Author: TSA Press

Fennemore
Craig
is
officially
packing
its
boots
and
heading
to
Texas.
The
Am
Law
200
firm

announced
a
merger
with
San
Antonio
labor
&
employment
boutique
Schmoyer
Reinhard,
bringing
all
11
of
the
boutique’s
attorneys
into
the
fold
and
boosting
Fennemore’s
office
tally
to
23.

The
move
marks
the
latest
step
in
Fennemore’s
growth
strategy.
CEO
James
Goodnow
said
the
firm’s
expansion
spurt
made
one
thing
painfully
clear:
their
labor
and
employment
practice
wasn’t
keeping
pace.

“We’ve
had
success
in
growth,
but
as
we’ve
done
that,
we
realized
that
there
were
some
practice
areas
that
we
needed
to
fortify,”
Goodnow
explained,
noting
that
while
Fennemore
already
has
strong
L&E
talent,
“we
didn’t
see
the
labor
and
employment
bench
growing
at
the
same
clip”
as
the
rest
of
the
firm.

Enter
San
Antonio’s
labor
&
employment
firm,
Schmoyer
Reinhard.

Not
only
are
Shannon
Schmoyer
and
Christine
Reinhard
bringing
their
specialized
expertise,
but
they’re
also
bringing
a
client
roster
stuffed
with
national
corporations.

“The
majority
of
our
client
base
is
large,
nationwide
corporations,
and
we’ve
just
been
super,
super
fortunate,”
Schmoyer
said,
clearly
aware
that
in
Biglaw,
nothing
says
“match
made
in
heaven”
quite
like
a
stacked
client
list.

Reinhard
highlighted
a
different
advantage
for
her
team:
joining
a
firm
with
the
tech
horsepower
to
push
forward
on
innovation.

“With
technology,
the
advent
of
AI
and
being
able
to
do
that
ethically,
responsibly
in
the
way
we
should,
that’s
what’s
exciting,”
she
said.
“That’s
not
something
that
you
can
necessarily
do
as
a
small
firm
—
at
least
not
easily.”

Translation:
AI
is
great,
but
it
costs
money.
Fennemore
has
money.
Sold.

The
merger
also
reflects
a
deliberate
strategic
move
into
Texas
—
a
state
that
has
become
the
hottest
legal
market
in
the
country
for
firms
trying
to
plant
flags,
rack
up
revenue,
and
maybe
get
a
decent
plate
of
brisket
along
the
way.

“Texas
has
been
at
the
top
of
our
potential
expansion
markets
for
some
time
now,”
Goodnow
said.
“And
you
look
within
Texas
and
you
see
that
San
Antonio,
in
fact,
is
one
of
the
fastest
growing
cities.
And
if
you
look
even
deeper
than
that,
you
see
that
San
Antonio
doesn’t
have
the
same
level
of
Am
Law
200
firms
in
it,
so
it’s
not
as
saturated
as
a
Dallas
or
a
Houston.”

In
other
words:
ripe
for
the
picking.

With
this
move,
Fennemore
continues
its
transformation
from
regional
mainstay
to
national
player,
and
if
Texas
is
any
indication,
the
firm
has
no
plans
to
slow
down.

---

Kathryn
Rubino
is
a
Senior
Editor
at
Above
the
Law,
host
of

The
Jabot
podcast,
and
co-host
of

Thinking
Like
A
Lawyer.
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 or
Mastodon

@[email protected].

While
most
of
us
celebrated
Thanksgiving,
some
of
Trump’s
phony
U.S.
Attorneys
were
the
real
turkeys.
First,
a
conservative
leaning
panel
of
the
Eleventh
Circuit

affirmed
the
million
dollar
sanctions
against
Donald
Trump
and
the
parking
garage
lawyer
he
claims
to
have
running
the
District
of
New
Jersey.
Then
his
Eastern
District
cosplaying
prosecutor
managed

to
lose
not
one,
but
two
of
the
high
profile
revenge
cases
she
brought.
In
other
news,
a
major
firm
announced

a
new
look
summer
associate
program
as
it
tries
to
deal
with
the
law
school
recruiting
free-for-all
that
everyone
hates,
yet
no
one
seems
able
to
do
anything
about.

It
is
difficult
for
today’s
youth
to
believe,
but
the
snarky
T-shirt
is
a
relatively
recent
innovation.
Though
they
are
now
everywhere,
until
the
late
1990s
one
almost
never
saw
another
person
wearing
a
shirt
that
read
“Stop
looking
at
my
nuts”
with
a
pair
of
the
threaded
metal
hardware
implements
pictured,
or
perhaps
one
with
a
sports
figure
on
it
and
“I
just
hope
both
teams
have
fun.”
My
personal
favorite
had
the
letters
“FU”
dressed
up
a
bit
to
look
like
an
abbreviation
for
a
university,
but
really
meant,
ya
know,
“F
you.”

