Category: News Feeds

Home DNA kits are bringing sperm and egg donor anonymity to an end. The popular holiday present has provided a new mode of easy access to reliable information on our genetic makeup and, more importantly to some, our genetic relatives. Donor-conceived persons are now finding out information that was previously kept intentionally unavailable — the identity of their genetically connected donor parent.

While the reality of information access has changed practically overnight, the law, at least in the United States, has been slow to shift. In some countries — Australia and much of Europe, to name a few — donor anonymity is not an option. These countries give donor-conceived persons the ability to have access to their biological history, even where a donor would prefer to remain anonymous. In many countries, this means that upon becoming a legal adult, the donor-conceived person will learn the identity of his or her donor.

The U.S. has been reluctant to regulate gamete donations, but we are starting to see the sprouts of change. In 2011, Washington State was the first to challenge sperm and egg donor anonymity with a law that requires sperm banks and egg donation agencies with gametes from Washington State to provide the donor’s medical histories and, importantly, full names to donor-conceived persons upon turning 18 years of age. Of course, the law has a major caveat. The agencies and banks are only required to provide the information if the gamete donor did not affirmatively opt out of being identified.

California is now taking a similar path — only with a little more effort to help out donor-conceived persons. As of January 1, 2020, California’s new Health and Safety Code Sec 1644.3, will lead to additional donor identity disclosure. The new law provides that:

(a) On request of a child conceived by assisted reproduction who attains 18 years of age, a gamete bank licensed in this state … shall provide the child with identifying information of the donor who provided the gametes, unless the donor signed and did not withdraw a declaration under paragraph (2) of subdivision (b) of Section 1644.2. If the donor signed and did not withdraw the declaration, the gamete bank shall make a good faith effort to notify the donor, who may elect under subdivision (c) of Section 1644.2 to withdraw the declaration and agree to release the donor’s information.

So even if the donor did opt out of having his or her identity revealed, upon the request of a donor-conceived person, the gamete bank has an affirmative duty to notify the donor as to the request, and allow that donor another chance with withdraw the declaration. The law didn’t go so far as to insert a guilt trip call from the child desperate to have knowledge of their biological parent, but close enough.

The new law goes on to provide that regardless of whether the donor signed a waiver, the donor-conceived person or, prior to the age of 18, his or her parents, shall have a right to the donor’s non-identifying medical information. Theoretically, the parents and donor-conceived person should already have that from when they went through the donor process. But it is still good to have legal confirmation of the child’s right to access information that could be important to the donor-conceived person’s health.

I spoke with California assisted reproductive technology attorney Amira Hasenbush about the new law. She thought it was a positive step for those conceived via gamete donation. She pointed out an interesting quirk in the law. In cases where the clinic failed to offer or keep a copy of a donor’s waiver, the clinic will be obligated to disclose the donor’s identity. Of course, she also noted that based on her experience with donors and recipients, it is not the donors who are as concerned about anonymity — and for those who are, they can choose to stop donating. She finds that it is more commonly the recipient parents who fear the repercussions of a  donor entering their child’s life. The law in California is clear that the gamete recipients are the legal parents, but for some, the fear appears to be more about the emotional impact than the legal impact.

Time — a lot of time — will tell the impact of this new law. The effective date of January 1, 2020, applies to gametes collected after that date. Meaning that the first child to turn 18 from such gametes will not occur until at least 2038. And, at this rate, we may all have been taken out by a hurricane by that time.

Ellen Trachman is the Managing Attorney of Trachman Law Center, LLC, a Denver-based law firm specializing in assisted reproductive technology law, and co-host of the podcast I Want To Put A Baby In You. You can reach her at babies@abovethelaw.com.

In a world of “do more with less,” corporate legal operations teams are often faced with an increasing contract volume but with no additional resources. Whether you use a homegrown or an older solution that’s just not working anymore, or you have no solution at all, chances are that the growth in your contract volume and complexity are difficult to manage and resource intensive. Join us for a webinar that will focus on:

– Why you need a simple, yet scalable, solution that you can configure and maintain on your own;
– How consumer-style business tools are revolutionizing the operational experience; and
– What AI is NOT capable of, namely, the replacement for your contracting expertise.

