Category: News Feeds

We don’t see this as work-from-home. We see this as work-from-anywhere. It’s very liberating. You don’t have to live near a physical office location or in a city where there is a physical office location. You have the freedom to live where you want to be. We are enabling people to organize their work around their life rather than their life around their work. And at the end of the day, those people are going to be more happy and more successful.

— J.Y. Miller, managing partner of Husch Blackwell’s brand new virtual office (referred to as “The Link”), commenting on all of the pros of the firm’s remote work offering. This week, the firm launched the new office with 50 staff members and nearly 40 lawyers, whose compensation remains unchanged. “I am convinced that this will be permanent,” Miller said. “It will expand. And it will be one of our largest offices in the firm.”

---

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 rapid collapse of many American companies due to the ongoing COVID pandemic means that bankruptcy and restructuring practices will be seeing a lot of action in the foreseeable future. In a recent program Restructuring and Bankruptcy Strategies in an Economic Crisis, bankruptcy attorney Michael J. Riela addresses the most important considerations for businesses obtaining new funding or restructuring their debts right now (such as when and why to turn to Chapter 11), the  legal and strategic considerations for creditors, and the skills and knowledge that attorneys will need to guide them through this process.  Check out the three main takeaways below:

1. Cash is King: Conserve, Collect, Project.

• Conserve cash whenever possible.
• Follow up on outstanding payments due (be the “squeaky wheel”).
• Create a cash-flow projection, including an inventory of what you have, what you expect to collect in the short term, and what you absolutely need to operate during the next several weeks.

2. Collect Your Data: Here’s what you need to obtain new funding.

• Analyze the 2020 and 2021 financial projections – with COVID adjustments made.
• Identify how much debt you can actually assume.
• Discuss the type of loan covenants that will allow the company to survive.

3. Chapter 11 is Available: Should you go for it?

• Maximize the value of a business’s assets and distributions to creditors.
• Grant a debtor the time to prepare a new business plan and plan for reorganization.
• Rehabilitate a financially viable business to preserve its operations and save jobs.

There is so much for law firms and companies to consider during this unprecedented, stressful time, especially as businesses continue to struggle and guidelines for reopening change in light of new outbreaks. Remember to take a step back, breathe, and be mindful of your company, your employees, and your clients during this time. Stay safe and healthy, encourage your employees to do the same, and tune in to Lawline CLE and Lawline Free Resources for ongoing updates during the pandemic.

Related Content

1. How to Shift – and Grow – Your Legal Practice in an Economic Downturn
2. Seven Great #lawtwitter Tweets from the Age of Coronavirus
3. All the States That are Changing Their MCLE Rules Due to the Coronavirus Pandemic

It’s basically every Zoom-fueled nightmare over the last four months — what would happen if you spoke your mind, but it turned out you weren’t on mute. And you called your boss a liar. And it turned out it was a public call. Yikestown.

That’s what happened to Mark Brodsky, a senior assistant state’s attorney in Hartford, Connecticut, during a June 26th reappointment hearing for Hartford State’s Attorney Gail Hardy. During that hearing, Hardy was asked how many cases she’s taken to trial, and she responded an estimate of a maximum of three trials a year. After that answer, Brodsky could be heard on the Zoom call saying, “Oh, come on … liar.”

So, yeah, he’s in some hot water for that. Chief State’s Attorney Richard Colangelo Jr. reprimanded Brodsky, forcing him to forfeit two vacation days, and writing in the reprimand:

“It is very important for you to keep in mind that as prosecutors, we are judged not only on our behavior during the workday, but also for how we conduct ourselves outside of the workplace. Your actions and the public comments during the hearing on June 26 not only reflected poorly on you but on the division as well. As ministers of justice, we have an obligation to act professionally at all times.”

Hardy has since withdrawn from seeking reappointment, and she’ll have “a new role in the Office of the Chief State’s Attorney to foster diversity in the Division of Criminal Justice.”

---

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).

Do you have a job at a law firm, but you’re unsure of when you’ll be starting — or if you’ll be starting at all?

You’re not the only one.

Half of law firm offices with incoming first-year associates haven’t announced their official start dates. For offices that have announced start dates, 62 percent of them won’t be onboarding their incoming associates until January 2021. On top of that, 49 percent of law schools noted that some of their graduates had employment offers rescinded, with 85 percent of those schools reporting that those reneged job offers came from private practice firms.