One
of
the
more
popular
(and
clean)
vintage
snarky
T-shirt
options
says
“The
beatings
will
continue
until
morale
improves.”
Nobody

really
knows
where
this
slogan
came
from
(there
are
rumors
of
a
naval
origin),
but
it
kind
of
fits
perfectly
with
the
Trump
administration’s
overall
philosophy
in
the
current
moment.

I
don’t
think
I
have
to
explain
to
my
normal
readers,
but
in
case
this
gets
picked
up
by
a
news
aggregator,
let’s
be
clear.
“The
beatings
will
continue
until
morale
improves”
is
funny
because
you
obviously
can’t
force
a
group
of
people
to
improve
their
spirits
by
inflicting
violence
on
them.
It
will,
in
fact,
have
the
opposite
effect.

This
exact
counterproductive
approach
has
become
de
rigueur
across
nearly
every
facet
of
the
Trump
administration’s
policy
portfolio.
All
those
violent
ICE
raids
full
of
masked
agents
with
no
accountability
who
are
largely
targeting
nonviolent
immigrants
with
no
criminal
records
(that
is,
when
they’re
not

pummeling
journalists,
protesters,
priests,
and
innocent
bystanders)?
People
hate
them,
and
it
has
caused

voters’
views
of
ICE
in
general
to
plummet.

So
does
the
Trump
administration
walk
them
back,
tone
down
the
violence,
or
prosecute
the
worst
ICE
agents
out
there
who
are
giving
all
of
America
a
bad
name?
Nope.
Donald
Trump
thinks
there
should
be
even
more
ICE
raids,
and
that

ICE
agents
should
be
even
more
violent.

There
is
no
shortage
of
physical
beatings
rained
down
by
agents
of
this
administration,
spurred
by
Trump’s
personal
directives.
His
rhetoric
is
no
less
sparing
than
the
fists
of
his
goons,
like
when
he
recently
insinuated
that
several
Democratic

lawmakers
should
be
executed
for
the
grave
crime
of
reminding
service
members
not
to
commit
actual
crimes.
Again,
a
huge
majority
of
Americans

at
least
claim
to
be
concerned
about
this
kind
of
extreme
political
rhetoric,
which
has
not
stopped
Trump
from
doubling
down
on
it.

Perhaps
the
economic
cudgel
is
the
largest
in
Trump’s
arsenal.
We
know
higher
prices
are
among
voters’
top
priorities,
and
we
also
know
with
almost
scientific
precision
what
the
federal
government
can
do
to
address
high
prices:
keep
interest
rates
up
and
tear
down
trade
barriers.
Trump
has,
of
course,
sought
the
opposite
of
each
of
these
(he
did,
begrudgingly,

just
roll
back
tariffs
on
a
number
of
food
items,
all
while
he
“insisted”
as
Reuters
put
it,
or
“lied”
as
I
would
put
it,
that
the
United
States
has
“virtually
no
inflation”).
This
is
all
to
say
nothing
of
Trump’s
repeated
economic
assaults
on
law
firms,
educational
institutions,
and
even
entire
states
that
he
feels
have
been
critical
of
him.

Maybe
Trump
simply
does
not
care.
Perhaps
he
does
not
mind
being
reviled,
or
going
down
in
history
as
the
worst
president.
I
think
he
does
mind,
though.
Nobody
works
so
hard
to
put
on
such
a
facade,
slaps
his
name
on
so
many
things,
or
brags
so
relentlessly
without
harboring
a
compulsive
concern
about
what
other
people
think.

Trump
has
not
learned,
and
seems
incapable
of
learning,
that
he
is
not
unpopular
because
he
has
failed
to
silence
critics,
he
is
unpopular
(in
part)
because
he
tries
so
hard
to
silence
his
critics.
If
he
put
half
the
effort
he
puts
into
unsuccessful
attempts
to
control
the
narrative
into
actually
improving
the
lives
of
normal
Americans,
he
might
not
have
such
problems.

“The
beatings
will
continue
until
MAGA
improves”
appears
to
be
the
cold
reality
we
will
all
be
living
under
for
the
next
three
years.
Can’t
wait
to
see
all
the
fun
insubordination
this
leads
to.

---

Jonathan
Wolf
is
a
civil
litigator
and
author
of Your
Debt-Free
JD (affiliate
link).
He
has
taught
legal
writing,
written
for
a
wide
variety
of
publications,
and
made
it
both
his
business
and
his
pleasure
to
be
financially
and
scientifically
literate.
Any
views
he
expresses
are
probably
pure
gold,
but
are
nonetheless
solely
his
own
and
should
not
be
attributed
to
any
organization
with
which
he
is
affiliated.
He
wouldn’t
want
to
share
the
credit
anyway.
He
can
be
reached
at [email protected].

Buckle
up,
the
allegations
in
this
lawsuit
against
the
University
of
Southern
California
are
wild.

USC
Gould
School
of
Law
Professor
Camille
Rich

filed
a
federal
lawsuit
claiming
that
the
university
ignored
her
Title
IX
complaints
about
her
ex-husband’s
alleged
affair
with
a
student
—
and
then
retaliated
against
her
when
she
dared
to
speak
up.

