The law firm of choice for internationally focused companies

+263 242 744 677

admin@tsazim.com

4 Gunhill Avenue,

Harare, Zimbabwe

Category: News Feeds

Category Added in a WPeMatico Campaign

Eating Disorders Took My Daughter And Changed My View Of Lawyer Wellness

I first met Steven Dunn through my eating disorder advocacy. I was actively bulimic for over two decades and have been in recovery for just over 12 years.

Steven had not long before lost his daughter Morgan to anorexia nervosa. We talked often about advocacy issues and supported each other in our work to raise awareness. However, I never spoke with him about how he dealt with tragic, heart-breaking loss as a father and lawyer. Here is his story.

The legal profession demands excellence. It requires intelligence, guile, compassion, integrity, and a sense of duty and honor. Trial work particularly tests all aspects of the human condition.

Those qualities, and the trials and tribulations we attorneys face, can steel us as we face the greatest challenge a parent can possibly encounter — the mortality of our beloved child. And the stress and mental strain of that battle far exceeds anything our law practice can possibly throw at us.

I had carved out a niche law practice, representing corporate debt collectors for violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. I had been admitted pro hac vice in over 20 federal courts outside the State of Texas. Respected and passionate, or so I thought, I believed I had found a calling. And then, life got in the way.

I am the proud father of a vivacious, beautiful, intelligent daughter who was 17 years old at the time when eating disorders first made their way into our life.  She had the benefit of a private school education, a comfortable house, good friends.  Unfortunately for her father, she was far too much like me, was far too brash, embraced life fully and yet had obvious flaws. (A future litigation attorney if ever there was one!)

In February of 2011, while attending a movie with a friend, Morgan began to feel light-headed and dizzy.  She left the theater and while walking out, passed out. She fell forward fracturing her jaw. Paramedics rushed her to the emergency room where blood was taken.

Her diagnosis? A combination of her weight being 86 pounds, her losing consciousness, and her decreased level of potassium, were all indicative of  Anorexia Nervosa.  A probable eating disorder. I didn’t know enough at the time to be deathly afraid. I should have been.

Morgan’s mother and I scheduled appointments with specialists, with counselors, and nutritionists. Amongst the scheduled counseling sessions were mandatory family counseling sessions.

And yet, her counselor became more alarmed and strongly recommended that we contact a heart specialist. And then you hear those words that chill any parent to their very core.  “Mr. Dunn, your daughter’s condition has worsened to a point where she needs extensive, hospitalized treatment.  One of her heart valves is leaking.  She continues to lose weight.  She is malnourished.  Without this treatment, it’s not a matter of if, but a matter of when she is going to die.”

And just like that, your law practice, the professional life you had built for over 30 years, seemed not so important after all. Helping a multimillion-dollar corporation save $5,000 on a case? Engaging in discussions about objections to interrogatories? Convincing opposing counsel that their client has no actual damages and the case is simply about his own attorney’s fees? You start to realize that those “professional truths” which you held so dear throughout your career have very little meaning. And you wonder who you really are.

Especially when compared with the task before you. You find that for females between the ages of 15 and 24 who suffer from Anorexia Nervosa, the mortality rate is 12 times higher than the death rate of ALL other illnesses. You find that Anorexia Nervosa has the highest premature fatality rate of any mental illness.

And if you think we attorneys or law students are immune from it, you are mistaken. This past February, Brian Cuban wrote an article published here on Above the Law. He quoted some alarming statistics: “We can look to a recent study of mental health issues in law school published by the Journal of Legal Education, which found 27% of law students (18% of male respondents and 34% of female respondents) screened positive for eating disorders. Yet only 3% of respondents had actually been diagnosed.”

And so, the journey began. Morgan fought these eating disorders for seven long years. There were so many hospitals and treatment centers, doctors and nurses. There were so many prescription drugs. The seizures she began to experience frightened us. And my focus on the practice of law continued to wane. So many family counseling sessions. So few individual sessions for me. And the stress and mental strain mounted.