Click here to learn from our panel of experts on Friday, September 27, at 1 p.m.  Our panel will be moderated by Jared Correia, the CEO of Red Cave Consulting, and he will be joined by Stephanie Corey, a widely respected veteran in the legal ops field and co-founder of UpLevelOps, and Matt Patel, a CLM solution expert with over 15 years of experience in CLM technology and co-founder of Malbek.

A tipster writes:

So WMU-Cooley reduces tuition by 21% and it’s reported everywhere but you clowns don’t even mention it?

Sorry, we cover law schools, not profit centers. While we’re at it, the headline should probably have some air quotes in there.

But, yes, as the ABA Journal pointed out yesterday, the program known as Thomas M. Cooley Law School before hitching up with Western Michigan University for branding purposes — despite the affiliation with a public institution, Cooley remains a private school — just announced that they will slash tuition 21 percent and close one of its four campuses. It’s the latest in the sad tale of Cooley’s sagging reputation — seriously, when Michael Cohen went there it was a perfectly fine school — and rather than being welcome news of a tuition reduction, only highlights how wildly out of hand its tuition had gotten.

Closing a campus is part of the natural ebb and flow for Cooley, which closed its Ann Arbor campus five years ago. The tuition cut is more “newsworthy” given that the school had hitherto exhibited the gall to charge a non-discounted price tag of $267,747 for the “honor” of graduating from a school with only 32.4 percent of grads in jobs requiring bar passage and a bar passage rate that sunk to 43.7 percent last year. This was, of course, after the ABA backed off of its accreditation challenge after Cooley filed an intimidating lawsuit against the organization for daring to adhere to its standards.

So dropping the tuition portion of that down makes it, what, $220K? This puts the school back to where it was in the early years of this decade when it was still overpriced and underperforming. It’s been “Rank Not Published” by USNWR for so long it’s forgotten what numbers even mean.

But the school will always be second to Harvard in our hearts.

In any event, yes, Cooley is lowering its tuition to a still absurd level despite no obvious change in the school’s performance. And so, we shall dutifully clown them.

Cooley Law School cuts tuition and seeks to close satellite campus [ABA Journal]

Earlier: Yet Another Subpar Law School Sues The ABA In ‘Accreditation-By-Lawsuit’ Strategy
Cooley Law School To ‘Cease Operations’ At One Of Its Campuses
Latest Cooley Law School Rankings Achieve New Heights of Intellectual Dishonesty

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.

I don’t fly American Airlines unless I absolutely have to. And by “absolutely have to,” I mean that my company buys me a ticket on American and is willing to withstand me complaining about my (free) ticket for a week while making veiled threats at filing a hostile work environment claim. American Airlines is not good to black people, says the NAACP. Air travel, in general, is not good to people, but if you can’t distinguish between the experiences of black passengers versus white ones, you’re a racism apologist. And if you can’t distinguish between American and other airlines — which are also crappy — then you are one of those “both parties are the same” idiots.

Yes, things are bad for everybody, everywhere, but American is worse. The latest evidence of that comes from Dana Holcomb. Holcomb is a black man who was trying to fly, first-class, from Vegas back to Austin. The flight had a layover in Phoenix. A woman got on and sat next to him with an “emotional support” lapdog. Holcomb is allergic to dogs. And then American did its thing. From RawStory:

Admitting that he was [allergic to her dog], he said the woman attempted to find another seat but could not be accommodated which led to flight attendants and then a pilot to become involved, telling him to move to another seat in the back of the plane.

According to Holcomb, the flight attendant, “Began to get really irate because he was insisting that I go to that seat.”

Holcomb’s attorney, Reginald McKamie Sr., explained the lawsuit he filed on his client’s behalf against the airline, stating, “At that point (workers) told him you’re going to go to the rear of the plane or get off the plane.”

Holcomb was removed from the flight, which left without even getting his bags off. Those bags included his medications. He had to spend the night in Phoenix. American Airlines claims, in a statement, that Holcomb was removed because he became “confrontational.”

