* Justice Antonin Scalia isn’t quite ready to publicly weigh in on whether computer data is considered a protected “effect” under the Fourth Amendment. “[T]hat may well come up [before the Supreme Court],” he says. Thanks NSA. [Business Insider]
* “[I]t doesn’t take many bad apples in a barrel to cause a stink.” No matter how hard Biglaw firms try to keep their confidential information locked down, someone’s going trade on it. It looks like STB is learning that the hard way. [Wall Street Journal (sub. req.)]
* The day after Michigan’s ban on same-sex marriage was struck down by Judge Bernard Friedman, couples who rushed to marry were met with some serious Sixth Circuit sadness. Way to stay and spoil all of the celebrations, judges. [New York Times]
* “We’re not the Cleveland Browns,” says one of Case Western Law’s interim co-deans. With that kind of a glowing endorsement, we don’t see how this law school could possibly fail. [Crain's Cleveland Business]
* Rutgers Law-Newark has a new low-bono fellowship program “believed to be the first of its kind in the nation.” Some other law schools might have a bone to pick about that statement. [New Jersey Star-Ledger]
At last night’s LeGaL dinner: Alex Levy (a 3L at NYU), Mary Bonauto of Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders (GLAD), and David Lat. (Photo by Jeff Trachtman.)
Last night, I had the great pleasure of attending the LeGaL Foundation Annual Dinner, which took place at Capitale here in New York. The mood was festive — which wasn’t surprising, given the successes of both LeGaL and the broader LGBT rights movement over the past year.
Here’s my account of the evening, a celebration of the Foundation’s 30th anniversary and an opportunity to honor some pioneers of the gay rights movement….
For two good reasons: First, Lat asked me to write about life as an in-house lawyer or, at a minimum, an in-house lawyer’s perception of outside firms. If I wrote about politics, I’d be way off the mark. Second, I work at the world’s leading insurance broker for law firms. If I wrote about politics — no matter which side I took — I’d offend half my readers. Some of those offended readers would complain to their brokers, and I’d soon have a phalanx of brokers with pitchforks storming my office door.
But I’m throwing caution (and Lat’s instructions about topicality) to the wind today, and I’m posing a question that struck me recently: Set your mind back to 1983, the year in which I graduated from law school. Suppose, in 1983, someone posed this question to you:
Look into the future. When will each of these events occur? (1) We’ll elect an African-American President of the United States; (2) states will begin legalizing gay marriage; and (3) states will begin legalizing the use of marijuana. Which will occur first, second, and third, and in what years?
* Play along at home with this handy tracker showing just how often the U.S. Chamber of Commerce prevails at the Supreme Court. It’s a long Supreme Court season, but based on the last couple years, the scoreboard might look disturbingly like the Super Bowl’s when all is said and done. [Constitutional Accountability Center]
* Hey, law schools! Looking for more students? It looks like a simple legal change can spike your applications. [Fox News]
* Dewey know which D&L defendants did the perp walk of shame before their arraignment yesterday? Three of the ex-executives! Even Steve Davis, who quit his job as in-house counsel to Ras al Ghul Khaimah of the UAE last week. [Am Law Daily]
* It’s about half and half when it comes to states that have filed briefs with the Tenth Circuit in support of or against the rulings striking down gay marriage bans in Utah and Oklahoma. Sadly, not everyone can be as fabulous as we’d like. [National Law Journal]
* Abortion clinics are closing their doors in Texas thanks to new legislation, and the total number of clinics in the state come September will be six. Let the Mexican medical tourism commence. [New York Times]
* Illegal immigrants can’t practice law in Florida, says the state’s Supreme Court, but they can in California. Good thing there’s eleventy billion law schools there to accommodate them. [Miami Herald]
* Webster Lucas, the fellow suing McDonald’s over an alleged race-based napkin denial that’s since prevented him from working, has sued fast food joints before. He’s a “vexatious litigant.” [NBC Los Angeles]
* We’re getting closer to being able to unlock our phones legally. Soon you can accidentally brick an iPhone without fear of reprisal. [The Guardian]
* The Wall Street Journal thinks law student résumés are nearly identical (?) and recommends cultivating “quirky interests” like serving as a college mascot. Because national law firms just feel safer with Furries on staff. [The Legal Watchdog]
* A judge who already faces overlapping ethics proceedings is about to add a couple more to his plate. This time the allegations include sleeping with a law student, not disclosing when she appeared before him, and “misappropriating” marijuana evidence. He doesn’t seem to get that the whole “What happens in Vegas” thing only works if you’re not living there. [Las Vegas Law Blog]
* Someone tries to fight Larry Lessig on copyright. They lose. [IT-Lex]
* An applicant withdraws his application to a law school because they do not allow gay or lesbian wedding ceremonies on campus. While that’s a noble decision, did he really think a Catholic school was going to be having gay and lesbian weddings? [The Ivy Coach]