The last two years of her young life were spent exclusively with me. I took her to weekly doctors and counseling appointments, many of which I attended. And yet, Morgan and I still laughed. Countless hours were spent playing backgammon. And how this emaciated waif so ill, could manage to whip me two out of every three games will forever remain a mystery. We watched Game of Thrones together every week. We shared a love of Mambo Taxis. She laughingly referred to me as “her twin.” When she walked into a room, people knew she was there. Though her body was slight, her personality was huge. And during that time, my once comfortable law practice continued to deteriorate.

I consulted with doctors and fought seemingly daily battles against this disease and the insurance providers which routinely denied payment for life-saving treatment. With each denial of authorization, with each deterioration in her health, the stress level increased. I wrongly believed this was my form of therapy. I could use these battles as my own form of counseling. I am a warrior. My perceived strength and perseverance would sustain me. How foolish I was.

I had never been a proponent of pharma drugs unless absolutely necessary. No drugs for anxiety or depression for me! Instead, I read internet sites on coping with fear, anxiety, depression. By sheer force of will I would beat back those emotions. They were signs of weakness! They would not control me!

And yet, my focus on the practice of law continued to blur and erode. Motions to continue hearings, extensions to respond to discovery, rescheduled depositions. A greater loss of focus and clarity. And the mounting realization that I could no longer serve my clients as they needed. I started to refer clients to other law firms. I realized that “fear” was constantly present — and it was becoming my master instead of my servant.

Fear can be a trial attorney’s best friend. We harness it to research more deeply, to motivate us to look for every possible legal angle in a case, to explore how we, and our opponent, are going to argue a case. Fear is that driving force that finds you up at 2:00 a.m. the night before a trial begins going over your opening argument one last time. It hones our skills. As attorneys, we learn to embrace it because we can control it.

But when your child’s life hangs in the balance, fear escapes your control and gets you in its icy grip. No stirring closing argument is going to deter fear and bring your child back to health. No well-researched brief is going to persuade this disease to leave your loved one in peace.

And then … your child breathes her last breath. On that day, you feel your soul, the very best part of your heart, leaving as well. For me, that day was October 30, 2016. A fog descends upon you. The practice of law is out of the question. You merely … exist. A few visits to a grief counselor and you believe they are reading from a book studied in a Philosophy 101 Class.

A short time after Morgan’s death, a friend gave me a card which in essence said: When confronted with an unspeakable tragedy, one of three things happens: 1. It destroys you; 2. It defines your existence in a negative way, or 3. It fills you with incredible strength and unshakeable resolve.

Grief destroying a person is far too common. The local Dallas legal community felt the sting of grief taking a life far too soon. One month after Morgan was taken, well-known attorney Brian Loncar was found dead of an accidental drug overdose just two days after he buried his own beloved youngest daughter, Grace. Grace had taken her own life. Those who knew Brian believe that it was a broken heart that claimed him.

For me, I was left with a shattered law practice, a shattered life, and broken heart. The number of times I have thought, “if I got to do it all over again.”

And yet, in one of the many journals Morgan left behind, one of the many messages of hope she stated, “I can seem to help everyone else … I just can’t save myself.” And so, the mission for The Morgan Foundation came to fruition. And with that, perhaps a purpose for continuing Morgan’s legacy was born.

After all of these years, and so many false starts and missteps, I learned to get out of my way and let my soul find me. And when it did, its purpose was made clear. Advocacy dedicated to helping those suffering from eating disorders and at the hands of the dysfunctional mental health system. Using 35 years of courtroom experience to cajole, convince, and push companies and treatment centers to focus on the patients — and not just their profits. Giving two TEDx talks. Writing weekly articles on the mental health industry. Using the skills we attorneys learn as negotiators and researchers to help those who suffer.

