�?Q,?q�VӶ��=�R�x�h�sJ8�qhog�C�ڼY O.��3:}Tw�;����S���6�L�x��J�Z�� �~c�H�8W�”��/`Ec�<�£Q����4�PVh~fpI����V텧���̝'���d�Ć��[�gn��3�Ǽ��u��,��19���|�m��a��'08�7�� ��}����� ~F��Mz��a��Z=�z{�v�;I2��⟅���[�r�������uA�v�F��2d��bo�ځ�.��1�bv�@pY��mB��|�O���A�+��@aJ�sU��$��,�ԿF6�QRE�ޏy��i��'�ĕ��<�ИT�J_T���^�Xbf$��J�t���;hե���L��0���q��O<�gD�+�o��j�q���Ev�A��L3;~��'�T��rt)��bu2O���J�����$���y�܍D��ܞ��d� �drt���5^�D���|���#|@%�ш1�B&C���fbe��V�v��Ȝ(0�@�~u� /w�,d@��"ue�-��1$p�S�W�#�Ⱦ6��a>��H�f��+’:x� l�b�6@S��kw���vF���ŧ �C53��O���Dǜ/1�*�Hі;g���X �.9�/R�W��Ba߲����]��-2’HW��-�����Jex�”�jqu::�c�y�o�-w��}O:}���Be��,��AG|��q�� �^2�S��R��?��a�s�%��p�Z���� �VUYS���fxK0�ş$��)�=<< /URI (http://prod.resource.cch.com/resource/scion/document/default/eld010ede87347d931000acde005056881d230f?cfu=BC&cpid=WKUS-Legal-Cheetah&uAppCtx=cheetah) /S /URI >> endobj 12 0 obj << /Type /Annot /Subtype /Link /Rect [ 56.692 683.432 512.518 697.418 ] /C [ 0 0 0 ] /Border [ 0 0 0 ] /A 11 0 R /H /I >> endobj 13 0 obj << /Type /Annot /Subtype /Link /Rect [ 56.692 664.532 396.752 678.518 ] /C [ 0 0 0 ] /Border [ 0 0 0 ] /A 11 0 R /H /I >> endobj 14 0 obj << /URI (https://prod.resource.cch.com/resource/scion/document/default/eld010ede87347d931000acde005056881d230f?cfu=BC&cpid=WKUS-Legal-Cheetah&uAppCtx=cheetah) /S /URI >> endobj 15 0 obj << /Type /Annot /Subtype /Link /Rect [ 56.692 622.658 218.112 632.648 ] /C [ 0 0 0 ] /Border [ 0 0 0 ] /A 14 0 R /H /I >> endobj 16 0 obj << /URI (https://lrus.wolterskluwer.com/about-us/experts/pamela-wolf/) /S /URI >> endobj 17 0 obj << /Type /Annot /Subtype /Link /Rect [ 71.122 603.489 150.982 613.479 ] /C [ 0 0 0 ] /Border [ 0 0 0 ] /A 16 0 R /H /I >> endobj 18 0 obj << /URI (https://www.congress.gov/116/bills/hr266/BILLS-116hr266enr.pdf) /S /URI >> endobj 19 0 obj << /Type /Annot /Subtype /Link /Rect [ 141.582 540.987 180.962 550.977 ] /C [ 0 0 0 ] /Border [ 0 0 0 ] /A 18 0 R /H /I >> endobj 20 0 obj << /URI (https://clerk.house.gov/evs/2020/roll104.xml) /S /URI >> endobj 21 0 obj << /Type /Annot /Subtype /Link /Rect [ 211.462 540.987 258.622 550.977 ] /C [ 0 0 0 ] /Border [ 0 0 0 ] /A 20 0 R /H /I >> endobj 22 0 obj << /URI (https://appropriations.house.gov/sites/democrats.appropriations.house.gov/files/Interim%20Emergency%20Package%20Funds%20Hospitals%2C%20Health%20Workers%20and%20Testing.pdf) /S /URI >> endobj 23 0 obj << /Type /Annot /Subtype /Link /Rect [ 373.982 469.236 417.262 479.226 ] /C [ 0 0 0 ] /Border [ 0 0 0 ] /A 22 0 R /H /I >> endobj 24 0 obj << /URI (https://appropriations.house.gov/news/press-releases/house-passes-interim-coronavirus-relief-bill) /S /URI >> endobj 25 0 obj << /Type /Annot /Subtype /Link /Rect [ 494.492 220.732 538.322 230.722 ] /C [ 0 0 0 ] /Border [ 0 0 0 ] /A 24 0 R /H /I >> endobj 26 0 obj << /Length 27 0 R /Filter /FlateDecode >> stream x��[ˮ��߯�D.