I’m mildly allergic to cats. Not nearly as allergic as Holcomb appears to be to dogs. If a cat were in the seat next to me, it would make my flight bad, but I probably wouldn’t make a whole thing about it. UNTIL THEY TOLD ME TO SIT AT THE BACK OF THE PLANE. That is about when I’d lose my ever-loving mind. I’ve got a first-class ticket and you’re going to tell me, but not the lady with the animal, to move to the BACK of the plane? No. Nah, son. I get “confrontational” AF when I have to remind people to Google Rosa Parks.

Holcomb plans to sue American for racial discrimination. I know some white people are reading this and thinking “that could happen to anybody, why you gotta bring race into it?” First of all, I hate you people, please know that. But the core of the discrimination point is not about American choosing dogs over people, it’s about kicking a black man off a flight because he refused to be treated worse than a dog.

Holcomb stated that woman did eventually find another passenger willing to switch seats with her, but that he was booted from the plane — as well as the airport — by American anyway and was accused of being “confrontational.”

That’s what doesn’t happen to white people. The situation resolved itself. The woman (and while I’m not on board with the proliferation of emotional support animals, the woman in this story seems generally blameless) found another seat. The tempest was quelled. But American STILL kicked Holcomb off the plane and out of the airport. Why? Did he do anything that necessitated the pressing of charges? Evidently not. No, they kicked him off and out because they didn’t like his “attitude.” They decided to humiliate him, because he refused to be moved to the back of the plane like freaking chattel.

The lesson, as always: Do Not Fly American. If it’s cheaper, it’s not worth the cost savings. If it’s quicker, it’s not worth the time savings. They’re the world’s largest airline and, therefore, hard to avoid. It’s nearly impossible to fly into or through Dallas or Charlotte or Miami or Phoenix without them. But it’s always worth it to try. Make American your airline of last resort, and if you are black, make sure you wear a body camera if you take one of their flights. You’ll thank me later.

American Airlines booted allergic black man from plane so dog could fly first class: lawsuit [Raw Story]

Elie Mystal is the Executive Editor of Above the Law and a contributor at The Nation. He can be reached @ElieNYC on Twitter, or at elie@abovethelaw.com. He will resist.

Sure, it’s possible to close a firm and wind down operations sans a bankruptcy filing, but that was simply not in the cards for LeClairRyan. And since we already knew the firm was having issues paying monies owed, well, it isn’t particularly surprising they went this route.

Yesterday, LeClairRyan filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in the Eastern District of Virginia. According to the filing, the firm has two secured creditors to which they owe almost $15 million — ULXP, which is the joint venture between the firm and alternative legal services provider UnitedLex as part of the attempt to start a “law firm 2.0” and ABL Alliance LLLP, the firm’s primary lender. In addition, LeClairRyan noted its unsecured creditors — more than 200 but fewer than 1,000 — were owed somewhere between $10 million and $50 million.

As reported by Law.com, former LeClairRyan general counsel Lori Thompson is heading up the firm’s wind down activities and is busy reducing overhead:

Thompson’s declaration in support of the bankruptcy petition revealed that since the firm’s members voted to dissolve July 29, a move it confirmed to the public 10 days later, she and securities attorney Christopher Lange were the only two names left on the committee. Former CEO Erik Gustafson and former New Haven, Connecticut, office leader Richard “Deke” Bowerman have since stepped down.

Thompson said that between the dissolution vote and the Chapter 11 filing, LeClairRyan has taken steps to reduce its overhead, closing down operations at all of the 25 offices it once operated around the country, with the exception of fewer than 10 employees who are overseeing the firm’s wind down.

Though the move was not unexpected, it is not necessarily easy. As Leslie Corwin, partner at the boutique firm Eisner, told Law.com, things are bound to get messy:

“I’ve never seen these things go smoothly,” said Corwin, who has handled the bankruptcies of former legal luminaries Heller Ehrman and Testa, Hurwitz & Thibeault, and also represented now-defunct WolfBlock in its years-long, out-of-court liquidation process. “I think it’s hard on the former partners and staff of LeClairRyan. Their lives are going to be disrupted for a long period of time.”