The practice of law is slowly reemerging even as grief continues to hound me every day. But just as we attorneys learn to use fear to motivate us, so too I must use grief to motivate me, to inspire me, to live a life of substance and purpose. And perhaps at the end of my journey, the words on my tombstone can read, “Steven Dunn, He Was a Damned Good Daddy and In His Beloved Daughter’s Name, He Saved Lives.”

Steven Dunn is a Dallas-based attorney and founder of The Morgan Foundation. It is dedicated to developing and implementing community-based counseling and assistance programs involving community leaders, university professionals, counseling communities, and families. Our goal is to increase the accessibility of adolescent mental health care in schools, churches, and communities with free to low-cost services in accordance with the newly created Texas Health Care Consortium.

Brian Cuban (@bcuban) is The Addicted Lawyer. Brian is the author of the Amazon best-selling book, The Addicted Lawyer: Tales Of The Bar, Booze, Blow & Redemption (affiliate link). A graduate of the University of Pittsburgh School of Law, he somehow made it through as an alcoholic then added cocaine to his résumé as a practicing attorney. He went into recovery April 8, 2007. He left the practice of law and now writes and speaks on recovery topics, not only for the legal profession, but on recovery in general. He can be reached at brian@addictedlawyer.com.

Free Webinar: How Can You Modernize Your Law Firm’s Business Development?

Law firm marketing is at an inflection point. Today’s legal clients scrutinize their spending and are well informed about prices, value, and competitive alternatives. This necessitates insight-driven marketing and business development strategies.

Modern chief marketing officers (CMOs) are the change agents who can advance marketing from a supportive function to a strategic partnership. With a birds-eye view across the entire client lifecycle, CMOs are best positioned to champion data-driven decision making and the requisite infrastructure and process changes.

As client become more demanding and less loyal, investing in ways to identify opportunities, predict client habits, develop market insights and facilitate client outreach is paramount. In fact, with an average return of $47 million on $1 million of marketing and business development spending for an Am Law 200 firm, the investment pays off.

On Wednesday, August 7, at 1 p.m. EST, please join us for a free webinar presented by Intapp. Speakers include Darryl Cross, Intapp’s Practice Group Lead for Professional Services Firm Leaders and Partners, and Bob Ambrogi, technology columnist for Above the Law, who will explores topics including:

  • Opportunities to integrate data into the culture of the firm;
  • Change management strategies to build firm-wide support; and
  • Advancing smart collaboration and key-client planning (industry use cases).

Intapp has also published a new white paper covering these subjects, which is available for download here.

Please click here to register for the free webinar. We can’t wait to see you there!

Sometimes It’s Fine To Use Humor In Judicial Opinions

Every couple of months, this website and other legal news outlets cover a judge cracking jokes or using some other kind of humor in a judicial opinion.  Since legal decisions are usually tedious to read, it is typically a welcome treat to find humor when reading this otherwise serious content.  However, it sometimes seems inappropriate for judges to use humor in their opinions, since this could demean the legal process, and this might be unfair to the parties involved in a case.

The codes of judicial conduct do not seem to explicitly cover humor in judicial decisions, so I thought I would provide some opinions on this topic based on my own experiences.  Although I contributed to the Georgetown Law Weekly’s humor column, and I had a short-lived career as a stand-up comic in law school, I am no expert on legal comedy.  As such, I would really appreciate any feedback from judges or other legal practitioners about when they think humor is appropriate in legal opinions.

Funny Facts

The subject matter of the case is probably the most important factor to determining if humor is appropriate in a legal opinion.  For instance, many legal practitioners are familiar with the famous New York haunted house case involving purchasers of a house suing the sellers for not notifying them that the house was haunted.  In ruling on the matter, the court made a number of ghost jokes and references to pop culture.  Of course, the subject matter of the case was kind of silly.  Although the issue of latent defects in real property is a serious matter, it is somewhat funny that attorneys would try to apply those standards to the context of a haunted house.  Since the subject matter of the case was funny in nature, the court did not really shatter the dignity of the legal profession by making some “Ghostbusters” references and using language associated with ghosts.  If anything, the court showed that judges are real people that have a sense of humor, and in this context, humor was appropriate in the judicial opinion.