>$�@��o� ���+’N�&���C�V�� �G�D��ԃ�Ooj������z����O<��e��0����5ފ��o��ݴ�ٹ�{?����G�*M��Z��Vx�O�~z��C�Imӧ��:<��y�2}�<}�{"�iCD��O����������o�Oo_�%��M,�-n_F���ᶋ�j7o����O�����0����yxE��s5�&�Iن ����d&��D��C�v�d�_�.���n��;�E�?�qU�Rj�V�� ����ױ�Qw���k%Ʋ X��m l�T�dԼ��+x��5[q��J�clZE�N��$j~6��/̚�9n��;ϥvc�s�@�Q$��7fV�y�f�N��vF%x8jp�g��2wY��5��õ��}��o,��f}�i����P�//!���l�m�M��Q�쀲�����g�Po�A��lR��+�����2M��Bj�����e�J"��Od*�+6�0���yu�ժf��^��'��ͼ��ә�,�#�߷�Z2j8�;s.o���H�{s��4�क&o�����-��4�J��D�2���;��w�^��w� �U� u�g��<@�e�{f~aZ,���&�9��C> l��p`Zz-���]}���3O�q� ��!�`ړ/��������R�l �U �҈BA�R؈�)�A%� �@U��G�`?��*T�l)�B���K��nŋ1w�r� q�0��� �> �ϑ>�B؝�)�>��,���6�.�����l~_ڣ��>+��c�~;��+,dɪR�/u^};��-�S���u#1_ È��=#n�$L�ƺɄ�! �$�F��1YW;��Cx�B9D��0�,6�Q�)�F�^�T E%��,���<[�ҺY�'9Ԥf�c-�n# K�Es��E��Mf����a��[̹��Y�;σ,p�*k�Se,W�K�T��쒽����lƖ'qwazm6���F�t'J�2����`�,C�.�Q͍�%.$�s��(7h�ʲE Ed%������D�7�K#��W�fZ��6����).E7��P��ssb �H�a�mp�h#r�h/�R%��0�P�Ht��sPT�/��Jȼ�f9U���ҘQ�Z�j���+��^�)n`8�Q�)W*.3Y�r4�xm@���gi$�2�9���A���a ��̐@�*��V�lL�9�q��k[�ա�ha��� ���PeΐMP5�KN$� ��O�.����_*#��<��/���. ��4^Z2ȅ��UWÕ��iY� ��A ���� �9N����,I$�����ѵVm���(�U[��� �:�ĥY�� J��S�adyI�*R��鴞xTy<,{��*]�aX�6�b�]�*5�qQϹ��9��*���y�C<��,��e�#<����A�&M���L�$ݬj�[:%ɼ.Q��V= 'hx��OX�i8z���e���G2�h'����K������f��1q:�����;��yz�2½����/ ^hn.�^7 Xv05(�4썜����}��>+�s�}�q7�x5�E��(ku�a���B�*R��r���:���̣ �=vW��]Һ�C�%%�|�iM��j8��Q5�Ov`��V���>�*O��:��-}h��6��+UKv^[Q��}H���T(�vv$���)�����a����kw�b� ��+]���C���}�t!����ž�j��yN��˗�ԩ5�.{*+U�j�S�L’���SL�@�A���e_����9��uԵQ1��U��9�@@��*)�۫ըދ�3��O��da���X�]d yWe��(�*��^0l��P��F�5�9�b�ZOu?l�ZkqCj��Ow1�h�|(�ځ�fzq�V�˹�jI���P��ޞT��{R�U.��3{m���A�~z�����JK�HbM*4 ��g���K}*4Jm::���5�n�UW�n^�W�[;ơ���:L�ZqĀ3�`|�h.K�YUhUf��s��?�Cxk>(exn%��XC���1[��A���ŧq���y���إ*i���Fk��7��PU��Iݾ�;�y�-���5���F�jɓ�v10�5M3���o�C +�ĀX�e;�ZS�s$(6�:g&s���ϵ�S�4N’^A������|�i�e�L��8�a���� U:�.d:Ϳ��k2�5� &6?kH�Q?��군��TQw�M�*U�tGs�e��;(+� ���U�)2ti�8[ѥ����M��NO�2ޫN��7�.,p�Yr�R�!/E,�~뫱�����%�o�nA�&������L����’-29%I �s�)”����*lK�����Q�Vƒ��������Mr|8�{���’�n�~���J;H”d:,7�۟�3�fo�~�/V]���7A�Ҏ�C��3�礵�M<�F��L��1}��c��|��0�װȿ��ٛ)�(o? ����oխt�G��3=X4�b� �:|�����j��5�~��N���"p��#z�3���ۯ��aB����V�+� �]~pP��Ъo�����b�Gk��Wgm����x'1���ЖUggm~���B�ܢ2�����p#���Q����ڍ��?