* Yesterday afternoon, two of D&L’s former executives quietly settled a clawback suit filed by Alan Jacobs, the firm’s bankruptcy trustee. Dewey know how much Messrs. Sanders and DiCarmine had to pay the piper? [WSJ Law Blog]
* GrayRobinson is the latest firm to hop aboard the medical marijuana bandwagon by launching its own regulated products practice group. Lawyers will soon puff, puff, pass around those lovely billable hours. [Daily Business Review]
* Pain at the pump apparently extends to this gas giant’s résumé dumps. A suit alleging bias in ExxonMobil’s hiring moves forward thanks to the Illinois Human Rights Commission. [Washington Blade]
* Facebook’s founder Mark Zuckerberg will be testifying against Paul Ceglia in court to prove that the alleged huckster faked a contract that claimed he owned more than half the company. Like. [Bloomberg]
* It seems that Kid Rock has been subpoenaed over a glass sex toy that was supposedly given to him by a former Insane Clown Posse employee. Kid Rock is probably thrilled to be in the news again. [MLive.com]
* Mayer Brown wants you to think the Supreme Court wasn’t tilted toward business interests this Term. Yes, we all know how Homer City turned out, but maybe it’s worth evaluating this based on how important the cases were. Is Petrella really equivalent to Noel Canning? [Mayer Brown]
* Not one, but two former Utah Attorneys General charged with corruption. [Deseret News]
* The CFPB brought suit against a debt collection lawsuit mill. A working CFPB. One more great thing we used to get from recess appointments. Thanks Breyer. [CFPB]
* Oh no. A law school tuition Kickstarter. [Kickstarter]
* New York tried to help homeowners facing foreclosure. Unfortunately, the law didn’t create a remedy if the banks refused to follow the law. Well, it was our fault for thinking Albany could do something right. [WiseLaw NY]
Earlier this week, several prominent LGBT advocacy groups announced that they would no longer support the proposed Employment Non-Discrimination ACT, known as ENDA. If the U.S. House of Representatives passes ENDA, it would create legal safeguards in the workplace for gay, lesbian, and transgendered employees. The National Gay and Lesbian Task Force Action Fund led the move, with the American Civil Liberties Union, Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders, Lambda Legal, the National Center for Lesbian Rights and Transgender Law Center later joining NGLTF’s initial statement. The groups fear that the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Hobby Lobby signals a move toward expansive religious exemptions. Consequently, the groups will now focus their efforts on securing rights for the LGBT community like those provided by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause.
A few months ago, I wrote about ENDA and why conservative Republicans in the House ought to pass the bill. I pointed to a novel D.C. district court ruling allowing a gay man to move forward with his Title VII employment discrimination claim, based on his status as a homosexual male. I described the differences between Title VII’s religious exemptions for employers and the much broader exemptions provided by ENDA. In my earlier piece, I wrote, “Republican Congress members should think twice about refusing to enact legislation that would provide ENDA’s key protection of religious freedom. If they fail to do so, and the push to expand the scope of Title VII in the courts continues, no such protection will exist.”
Instead of prioritizing religious freedom, social conservatives in Congress have held fast to a strident moral opposition to LGBT rights. Instead of pressing for new, democratically enacted statutory rights, many advocates of LGBT equality will increasingly double-down on judicial re-interpretation of Title VII and the Equal Protection Clause. As each side digs in, the other side digs in deeper. Workable compromises seem fewer….
Color me disappointed. The parties have reached a settlement in Ku v. Mitchell. We won’t get to hear trial testimony about a law school dean allegedly propositioning students and staff or trying to set up threesomes on a bed with Chinese silk sheets.
Okay, let’s rewind. Last October, Case Western law professor Raymond Ku filed a lawsuit against former Case dean Lawrence Mitchell and against the university. Ku alleged that he suffered retaliation after reporting to university officials that Mitchell had potentially sexually harassed women at the law school, including employees and students. In the wake of the lawsuit, Mitchell took a leave of absence as dean, then resigned the deanship (but remained on the faculty).
Today brings word of the parties settling the case. What are the terms of the settlement, and what do the parties have to say about it?