This information comes from a new survey by the National Association for Law Placement (NALP) of 356 law firm offices and 167 law school career services offices, and it means that hundreds upon hundreds of recent law school graduates have been left out in the cold when it comes to the start of their careers in the legal profession. Thanks a bunch, COVID-19.

This time around, Biglaw firms are not wholly to blame for the rescinded offers. Per NALP Executive Director James Leipold, those have been “rare” and have mostly come from smaller law firms. Biglaw firms remember what happened after they decimated the ranks of their younger associate classes during the Great Recession, and don’t want to face another shortgage of midlevels in a few years down the line. Here’s some additional detail from Law.com:

“There’s a lot of uncertainty right now,” said … Leipold. “The bar exam is a moving target—even jurisdictions that have made decisions [about when to administer the exam] have had to make second and third decisions as the virus surges. So law firms are trying to plan start dates around when they can get licensed lawyers.” …

“The other piece of the puzzle is the uncertainly about the volume of work, and wanting current associates to have the work now,” Leipold said. “It seems that most firms that have deferred start dates have provided some sort of stipend—not a salary obviously—but some monetary compensation to help tide incoming associates over until January.”

To that end, 69 percent of offices that have deferred start dates for first-year associates are offering a stipend or other cash payment as part of the deferral package. As for the other 31 percent of offices that have deferred start dates for first-years without providing some sort of assistance, allowing incoming associates to financially struggle during a pandemic sure is a nice welcome.

NALP will send out another survey to law firms and law schools at the end of July. With layoffs at hand, wonder what the employment scene will look like then…

Law Schools Report Rescinded Employment Offers, Law Firms Report Uncertainty About Associate Start Dates in Second Series of NALP Pulse Surveys [NALP]
Incoming Law Firm Associates Unsure When Their Jobs Will Start [Law.com]

---

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.

Sometimes lawyers make unpopular decisions to represent clients who will become — or are already — the subject of ridicule and blame. Yet, deep down we believe that we are doing the right thing by accepting the task of representation, and we are willing to embrace the consequences that may result from working with controversial figures.

On the morning of July 15, I was retained by Philip Martin McCaulay, an actuary based in Alexandria, Virginia. McCaulay has become infamous for registering and applying for a number of “Washington” related trademarks, any one of which could turn out to be a mark that the Washington NFL team (still branded as the Redskins, but with a stated intention to rebrand upon the conclusion of a pending review that has no end date) selects for future use.

McCaulay fits the description of being a controversial client. When McCaulay asked me for assistance, he referenced the terrible threats and harassment he was receiving from fans of the Washington NFL team and the public at large. It led to McCaulay tweeting, “Speculate on prior motives all you want if you don’t believe I just wanted them to change the name, now [I] just want this albatross around my neck gone.”

McCaulay was a man who lived in relative obscurity. Overnight, he has been thrust into the spotlight as people started to speculate about the forthcoming new nickname for the Washington NFL team and quickly discovered that McCaulay was attached to many pending trademark applications for names such as Washington Redtails and Washington Red Wolves.

Prior to June 24, McCaulay had only published four tweets, all of which were circulated in 2014. All of a sudden, McCaulay was the victim of a barrage of verbal attacks on the social media platform. He felt overwhelmed and did not know how to properly handle the situation. I am still working with McCaulay to better understand Twitter best practices as he receives a new mention by the minute.

In my diligence, I noted that McCaulay previously tried to communicate with the National Football League, offering any of his pending or registered marks for free. He even asked, “Are you waiting for me to offer to pay you to take them off my hands?”

McCaulay is clearly an individual who was — and continues to be — misunderstood. Thus, McCaulay hired my law firm to assist him in an effort to clear the record as to his intentions and with an interest in getting the word out to decision makers at the Washington NFL team about his interest in not holding up the franchise’s name selection process.

At noon on July 15, I disseminated a letter with the hope that it would clear the air as to who McCaulay is and what he stands for. McCaulay is a man with an expensive hobby of filing trademark applications and actually using the marks in connection with the goods and services stated in the descriptions of the applications. He is someone who has no desire to be a “trademark troll”; he will get out of the Washington NFL team’s way as soon as the team contacts him (if it decides to rebrand with any of the marks that McCaulay has sought to register). I see no reason why he should abandon any pending trademark applications that are of no interest to the Washington NFL team.