References to the PARTIES IN a Case

Sometimes, it is funny when courts reference people or things associated with a case, and this is appropriate in a number of contexts.  For instance, many judges when deciding cases involving musicians cite to lyrics of the musicians involved in the lawsuit.  One such case that I stumbled upon a few months ago involved a plaintiff trying to assert hearing loss from attending a concert.  The judge in the opinion rather skillfully included lyrics of the subject musician’s songs, which was pretty funny.  Of course, it is not good that a plaintiff appears to have suffered from hearing loss, but the subject matter of the case opened the matter up for humor.  More recently, a judge used Taylor Swift lyrics in a case involving this singer.  This humor also seemed appropriate, since the court was merely making references to the parties in the case.  As these examples show, humorous references to the subject matter of a case can be appropriate in a number of contexts.

Judges Shouldn’t Use Comedy to Ridicule Lawyers

One inescapable fact of being a lawyer is that you sometimes need to make silly arguments for the benefit of the client.  Sometimes, lawyers make silly arguments on their own volition as a last-ditch effort at promoting the client’s interests.  Other times, clients put their lawyers up to making silly arguments, since they might not know about some legal issues.  In any cases, judges should understand that this is a reality of our adversarial process, and cut attorneys some slack about silly arguments they might need to make.

In law school, I had to read the Texas jackrabbit decision, an opinion that involved an effort to change the location of a given matter.  The judge uses colorful language and comedy to excoriate the defense lawyers for filing the motion to transfer the case to a different judicial division.  However, there must have been some reason why the defense lawyers wanted to transfer the division of the matter.  Perhaps it was truly out of convenience for the individuals involved in the case, and perhaps there was some deeper legal significance to this motion.  In any case, I always felt bad for the lawyers who were on the receiving end of this comedic “benchslap” and judicial humor should probably not be used to ridicule lawyers.

Subject Matter

Sometimes, the subject matter of a case is so serious and so grave that any use of humor by a judge seems to be in poor taste.  When I was in law school, I read one such case involving a serious situation in which one of the parties needed to use a bow and arrow to fend off an attack.  The court cited a Shakespeare quote from “Hamlet” about the “slings and arrows of outrageous fortune” and made other Shakespeare references.  However, the parties in this case were seriously injured, so this use of humor seems misplaced.  If a court is charged with reviewing a serious criminal law matter, it might not make sense to use comedy in a judicial opinion.

In the end, I am no expert on what judges should and shouldn’t do in their decisions, and I am also no expert on comedy.  I look forward to hearing from legal professionals, and hopefully some judges, about when they think it is fine to use humor in judicial decisions.  However, it is undeniable that comedy can be a welcome treat in some legal opinions but should not be used by judges in other contexts.


Jordan Rothman is the Managing Attorney of The Rothman Law Firm, a New Jersey and New York litigation boutique. He is also the founder of Student Debt Diaries, a website discussing how he paid off his student loans. You can reach Jordan through email at jrothman@rothmanlawyer.com.

What toilet paper, coffee and other goods now cost in Zimbabwe compared to South Africa – The Zimbabwean

A grocery store in Harare, Zimbabwe (Lindiwe Mpofu, Business Insider South Africa)

  • Zimbabwe adopted the Zimbabwean dollar, and banned the use of the US dollar and the rand, at the end of June.
  • It caused widespread confusion and cash shortages in the country. 
  • We compared prices for everyday household goods in Zimbabwe to what they cost in South Africa. 

This brought to an end nearly a decade where these currencies were used as legal payment after the Zimbabwean dollar (Z$) became worthless.

The sudden change in currency has caused widespread cash shortages at banks in Zimbabwe, with citizens waiting in line from as early as 05:00 to withdraw cash.

Most banks have therefore introduced withdrawal limits of Z$100 per day for businesses and Z$60 for individuals per day.