* The sad truth for those of you banking on Biglaw careers to pay off your loans? You are not a beautiful and unique snowflake. [Law School Lemmings]
* The recent study that created a cumulative ranking of law schools based on LSAT scores, employment, and citations has been updated to account for school-funded jobs. No more gaming the system schools. [The Faculty Lounge]
* The next generation wants to change the world. Maybe consider something other than law school. [Law and More]
* The suit between Jerry Only and Danzig (Glenn, not Chris) is heating up with a countersuit. [Metal Sucks]
* Time for another Battle of the Law Firm Bands! This one is in L.A. next Tuesday, July 8, and 11 bands from area law firms and companies are playing, including bands from Latham, Gibson, O’Melveny, and MoFo. It’s for a good cause, so show up. [Family Violence Appellate Project]
Today’s majority cannot resist taking potshots at Abood… but it ignores the petitioners’ invitation to depart from principles of stare decisis. And the essential work in the majority’s opinion comes from its extended (though mistaken) distinction of Abood… not from its gratuitous dicta critiquing Abood’s foundations. That is to the good — or at least better than it might be. The Abood rule is deeply entrenched, and is the foundation for not tens or hundreds, but thousands of contracts between unions and governments across the Nation. Our precedent about precedent, fairly understood and applied, makes it impossible for this Court to reverse that decision.
– Justice Elena Kagan, using her dissent in Harris v. Quinn to shore up the compelling case that Abood cannot be reversed. Which is going to be downright hilarious next term when the Court goes ahead and reverses it.
* You’d think a tax attorney would remember to file a tax return. You’d be wrong. [SF Gate]
* You think you have difficult clients? Try representing a sovereign hellbent on making political hay by contradicting every representation you make in court. [Reuters]
* Dov Charney out at American Apparel. And he seemed like such a nice guy… [Slate]
* The Central Park Five civil rights lawsuit has settled for $40 million — or roughly $1 million for each year the accused spent in prison. [New York Times]
* It’s a bad week for everyone affiliated with the Miami Heat. Now they’re losing to bloggers. [South Florida Lawyers]
* In an unfortunate follow-up, the effort to unionize some lawyers at Bloomberg has fizzled and the primary organizer has been fired with no severance and a baby on the way. Which is surely a complete coincidence and not related to his organizing activity at all. [Fortune]
* Former Delaware Supreme Court Justice Carolyn Berger has resigned and she is not bashful that it’s all to do with being passed over as chief justice in favor of Leo Strine. [Delaware Law Weekly]
* Yale Law grad and former Senior Counsel to the World Bank, Karen Hudes, wants you to understand that JFK was killed over the gold standard and that there’s a species of coneheads in control of the Vatican. We should do a Career Alternatives on her. Video after the jump… [Starship Earth: The Big Picture]
If you are considering a virtual law practice, you know that many of today’s solo firms started that way. But why are established, multi-attorney law firms going virtual?
Many small firms are successfully moving part—or even all—of their practice to a virtual setting. This even includes multi-jurisdictional practice spanning several states and practice areas, although solo and small partnerships are still the largest adopters of virtual law.
Can you do the same? The new article Mobile in Practice, Virtual by Design from author Jared Correia, Esq., explores how mobile technology bring real-life benefits to a small law firm. Read this new article—the next in Thomson Reuters’ Independent Thinking series for small firms—to explore how a mobile practice:
Reduces malpractice risk
Enables you to gather the best attorneys to fit the firm, regardless of each person’s geographic location
Leverages mobile devices and cloud technology to enable on-the-spot client and prospect communication
Transitioning in-house is something many (if not most) firm lawyers find themselves considering at some point. For many, it’s the first step in their career that isn’t simply a function of picking the best option available based on a ranking system.
Unknown territory feels high-risk, and can have the effect of steering many of us towards the well-greased channels into large, established companies.
For those who may be open to something more entrepreneurial, there is far less information available. No recruiter is calling every week with offers and details.
In sponsorship with Betterment, ATL and David Lat will moderate a panel about life in-house and we’ll hear from GCs at Birchbox, Gawker Media, Squarespace, Bonobos, and Betterment. Drinks, snacks, networking, and a great time guaranteed. Invite your colleagues, but RSVP fast, as space is limited.
Ed. note: The Asia Chronicles column is authored by Kinney Recruiting. Kinney has made more placements of U.S. associates, counsels and partners in Asia than any other recruiting firm in each of the past seven years. You can reach them by email: email@example.com.
It’s that time of year again when JDs are starting to apply for 2L summer jobs and 2L summers are deciding which practice area to focus on.
For those JDs with an interest in potentially lateraling to or transferring to Asia in the future, please feel free to reach out to Kinney for advice on firm choices, interviewing and practice choices, relating to future marketability in Asia, or for a general discussion on your particular Asia markets of interest. This is of course a free of cost service for those who some years in the future may be our future industry contacts or perhaps even clients.
For some years now Kinney’s Asia head, Evan Jowers, has been formally advising Harvard Law students with such questions, as the Asia expert in Harvard Law’s “Ask The Experts Market Program” each summer and fall, with podcasts and scheduled phone calls. This has been an enjoyable and productive experience for all involved.