��o�� endstream endobj 27 0 obj 3306 endobj 28 0 obj [ 12 0 R 13 0 R 15 0 R 17 0 R 19 0 R 21 0 R 23 0 R 25 0 R ] endobj 29 0 obj << /Resources 30 0 R /Type /Page /MediaBox [0 0 612 792] /CropBox [0 0 612 792] /BleedBox [0 0 612 792] /TrimBox [0 0 612 792] /Parent 31 0 R /Annots 28 0 R /Contents 26 0 R >> endobj 32 0 obj << /Type /FontDescriptor /FontName /EAAAAA+ArialMTPro-Bold /FontBBox [-166 -301 1011 939] /Flags 33 /CapHeight 715 /Ascent 939 /Descent -301 /ItalicAngle 0 /StemV 0 /MissingWidth 500 /FontFile2 33 0 R /CIDSet 34 0 R >> endobj 33 0 obj << /Length1 7108 /Length 35 0 R /Filter /FlateDecode >> stream x��9 p�u�����X� H ��<��Ӗc�";B"[t=N�3�U˵�$M�I��I��iOgb9������h���l��x2��-�������! �1�4>�ϟ��U��_��C�˧��>�B�$B��lf��F�,�O.��$�`>�ꅕ����s0/����L�o���xq%s�(:�����_ͬd����.#�N���_E”B�/�}T�L�a�v���^��”���.�B 5� ���R��2�W�1�;�@��.��~� �!8��4��{���GE`h����`��3z�� =� ���’2V�h����@�ߑK`y��Ȃ�h�=�4��]���!V�_��/>”���_�x���Er��r��w#�) �w�y���wF��;xO=�J�V�b���F��2p�������+�S��|�؉EQ’x”�fĸW�U��J�]��a��I4��T2�h�!`��0�x*��>��'[�;�~�c��R���x�tз�Aa��a�W�A�mg8XW[����B<{���N��d1�+]:��a�Z�`Mͮ��� ����>F�+i��6��qV�J�$U���?����j��k��m���^rYzg�x��FM����9�#{�b�0��@�aAU`��4{�~�IV������g��w�W�gݛ�註s(�jIaS���Ɖ���bE�}��C�;w�ƨ^�m�Q0����b��9���Q�V�jǢ�j��_�Sab�Իn�����l���9�:�0�E(�ք� �hN��ʖ`�ɔ]�zq0T�cO�ղ�0�2v�ܮt[Mf��p2�}t$wp���Ӟ��C��3���$�f�F���*���F�R�̾_R���b���=�=9^�6�Y��7w>%��u�G� %�UU�����TF�^����O��*�X綞a� �t�^��[�.�i��7�h�(x�,����ª���cXﺍ�Z� �o�[I��U6Ok�#���O���Ԕ?�’���q���̼+6���J���#Ir� l&��7��A�� ��Y�R���lTրn#w��L�,��m����}���#�����g�������D�����C�~l�y��)�:�&abA.ʝ>��5��9��{n&7��j���a�E��F�2��n-�H��6Y���=`�P����� ���6�^n�+h7(@��D���e�⛊J]0z]�b;_�6�پ/%襇H[K�_�;C.}����������D,ؾkO<1�Bm���;�ax��k�&rԡ�Wf�֘�@Jo,��Y���t)�1 �N���?�_`�}!k_�Zz�d/���x�WJsWI�����N,$�D��� W�+�bG�ߠc{z��� :=^�Gk�k�#�ߔiBp2��|�����<0|I����rB8���5�ʰ+YE.���z�sOfw���f�橶ڞƠäV�2�r���ha"7T,��ʯ��� �@1������P����3Oz�3�o� P�ߑ���T_y��!��8��f.�Ѵ*L���JA��P���*N�2x���y�V7P+l�tv�V��{}�n��ұP�l�9U�o��~�*R�D���pϤ��"�;����ʄ�noK0�oWj��/p_�>�I�za��+݇E�Y�_Z��Jкr�4�B�B�%>,��L=vb�*(�#�0N���w.��{�:R㏅C��%WKMet��p��S�ZOUO��Z�A��C���ڗ�U(���_~,�Bd!?+��E����.�`�}�|��E0�6l*�m��%��A�$�f�n9�x;KS���3H���H�����S�ya�7�ub���R��jm:0���ҋ�;�W�ޒ��ɦ��}��o�9��O�
(Image via Getty)
What’s the first thing that comes to mind when you think of how COVID-19 has affected the legal profession? Salary cuts, obviously — and furloughs, and layoffs, but mostly salary cuts. Today, we’ve got yet another firm that’s decided to slash salaries, at least for the time being, thanks to the coronavirus crisis.