It’s clear that though LeClairRyan may be gone, their legal (and financial) woes are far from over.

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).

The construction industry is one of the largest and most lucrative in the country. Construction lawyers assist with every aspect of a building project, from the initial land selection and development, to any disputes or insurance issues that may arise after construction is complete. Construction clients run the gamut from contractors and subcontractors, to architects and engineers, to land developers and insurance companies. The broader field of construction law encompasses countless nuanced practice areas, including contract negotiation, regulatory work, insurance law, and litigation, just to name a few. 

As a guide to the complex ecosystem of law firms servicing the industry, our friends at Lake Whillans Litigation Finance present the Go-to Firms of the Construction Industry. Among them, these firms can handle every transactional and litigation need.

Lake Whillans is there to partner with the full spectrum of construction industry players, including financial institutions and major law firms. Engaging these Go-to Firms can help companies avoid or contain problems down the road. Should legal issues arise, Lake Whillans can step in and help resolve them.

When you need an expert in your corner on your next construction project, these are the firms to call.

1. Best Global Powerhouse for Construction Law: Duane Morris LLP

When it comes to depth of talent, it’s difficult to compete with Duane Morris in the construction law arena. With over 800 attorneys practicing across the United States and in offices around the globe, chances are they can handle anything you need, anywhere you need it. Consistently recognized as one of the leaders in the construction industry, Duane Morris has experts in all facets of construction law, from design and funding through to final construction and workplace safety issues. When you need lawyers by your side from start to finish, Duane Morris is your full-service contractor.

2. Best Firm to Handle Complex Litigation Disputes: Pepper Hamilton

With so many phases and moving parts, litigation and disputes are an inevitable reality of any complex construction project. When the future of your project is on the line, you want a firm that knows its way around a courtroom and a construction lawsuit. Pepper Hamilton is that firm. Named the “Construction Law Firm of the Year 2018” by Chambers USA, the firm has handled more than a dozen complex construction litigations worth more than $50 million in the last five years alone. The firm’s lawyers have the skills necessary to get you the favorable outcome you need.

3. Best Firm For When Your Growing Startup Needs More Room to Expand: Perkins Coie LLP

Since it opened its doors in Silicon Valley and San Francisco in 1998, Perkins Coie has been the go-to firm for innovators and emerging tech companies. Their role as a trusted advisor for startups has expanded as the firm has grown. Today, the firm has a nationally recognized construction law practice, bringing a depth of expertise in all facets of construction law to large and small businesses alike. When you’ve invented the next great thing and have outgrown your garage, Perkins Coie will help you take the next step.

4. Best Law Firm for Land Development Projects: Greenberg Traurig

Much like its competitors, Greenberg Traurig is more than capable of handling the most complex of construction matters, on both the transactional and litigation sides. Where the firm really stands out, though, is in its more nuanced niche specialties, like its Land Development Group. Greenberg Traurig’s experienced attorneys have guided numerous entrepreneurs, landowners, and joint venture partners through the development process, from financing, to permitting, to occupancy. If your next construction project involves a land development component, these are the folks you want on speed dial.

5. Best Firm for Building That New Power Plant: Alston & Bird LLP

Now a recognized powerhouse in construction law, Alston & Bird rose from humble Georgia beginnings in 1893 to become a major international player in the industry. While the firm’s construction lawyers are adept at handling all aspects of major projects, they particularly excel when it comes to the energy sector. Alston & Bird has handled some of the most complex power plant and infrastructure projects around the globe, from China to South America and everywhere in between. When the worlds of construction and energy law collide, you want Alston & Bird in your corner.

6. Best Firm When You Have Lots of Work Coming Down the Pipeline (Literally): Holland & Knight LLP

With over 1,200 lawyers around the world, the sheer size of Holland & Knight allows them the flexibility to develop extremely nuanced specialties within the common practice areas you’ll see at most firms, and their construction law group is certainly no exception. A perfect example is its expertise in pipeline projects. The firm’s construction lawyers have handled countless complex pipeline matters from transactional, compliance, regulatory, and litigation perspectives. If you’re in any way involved in one of the estimated 94,000 pipeline projects currently happening around the world, you’ll want to give Holland & Knight a call.