Many fans have criticized me in the 24 hours since I was retained by McCaulay. As lawyers, we must have thick skin and stand firm if we believe in our causes. Before I met McCaulay, I figured he was just another trademark troll. However, after conducting my diligence, I learned that he is not a bad actor; he has no intent to cause harm to the Washington NFL team. Instead, he is exactly the type of person who requires strong representation to explain his position and interests.

Not all represented clients are looking for a payday. While I am certain that McCaulay would not reject an offer of compensation for any of the intellectual property he possesses, it is my understanding that compensation is far from his main priority.

McCaulay should be a reminder to the masses that it is lazy to judge a book by its cover. Sometimes acts are not motivated by greed, and sometimes lawyers get involved in issues because they believe it is the right thing to do in order to assist a client in desperate need. When I heard that McCaulay greatly wanted the albatross around his neck gone, I was committed to do whatever is necessary to be of service, even if it meant shifting the Twitter attacks to yours truly.

---

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

An unmarked Supreme Court police vehicle was set on fire yesterday in a metaphor that was probably a bit too on the nose.

With the Court wrapping up its Term on the back of a high-profile punt, a milquetoast dodge, and a Trojan Horse opinion, things were quiet at the Supreme Court except for the occasional hospitalization and state-sanctioned killing.

But that tranquility was broken when an unidentified man lit up the parking lot:

“An individual poured an accelerant on and set on fire an unmarked Supreme Court police vehicle parked on Maryland Ave. near First Street, NE. The car was totally burned and an adjacent Court vehicle was also damaged,” said Kathy Arberg, the court’s public information officer, in a statement to CNN. “The individual suffered burns in the process. He was taken into custody by Supreme Court Police and was transported by ambulance for treatment of his injuries.”

I guess decades of established precedent aren’t the only things going up in smoke at the Supreme Court these days.

Man in custody after Supreme Court police vehicle set on fire [CNN]

---

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.

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 April Kelso to our pages.

After going through a relatively easy pregnancy, my husband and I sent the 5-year-old to her grandpa’s house, did last minute baby prep, watched the Super Bowl in our pajamas, then woke up extra early and made our way to the hospital. I heard “Play that Funky Music” (not my choice) ring through the operating room as my doctor performed the caesarean section, our second together. Friends and family visited the hospital and then brought us dinner once we made it back home.

As the days and weeks progressed, I was proud that breastfeeding was working and that I avoided the baby blues. I worked for a different firm this time, and my maternity leave was longer and smoother, and it was all going just as I had hoped. The daycare mom guilt was even better the second time. We were trucking along. I was happy.

Until I wasn’t. I don’t really know when it happened, but months in I started feeling off. I couldn’t put my finger on it, but I found myself overwhelmed and unable to concentrate and irritable and feeling worthless. It was hard to get to sleep, I would cry at the drop of a hat, and my anxiety was climbing. It did not happen overnight, instead it crept up slowly after several months, making me feel even crazier. After a lot of late-night googling and many online symptom checkers, I was self-diagnosed with postpartum depression.

The feelings of craziness turned to shame and embarrassment.

I love my babies. I have a supportive husband. We have a stable home. I am a good person. I am happy in my job. Breastfeeding is working this time. What did I do wrong? Was I just not cut out to be a mom? So for a bit, I tried to just will it away without admitting it to anyone else. But it was getting harder and harder to hide.

The first person I admitted it to was my counselor. Why in the world did it take me weeks to work up the nerve to admit to my counselor that I was suffering from a mental health condition? It is her literal job to help me resolve these issues and work through these problems. I think I was just overwhelmingly ashamed and embarrassed. I was worried what everyone would think if I admitted I was struggling with anything, let alone postpartum depression — something that carries such ugly (and untrue) stigmas with it.

The next people I admitted it to was my little group of moms who also had babies around the same time — because a couple of them had admitted their struggles with postpartum depression. They became a safe place where I could discuss the ugly truth. Then through lots of tears, I told my husband, although I am pretty certain he already knew something was up.

It would be a few more weeks before my firm mentioned something. I was called in to a meeting, and I immediately felt like a complete failure — inadequate mom and now inadequate lawyer on top of it. As the words came out of my mouth (and the tears flowed out of my eyes), I was shocked I admitted it at work — I thought for sure this would be career suicide. Women already can have such an uphill battle in the legal profession, with the hill becoming seemingly steeper every time we decide to expand our families. Now throw in being an associate with postpartum depression and I was worried, to say the least. But I honestly could not have asked for a more supportive group of people. I came out of the meeting feeling like they really listened and helped me come up with a game plan for how to move forward. I know that this may not be the typical firm response, but I will forever be grateful for the way I was treated with respect and kindness as I battled through an impossible time in my life.