* Professors Chris Sprigman and Barry Friedman employed a cool tool called ReplyAll to have a public discussion about the NSA. [Just Security]
* Redeployment (affiliate link) is a new collection of stories by Phil Klay focusing on the transition of Iraq veterans to stateside living. One story focuses on a Marine going to law school. Apparently he wanted to trade one brand of PTSD for another. [New York Times]
* Wow, it looks like San Diego has a real problem policing its police. [Voice of San Diego]
* If you’re in the Boston area next week, check out Disruptive Innovation in the Market for Legal Services, a cool symposium on March 6. [Harvard Law]
* Of course there’s a gender pay gap in Biglaw, but none of the firms are going to tell you about it. We’ll be discussing the results of the annual National Association of Women Lawyers survey later today. [ABA Journal]
* In case you’ve been sleeping under a rock, Texas struck down its ban on gay marriage, but stayed the ruling pending appeal. Seriously, of all places, this happened in Texas. Yeehaw! Ride ‘em, cowboys! [New York Times]
* New Mexico Law didn’t like what it found after auditing its SBA’s off-campus bank account. FYI: the SBA apparently isn’t supposed to spend money on bars, liquor, and restaurants. Who knew? [Albequerque Journal]
* “I don’t want to pay for someone else’s peculiar behavior.” Amanda Knox’s ex-boyfriend, Raffaele Sollecito, is changing his tune about his former flame as their appeal date gets closer and closer. [CNN]
* A source says the casualties at Kasowitz were a matter of “managing the pipeline” after work involving the credit crisis dried up. Don’t worry, he says the firm’s still really busy. Aww, someone will believe you. [New York Law Journal]
* Sorry, folks, but if you want to work in Biglaw, taking classes during law school like “Law and Unicorns” isn’t going to cut it. Try to stick to the boring stuff, and you probably won’t get dinged as often. [Volokh Conspiracy / Washington Post]
* Oregon’s AG is refusing to defend the state’s ban on same-sex marriage because it “cannot withstand a federal constitutional challenge under any standard of review.” That’s just fabulous, darling. [Bloomberg]
* Career alternatives for attorneys: Olympic gold medalist. Jennifer Jones, in-house counsel at National Bank Financial, helped Canada’s curling team take the win this week in Sochi. You go, girl! [The Star]
* Say hi to this century’s Stella Liebeck. A woman is suing Dunkin’ Donuts after suffering second and third degree burns to her crotchal region after spilling her hot apple cider. [New Jersey Law Journal (reg. req.)]
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: firstname.lastname@example.org.
Please note that Evan Jowers and Robert Kinney are still in Hong Kong and will stay FOR THE REMAINDER OF THIS WEEK. We still have a handful of available slots for meetings with our Asia Chronicles fans. If we have not been in touch lately, reach out and let us know when we could meet! There is no need for an agenda at all. Most of our in-person meetings on these trips are with folks who understand that improving a legal practice through lateral hiring is an information-driven process that takes time to handle correctly.
Regarding trends in lateral US associate hiring in Hong Kong, we of course keep much of what we know off of this blog. Based on placement revenue, though, Kinney is having one of our most successful years ever in Asia. We are helping a number of our law firm clients with M&A, fund formation, cap markets, project finance, FCPA and disputes openings. These are very specific needs in many cases, so a conversation with us before jumping in may be helpful. As always, we like to be sure to get the maximum number of interviews per submission, using a well-informed, highly targeted, and selective approach, taking into account short, medium and long-term career aims.
Making a well informed decision during a job search is easier said than done – the information we provide comes from 10 years of being the market leader in US attorney placements at the top tier firms in Asia. There is no substitute for having known a hiring partner since he/she was an associate or for having helped a partner grow his or her practice from zip to zooming, and this is happily where we stand today – with years of background information on just about every relevant person in all the markets we serve, and most especially in Hong Kong/China/Greater Asia. So get in touch and get a download from us this week if we can fit it in, or soon in any case!
The legal industry is being disrupted at every level by technological advances. While legal tech entrepreneurs and innovators are racing to create a more efficient and productive future, there is widespread indifference on the part of attorneys toward these emerging technologies.
When the LexisNexis Cloud Technology Survey results were reported earlier this year, it showed that attorneys were starting to peer less skeptically into the future, and slowly but surely leaning more toward all the benefits the law cloud has to offer.
Because let’s face it, plenty of attorneys are perhaps a bit too comfortable with their “system” of practice management, which may or may not include neon highlighters, sticky notes, dog-eared file folders, and a word processing program that was last updated when the term “raise the roof” was still de rigueur.