It also left retailers and informal traders confused as they weren’t sure how much to charge after converting their prices to the Zimbabwean dollar.

The bureau de change exchange rate is currently between Z$9.5 to Z$9.7 for every US dollar, or roughly Z$0.70 for every rand.

On the Zimbabwean black market, the exchange rate is Z$10 for every US dollar.

Business Insider South Africa compared prices of everyday household goods in stores in Harare, Zimbabwe’s capital city, to prices in South Africa.

Huggies Gold nappies (52 in a packet)

Z$261.29 = roughly R373.27


Eet-sum-more cookies 200g

Z$42.50 = roughly R60.70


Baby Soft 2 ply toilet paper

Z$89.99 = roughly R128.56


Bokomo Weetbix 450g

Z$ 38.49 = roughly R54.98


Jacobs Kronung Instant coffee 200g

Z$99.99 = roughly R142.80


Mrs Balls Chutney 470g

Z$36.50 = roughly R52.14


Koo Baked Beans 410g

Z$26.09 = roughly R37.27


Fatti’s & Moni’s Macaroni 500g

Z$14.99 = roughly R21.41


Nivea body lotion 400ml

Z$84.49 = roughly R120.70

A year after Mnangagwa’s election, old woes haunt Zimbabwe

Post published in: Business

Struggling Biglaw Firm Begins The Process Of Dissolution

If you’ve been following along with the trials and tribulations of the Biglaw firm LeClairRyan, then news that the firm has begun the process of dissolution is not shocking at all. After all, partners have been deserting the firm en masse, including name partner Gary LeClair; their lender has prevented the firm from returning departing partners’ capital contributions; they gave staff WARN Act notice of coming mass layoffs; and they’re being sued for not paying rent on one of the firm’s office and for gender discrimination. So the writing has been on the wall.

Now comes a report that the wind-down process has begun and whatever lawyers are left at LeClairRyan are being encouraged to find new firms. As reported by Law.com:

Firm attorneys have been told a wind-down committee is in the works, sources said, and partners are eyeing a few different law firms where large groups might land. For instance, a group of attorneys is talking with Northeast regional firm Barclay Damon. That firm’s managing partner, John Langan, declined to comment.

The firm’s revenue has also been in decline, from $142 million in 2017 to $122 million in 2018. To stem some of the issues, the firm launched “law firm 2.0” and embarked on a strategic partnership with UnitedLex, an alternative legal service provider. But that hasn’t stopped the onslaught of problems for the firm, and alumni of the firm say the problems go back even further:

Michael Volkov, a white-collar partner in Washington, D.C., who left in 2013, blamed leadership and compensation decisions that long predated the firm’s partnership with UnitedLex. As for what’s unfolding there now, he summed up, “What a disaster.”

LeClairRyan has yet to offer a comment of the firm’s status.


headshotKathryn 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).

What Do You Wish You Knew About Biglaw BEFORE You Started?

Here at Above the Law we care a lot about increasing transparency at Biglaw firms — that’s why we spend so much time reporting on bonuses and salaries and benefits. And while reporting on the market standard and leaders will always be a part of our mission, we also want to hear about what it’s like to actually work in the halls of Biglaw.

So, we’re asking our readers to fill out a brief survey about what they wish they knew about their firm before they started working there. We don’t care about the firm’s PR line, but about what associates really feel about the firm. We’ll be integrating the results of the survey into a new transparency project that’ll be launched later this summer.


headshotKathryn 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).

Former Attorney General Released From Prison

Kathleen Kane, the former Pennsylvania AG who managed to get herself sent to prison after shutting down a public corruption investigation and then retaliating against the prosecutor she blamed for leaking the move, is finally out of the pokey.

Kane’s downfall was one of the all-time Above the Law tales. Beyond the abuse of power, Kane’s story involved lying to a grand jury, using her twin sister as a decoy, and getting state supreme court justices to resign in a porn scandal.

It was an eventful 2015.