7. Best Firm to Handle Your Construction Insurance Claims: Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP

Insurance is a critical part of any construction project. While many law firms across the country can boast about their roster of insurance company clients, far fewer have a proven track record for representing policyholders. Pillsbury is one of the notable exceptions to the rule. The firm brings its vast experience in the construction industry to the insurance arena, successfully representing countless owners, contractors, and developers in faulty construction claims and insurance coverage disputes. Pillsbury is the firm to call when you need your important risk management and coverage questions answered.

8. Best Firm to Handle the Construction Project of the Future: K&L Gates

The construction industry has been around for centuries, but that doesn’t mean it hasn’t adapted to the changing times. The Construction and Infrastructure Group at K&L Gates draws from vast past experience to focus on ensuring that construction projects are sustainable for the next generation. The firm’s lawyers specialize in niche areas like integrating technology and IP into construction projects and incorporating clean energy and green initiatives. When you’re planning a construction project for a better tomorrow, K&L Gates is thinking ahead.

9. Best Firm for Your Construction Project South of the Mason-Dixon Line: Bradley

Named “Law Firm of the Year” in Construction Law for 2018 by U.S. News & World Report, the construction lawyers at Bradley intimately know the ins and outs of every aspect of a construction project, from beginning to end. Founded in Elyton, Alabama, in 1870, the firm now has eight additional offices scattered throughout the South, and offers expert counsel on regional, national, and international constructions projects. The firm’s Construction Practice Group has worked on nearly every type of construction project imaginable, from embassies and government contracts, to hospitals and power plants, to resorts and casinos. No matter what side of a construction deal you’re on, this is the firm that can get you where you need to be.

10. Best Jack-of-All-Trades Construction Firm: Seyfarth Shaw

When it comes to construction law, Seyfarth Shaw offers a little bit of everything. Their team of construction experts has represented every possible kind of party to a construction project in every possible stage of the project. From negotiating contracts, to installing clean technologies, to engaging in alternative dispute resolution, the firm has you covered around the world. You can’t go wrong with one of the country’s largest and most experienced construction law practices.

I liked her and believed in her. I just knew she was the right person for the court. But I have to say over the past 26 years she has far exceeded my expectations. All of us hope that she will stay on the court forever.

— Former President Bill Clinton, praising Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg as he introduced her to a packed house for a speaking engagement that was hosted by the Clinton Foundation and the University of Arkansas’ Clinton School of Public Service. Clinton nominated Ginsburg to the Supreme Court in June 1993, and she was confirmed two months later.

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.

A solo practitioner in a lawyers group asked what is a fair wage to pay a law clerk who is still in school. The responses went all over the place. Some paid little more than minimum wage while others paid slightly more. One paid a lot more. Since there is no recommended minimum as exists with the major law firms, it is anybody’s guess.

Some based their answers on what they got paid when they were a 3L. Others based the pay on the number of applicants they received. Or they base it on what they thought was the going rate by asking around or searching online.

The short answer is you can pay whatever you can get away with.

But just because you can pay a small wage to a law student, does it mean that you should? I have heard the typical reasons for not paying a lot to law students. They come with little-to-no experience, are likely to make mistakes, and the employer (and the client) should not have to pay for that. Also, since most law student jobs are likely to be temporary, the law student might not notice the higher wage. The on-the-job experience they receive is more valuable than the money. And some firms just cannot afford to pay more than the bare minimum.

Some have said that the pay is comparable to similar positions in government. While government jobs generally pay less than the private sector, the training is usually better, the work is less stressful, and employers generally prefer people with government experience. Most small firms cannot offer similar intangible benefits like these.

I may sound crazy or financially wasteful, but I think it would be beneficial in the long run for small firms to pay higher than market rate for law students. Why?

For starters, you will generally attract better employees. I know this sounds obvious but most lawyers aren’t famous for their business acumen. Let’s face it, money talks. Especially when law students today have $300,000+ of student loan debt chasing them. The best firms tend to pay the best salaries. A higher salary means that you will get candidates who actually want to work for you instead of seeing you as a last resort résumé gap filler. They will be motivated to stay and go the extra mile since they know they are paid better than their classmates.