Davis & Gilbert, a firm that was recently ranked by Vault as the #6 best midsized firm in New York, will be cutting salaries across the board.
These cuts will soon be coming to Davis & Gilbert, among other expenditure reviews:
On the bright side, we’re told that the firm hopes to treat these cuts as “temporary deferrals” and plans to make employees whole in the future if they’re able to do so.
Davis & Gilbert’s Executive Committee released the following statement:
While our firm experienced increased revenue from 2019 and a strong first quarter, we also have seen a marked decline in overall billable hours and a slowing of collections since New York state’s ‘stay-at-home’ order went into effect in mid-March. Many of our departments, including employment, benefits, insolvency and real estate, have remained busy over the past few weeks, but most of the corporate transactions that were in the works have been put on hold, and many other client projects have stopped or slowed down significantly. We need to anticipate and plan for reduced billable hours for the second and third quarters of this year and lower collection rates for the balance of the year. As a result, our Executive Committee has decided to take cost-cutting measures it believes are necessary and prudent to best guide the firm through this difficult period. We do not take these actions lightly. However, it is our hope that by taking them now, we can avoid furloughs of staff or attorneys.
Davis & Gilbert’s client relationships are wide, deep and strong, with many relationships going back decades. Our firm has weathered many storms in its 110-year history, and we are confident we will weather this one too. We are optimistic that after the lockdown ends and business comes back, we will likely see a burst of activity and new opportunities.
If your firm or organization is slashing salaries, closing its doors, or reducing the ranks of its lawyers or staff, whether through open layoffs, stealth layoffs, or voluntary buyouts, please don’t hesitate to let us know. Our vast network of tipsters is part of what makes Above the Law thrive. You can email us or text us (646-820-8477).
If you’d like to sign up for ATL’s Layoff Alerts, please scroll down and enter your email address in the box below this post. If you previously signed up for the layoff alerts, you don’t need to do anything. You’ll receive an email notification within minutes of each layoff, salary cut, or furlough announcement that we publish.
