(Yes, we know. According to Gawker, the formulation “Best. [X]. Ever.” is a blog-media cliché. But we don’t care. And we doubt that this cliché has ever been deployed in the context of Continuing Legal Education — so we get a free pass.)
If you’re (1) short on New York CLE credits, and (2) as transfixed as we are by the Biglaw train wreck called Charney v. Sullivan & Cromwell, have we got a suggestion for you.
A reader tipped us off to this CLE event, taking place on March 8 at the Princeton Club in New York:
Employment Law for the General Practitioner and Corporate Counselor
Thursday, March 8, 2007
7.5 TOTAL CREDITS: 6.0 credit hours of practice management and/or professional practice; 0.5 credit hour in skills; 1.0 credit hour in ethics
This popular, basic-to-intermediate level program, updated and revamped from previous years, is structured to cover on a practical basis the issues and problems typically arising in today’s workplace on which corporate counsel, or a private practitioner with a general practice, may be called to handle on behalf of the company or the employee.
What’s so interesting about this? The presenters. Two of the lecturers are A-list celebrities of L’Affaire Charney: Zachary Fasman of Paul Hastings (at right), who represents the embattled megafirm; and Theodore Rogers of Sullivan & Cromwell, who is working on the case in-house.
We have advice for Mr. Fasman on how to structure his CLE presentation. Check it out, after the jump.
Ted Rogers is presenting on this subject, which Sullivan & Cromwell v. Charney is probably making him increasingly familiar with:
ETHICS IN EMPLOYMENT LITIGATION DISCOVERY
Who can you speak to? Who not? Preservation of evidence; Electronic discovery issues; Inadvertent disclosure rules.
Speakers: Susan Ritz, Esq.; Theodore O. Rogers, Esq.
Meanwhile, Zach Fasman will hold forth on this topic:
MANAGING ATTORNEY/CLIENT RELATIONSHIPS – FOR CLIENTS AND THEIR LAWYERS
“Hand holding,” (individual hands and corporate hands), administering “doses of reality” (setting realistic expectations), delivering bad news, performing delicate fact investigations, evaluating truthfulness, developing trust and openness, payment issues for plaintiffs (contingent fee / hourly rate / mixed, control over settlement offers, other); payment issues for defendants (disclosing hourly rates, flat fee arrangements, agreeing on charges for disbursements such as legal research, meals, transportation, etc.).
Speakers: Debra Raskin, Esq.; Zachary D. Fasman, Esq.
We have a suggestion for Zach Fasman, to liven up his presentation. With the help of Ted Rogers, he should stage “dramatic reenactments”: skits in which he assumes his lawyerly role, Rogers plays the client, and he “counsels” Rogers in front of the audience, for the benefit of everyone assembled.
Here are some things he could demonstrate:
“Administering doses of reality”: “No, Ted, these ‘Blogger-People’ aren’t going to just ‘Go Away.'”
“Delivering bad news”: “Sorry, Ted. But it appears that Eric really DID make that ‘bend over’ crack… I mean, remark…. No, Aaron Charney doesn’t have lower back problems that are therapeutically addressed through stretching….”
“Performing delicate fact investigations”: “So Eric, how many times a day do you, er, go ‘number two’… No, assume it’s a regular, ‘no constipation’ day… And when you go ‘number two,’ what do you take into the bathroom with you…. Have you ever taken, say, a redlined draft merger agreement in there…”
“Evaluating truthfulness”: “Please, Alexandra — stop screaming. I am only asking these questions because it’s part of my job. I’m your lawyer; I’m on your side.”
“Your credibility does NOT go up with your decibel level. And I do not appreciate being called a ‘liar,’ and told that ‘all liars should be fired.'”
“Payment issues for defendants”: “We think that S&C will understand our billing model quite well. We call it ‘Bend Over Billing.’ It’s a new hybrid of hourly, contigent-fee, and premium billing, and it’s designed to yield us the greatest possible fee in any given case.”
Finally, look for Ted Rogers to be sitting in the front row at this session:
SEXUAL ORIENTATION AND GENDER IDENTITY DISCRIMINATION
New York State law prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. New York City law adds protection for transgender employees. This segment will provide an overview of the law in this area, examples of common violations, and tips for avoiding liability.
Speaker: Alphonso David, Esq.
Employment Law for the General Practitioner and Corporate Counselor [New York State Bar Association]