After eight months behind bars, former Pennsylvania Attorney General Kathleen G. Kane was released Wednesday from the Montgomery County prison.

Asked how she felt as she walked through the prison gate, she only said, “Grateful.”

Kane was disbarred, so private practice is out of the question. Perhaps building boats in Zihuatanejo?

Former AG Kathleen Kane released from jail; ‘Grateful,’ she says [Inquirer]

Earlier: Penn Attorney General Dupes The Press
‘No Law License? No Problem!’ Says Embattled State Attorney General
Pennsylvania Attorney General Kathleen Kane: From Top Prosecutor To Convicted Criminal

California Bans Bar Examiners From Asking Law School Grads About Their Mental Health

(Image via Getty)

There is no reason why perfectly capable people with PTSD or depression, who suffered with those issues, can’t practice law and do so effectively.

— Senator Tom Umberg (D-Santa Ana), commenting on legislation in California that bans the State Bar from seeking the mental health records of law school graduates as part of its character and fitness assessment. Governor Gavin Newsom signed the bill into law earlier this week. Other states have already removed such questions from their bar applications.


Staci ZaretskyStaci 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.

NRA May Be Shooting Itself In The Foot With Out-Of-Control Legal Bills

The NRA appears to be in utter disarray. They’ve had a failed palace coup, state regulators are closing in, and the group is openly admitting that they’re running out of money. A key factor in all of these problems may be their lawyer, Bill Brewer.

Brewer is known for his tenacity, but NRA insiders are starting to wonder if Brewer’s zealousness is driving the organization toward bankruptcy. A new ProPublica report dishes on some hefty legal bills over at Gun Central.

The statement [from former senior employee, Emily Cummins] lays out a list of allegations regarding Brewer’s legal work and his treatment of NRA staff as questions surfaced about his law firm’s billings, which totaled $24 million over a 13-month period. In the first quarter of 2019, Brewer’s firm charged over $97,000 per day, according to internal NRA documents posted anonymously online.

Normally, stories about how much attorneys charge are little more than pearl-clutching overreactions. But $97K every single day is actually eye-popping.

“I witnessed what appeared to be unrealistic and duplicative billing from Bill Brewer,” Cummins wrote. “I witnessed that Bill Brewer himself created a 2018 cash flow crunch by interfering with accounts payable to prioritize paying himself immediately versus other NRA vendors that had been providing goods or services for months without payment, also jeopardizing the NRA’s biweekly staff payroll.”

I doubt the bills were “unrealistic and duplicative” but there’s definitely room to be overaggressive that lay observers might perceive as duplicative. Still, Brewer is no stranger to getting sanctioned, so it’s easy for people to jump to the least charitable read of a hefty bill.

This month, four NRA board members publicly called for an “independent review of the millions of dollars in payments to Brewer, Attorneys & Counselors for legal fees.” But other NRA senior officials continue to defend the group. Carolyn Meadows, the NRA’s president, told ProPublica, “I have never worked with an outside law firm that is more on call, attentive and positively in tune to the needs of their client.” Charles Cotton, the NRA’s first vice president and chairman of the audit committee, added that Cummins’ allegations “reflect a misinformed view of the Brewer firm, its billings, and its advocacy for the NRA.”

Former NRA President Oliver North was one of those seeking an audit of Brewer’s bills. He got wished into the cornfields for his efforts. No matter how much internal pressure bubbles up against Brewer’s billings, the NRA’s core leadership unit is steadfast in its support.

And they sound like they will be all the way to the poor house.

New Documents Raise Ethical and Billing Concerns about the NRA’s Outside Counsel [ProPublica]

Earlier: Federal Judge Wants To Hear Why Bigtime Attorney Said He’d Never Been Sanctioned… When He Was TOTALLY Just Sanctioned


HeadshotJoe 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.

Capital One Attempts To Ease Customer Concern Over Massive Hack With Stats, Fails Miserably

Only 140,000 Social Security numbers were stolen, the other 99% are almost definitely safe…wait, what?