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.
When a non-profit entity offered access to the official Georgia state code for free, the state government decided to sue, declaring such public access a “strategy of terrorism.” That alleged copyright violations could be lumped together with a suicide bombing campaign says a lot about either the broken intellectual property regime in America or the bankruptcy of leadership in the state of Georgia. Or, in this case, both.
Today, the Supreme Court put an end to this nonsense, shutting down Georgia’s copyright claim and declaring the Georgia Code in the public domain as “governmental edicts.”
It’s embarrassing that this required a 5-4 decision, but unlike most 5-4 decisions, this was not a testament to an ideologically divided Court but a generationally divided one. Roberts wrote the opinion, joined by the four most recent appointees: Kagan, Sotomayor, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh. Thomas, Ginsburg, Breyer, and Alito (the only justice appointed after Roberts not to join him here) found different reasons to dissent from “allowing public access to the law.”
The wrinkle in this case deals with the annotations made in the official code. Georgia conceded that codified statutes would not be amenable to copyright protection, but claimed that the annotations made to the laws would be, even though the legislature commissioned the annotations and ordered them included with the statutes. The reason this matters at all is that Georgia — like many other jurisdictions — outsourced the creation of these annotations as a work for hire but refused to pay anything for the work, instead opting to issue, as the legal author, a reproduction license back to Lexis to allow Lexis to charge people for access to the work they performed on behalf of the state.
The rub for Georgia in this whole kerfuffle is that if the laws became public domain, the license becomes useless and states might actually be forced to pay third-party authors for the services the state government consumes. And that might require — gasp — taxes instead of privatizing essential government services, exploding the lie that you can get something for free.
The majority saw past this and in an opinion that amounted to an exasperated “come on, people!” the Chief Justice explained that a state government cannot mandate the inclusion of these annotations in the official pronouncement of state law and simultaneously contend that it’s not a governmental edict.
With common sense covered by the majority, the dissenters provided Freudian insights to ideological fights they’re willing to tie to cases by gossamer threads.
Ginsburg and Breyer, for their part, seem more worried that this decision might result in the unmoored holdings of an intellectually bankrupt judiciary earning undue deference. If the annotations are intended to inform the public of how judges — and not legislators — have interpreted the law, then they cannot be governmental edicts of the legislature.
Without saying so explicitly, Clarence Thomas and Sam Alito saw the majority as an assault on the foundations of the twin pillars of Textualism and Originalism. If mere annotations could carry the force of a “governmental edict” then we’re well on our way down the slippery slope of legislative intent and when annotations highlight later judicial interpretations, we’re far afield of the original public understanding of the law when written. For Thomas and Alito (Breyer joined parts of this dissent but we’ve already dealt with him) the question of copyright is just the conscious manifestation of the more burning concern that laws must be stripped of all context lest they become impossible to semantically manipulate. If that requires giving state governments the power to lock up access to state law in copyright, that’s a small price to pay.
In both instances, the older justices seem to be more interested in laying the groundwork to protect themselves from being burned in a future ideological showdown than in just declaring, “no, states can’t copyright the one publication they print purporting to contain the laws of the state.”
It’s a shame that this ended up in a divided ruling because it seems as though the break is entirely a function of the majority pigeon-holing this as a “government edict” to give it public domain status. At the risk of being branded the real Originalist here, the Constitution’s intellectual property language authorizes copyright legislation “To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts” and it’s difficult to imagine the people who fought a war against a Star Chamber monarchy meant for this power to allow state governments to keep people in the dark about the law. Copyright isn’t about granting authors moral rights, it’s about encouraging progress. And that’s where it’s gone off the rails, because incentivizing creation through monopolistic economic rights is only a means not the end. When locking up access to material is no longer advancing science and art — like, say, keeping statutory notations under wraps — then it’s just not something the copyright authority can countenance.
But that sort of talk might inconvenience Disney, and that would really be letting the terrorists win.
Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org Inc. [Supreme Court]
Earlier: Georgia Argues That Public Access To Its Laws Constitutes ‘Terrorism’
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.