Also, you should see this as an investment. You see, these 3Ls will one day become your colleagues, potential referral sources, or co-counsel. The sad truth is that some of them may end up being paid less as new attorneys. And others may not find jobs at all. A few years ago, I wrote about why small firm junior associates are paid relatively little. I think the struggle for new attorneys will continue, especially if Siri is one day allowed to give legal advice. You may be the one bright spot in their lives and they will remember you when they need to refer potential clients.

Of course, there are some steps you should take to make sure you don’t end up paying more than necessary. Start new law student hires on a part-time basis and with tasks that are appropriate for their skill level. If the new hire is not performing well, it is best to let him go as soon as possible.

This post was not meant to be a definitive “how to” on hiring clerks or staff in general. I only hope that it will make employers think twice before deciding to pay law clerks the least amount as possible. Most of us probably remember what it was like to work as a law clerk during law school. We did our best, no matter how much we were paid. Employers who pay the bare minimum usually end up with employees who do the bare minimum. Attorneys only have their reputation. This not only applies to future clients but also to future employees. If you want to attract the best talent, you will have to be known for paying for the best.

Steven Chung is a tax attorney in Los Angeles, California. He helps people with basic tax planning and resolve tax disputes. He is also sympathetic to people with large student loans. He can be reached via email at sachimalbe@excite.com. Or you can connect with him on Twitter (@stevenchung) and connect with him on LinkedIn.

We are deeply concerned with the continued resurgence of xenophobia in South Africa and note that acts of xenophobia defeat the spirit and letter of Article 3 (a) and (f) of the Constitutive Act of the African Union, which encourages greater unity and solidarity between African States and African people, as well as the promotion of peace, security, and stability on the continent.

It is our view that these attacks go against the grain of humanity and severely compromise the people-to-people solidarity that has existed between South Africa and her fellow African countries for many years.

We are of the view that instability in many African countries, a direct consequence of weak democratic culture, is at the heart of the forced migration many Africans have to take in order to escape persecution, poverty and lack of opportunity. Hence, we continue to plead with African governments to be more democratic and responsive so that citizens can meaningfully contribute to their own development, in their own countries.

Aspirations of regional and continental integration can only be met if we are all moving together in one direction.

We urge South African authorities to shun issuing xenophobic sentiments. We urge them to urgently deploy adequate resources and put in place measures aimed at protecting human life, regardless of nationality.

The Crisis in Zimbabwe Coalition will continue to work with various stakeholders, including the South African government and civil society establishments in finding a lasting solution to threats of xenophobia.

Meanwhile we implore the South African government to remain true to the African Charter and recommit itself to deeds and the spirit underlying Articles 3, 4, 5, 12, 14 and 28 of the African Charter and noting, in particular Article 4 which provides that:

“Human beings are inviolable. Every human being shall be entitled to respect for his life and the integrity of his person. No one may be arbitrarily deprived of this right”

We urge the government of South Africa to instill a sense of security for black Africans and other nationals living in South Africa and uphold domestic, regional and international obligations and call upon the Government of the Republic of South Africa to:

1. a)Immediately put in place measures to stop the attacks on foreign nationals in the country and to ensure that this does not recur in future;
2. b)Fully investigate the circumstances leading to the xenophobic attacks and other acts of violence perpetrated against foreign nationals;
3. c)Ensure that all the perpetrators of the attacks are brought to justice and held accountable for their actions in accordance with the law;
4. d)Take appropriate measures to ensure that the rights of all immigrants are protected in accordance with the applicable international and regional human rights instruments;
5. e)Comply with its obligations under the African Charter, Universal Declaration of Human Rights and all other international and regional human rights obligations; and
6. f)Take immediate steps to sign, ratify and domesticate the African Union Convention for the Protection and Assistance of Internally Displaced Persons in Africa.

As CiZC, we implore the Zimbabwe community in South Africa, and other Africans at large to observe peace and assist in promoting law and order. We further encourage them to condemn and report criminal activity by anyone, regardless of citizenship.

Africa, Let’s Unite

Post published in: Featured