I talked to my doctor, I talked to my counselor, I googled all the things, I talked to my husband, I talked to a couple of colleagues who were so supportive, and I talked to friends. I made some changes (goodbye exclusive breastfeeding) and I made it through. Probably the biggest help of all was just educating myself to the fact that postpartum depression and anxiety is really a lot more common than I thought, and it does not always look the same for everyone. Some people have symptoms quickly, some people (like me) do not feel it for months after birth. For some people it is extremely debilitating, making even getting out of bed impossible, and for some (like me) you can even fake feeling fine for a while before it catches up with you. According to the American Psychological Association, one in seven women experience postpartum depression within the first year after giving birth. Yet there is still this unfair stigma around postpartum depression. How in the world can we continue to be ashamed or embarrassed about something that almost fifteen percent of moms go through? For me, admitting that I was struggling, realizing I was not alone, and having honest conversations with those around me is was what got me through it.

---

April Kelso is a graduate of the University of Tulsa College of Law. April joined Pierce Couch Hendrickson Baysinger and Green in 2017. She is a girl mom two times over and loves adventuring with her husband and daughters. When not working, she can be found baking, covering something in glitter, playing another round of Uno with her six-year-old, or volunteering at her church. You can email her at akelso@piercecouch.com or follow along with her on Instagram @mrsaprilkelso.

On the heels of the Minnesota Supremes pushing ahead with the state’s in-person July bar exam in a curt opinion ignoring overwhelming public health advice, Louisiana and New Jersey have finally seen enough and pulled the plug on the planned examinations.

New Jersey had already canceled the July exam, but now takes the extra step of calling off the September in-person exam, recognizing that conditions aren’t going to be much better by the Fall than they are right now. Instead, the state will run an October online exam.

Louisiana has struggled with what to do about the bar exam for weeks now. They shortened the test and offered an online version, but in the end there is no way to run a bar exam in the midst of rising infections.

Unfortunately, Louisiana didn’t bother to sort out the backup plan before telling everyone that the exam would be canceled. Will it be moved to September? October? Fully online? Diploma privilege? The court offered no inkling as to what comes next, understandably frustrating graduates who have been cramming for this test for weeks and now have to just let this all seep out of their brains for a few months before starting over.

This result is patently unfair and likely to cause undue hardship as people try to take a delayed exam while juggling their new jobs. Diploma privilege remains the only sane response to the challenges of 2020. A letter asking for a diploma privilege response brought some receipts to the party:

“We point out that neither licensure by diploma privilege nor supervised practice are foreign concepts in the Louisiana legal profession,” the letter reads. “From 1842 to 1937, Louisiana used licensure by diploma privilege as an alternative to growing dissatisfaction with the state bar examination then in existence, a dissatisfaction which has recently reemerged with vigor.”

But as frustrating as this all is for Louisiana graduates, it’s worth focusing on the positive: there are still a lot of states out there who simply do not care if graduates get sick, and your state isn’t one of them.

Louisiana bar exam canceled amid statewide coronavirus increases, law grads left reeling [NOLA.com]
Fall In-Person NJ Bar Exam Canceled, Goes Online Only Due to COVID-19 [Law.com]

Earlier: State Supreme Court Hears Public Health Concerns, Ignores Public Health Concerns

---

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.

Let’s say you’re a Russian bad guy or shadowy Malaysian financier or a lawyer trying to conceal a cryptocurrency pyramid scheme or the president of the United States, and you’ve got some money to launder. Sure, you could just go to your local (or, preferably, not-so-local) bank to do it. But the FBI has a better idea (not one that it intended to make public; thanks, leakers!): Just invest it in a hedge or private equity fund.

“Hedge funds and private equity firms receive funds from entities registered in nations that maintain laws conducive to masking underlying beneficial owners,” which makes it harder for U.S. financial institutions and regulators to determine the source of funding, the FBI bulletin read…. Martin Kenney, a British Virgin Islands-based asset recovery attorney who has represented victims of hedge-fund swindler Allen Stanford and other frauds, said: “It stands to reason that a not-insignificant proportion of the capital managed by private investment funds is dark money.”