According
to
the
lawsuit,
Camille
Rich
and
her
ex-husband,
Stephen
M.
Rich,
also
a
professor
at
USC
Law,
and
now
a
vice
dean
of
the
law
school,
divorced
in
2019.
During
the
divorce
process,
Camille
filed
a
Title
IX
complaint
alleging
Stephen
was
carrying
on
an
affair
with
a
student.

In
the
lawsuit,
Camille
says
years
of
dealing
with
a
hostile
work
environment
and
the
implosion
of
her
marriage
left
her
with
PTSD,
trauma
she
says
worsened
when
she
learned
Stephen’s
relationship
with
the
student
was
ongoing.
Stephen
later
married
the
former
student,
Deanna
Rafla-Yuan,
and
the
couple
had
twins
in
March
2020.

This
wasn’t
just
messy.
This
was
nuclear.

Camille
also
alleges
that
during
their
separation,
Stephen
attempted
to
defame
her
to
colleagues,
“painting
himself
the
tormented
victim”
in
an
effort
to
pressure
her
into
returning
to
the
marriage.
A
bold
strategy,
which
did
not,
in
fact,
pay
off.

Camille
claims
the
university
conducted
a
“perfunctory
and
sham
inquiry”
into
her
Title
IX
complaints,
dismissing
them
as
unfounded
without
even
interviewing
Stephen.
She
says
that
instead
of
protecting
her,
USC
officials
retaliated
by
denying
disability
accommodations
she
needed
for
PTSD,
refusing
to
restore
lost
pay
for
trauma-related
absences,
and
handing
her
poor
performance
evaluations.
She
also
alleges
that
then–dean
and
current
provost
Andrew
Guzman
denied
her
request
to
cap
class
sizes,
and
that
Guzman’s
personal
friendship
with
Stephen
made
impartial
review
impossible.

USC,
for
its
part,
says
oh
absolutely
not.

In
a
statement,
the
university
insisted:
“The
lawsuit
has
no
legal
merit.
We
look
forward
to
defending
the
university’s
position
in
court.”

Stephen’s
now-wife,
Rafla-Yuan,

also
issued
a
statement
pushing
back
hard
on
the
narrative,
saying
the
complaint
contains
“numerous
untrue
statements”
about
her
and
her
relationship
with
Stephen.
She
insists
their
romantic
relationship
began

after
she
left
USC
Law.

---

Kathryn
Rubino
is
a
Senior
Editor
at
Above
the
Law,
host
of

The
Jabot
podcast,
and
co-host
of

Thinking
Like
A
Lawyer.
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 or
Mastodon

@[email protected].

The
Trump
administration’s
position
on
drug
prices
is
that
Americans
pay
too
much
while
other
countries
don’t
pay
nearly
enough.
A
new

trade
deal
with
the
United
Kingdom
is
addressing
that
imbalance,
raising
prices
the
national
health
system
will
pay
for
new
medicines
in
exchange
for
tariff
exemptions
on
U.K.
pharmaceutical
exports
valued
at
about
$3.5
billion
a
year.

The
deal
announced
Monday
is
an
update
to
a

broad
trade
deal
the
U.S.
struck
with
the
U.K.
in
May.
While
the
countries
describe
this
new
deal
as
an
“agreement
in
principle,”
it
sets
a
precedent
that
could
shape
pharmaceutical
pacts
the
Trump
administration
is
still
pursuing
with
other
countries.

Before
the
U.K.’s
National
Health
Service
(NHS)
can
use
a
new
medicine,
it
must
first
be
evaluated
by
the
government’s
National
Institute
for
Health
and
Care
Excellence
(NICE),
which
assesses
a
drug’s
cost
effectiveness
to
the
health
service.

NICE’s
current
cost
effectiveness
benchmark
is
a
range
of
£20,000
to
£30,000
(about
$26,412
to
$39,618)
per
quality
adjusted
life
year.
That
means
a
cost-effective
drug
should
lead
to
the
equivalent
of
one
additional
year
of
health
and
improved
quality
of
life
for
no
greater
than
£20,000
to
£30,000
more
than
the
cost
of
the
current
standard
of
care.
Consequently,
a
drug
shown
to
be
safe
and
therapeutically
effective
in
clinical
trials
may
end
up
being
turned
down
by
NICE
because
it
is
not
cost
effective,
though
the
agency
said
it
applies
a
higher
threshold
for
medicines
developed
for
ultra-rare
conditions.

The
new
agreement
boosts
the
cost-effectiveness
standard
by
25%,
raising
it
to
£25,000
to
£35,000.
It’s
the
first
major
increase
in
this
threshold
in
more
than
20
years,
the
U.K.
government
said
in
its
own

announcement
of
the
deal.
NICE
said
it
approves
about
91%
of
the
drugs
it
evaluates,
amounting
to
about
70
new
drugs
annually.
The
agency
calculates
that
the
threshold
could
lead
to
three
to
five
additional
approvals
each
year.
NICE
expects
this
new
standard
will
take
effect
this
coming
April.

The
U.K.
government
frames
the
higher
threshold
as
a
way
to
improve
access
to
innovative
new
treatments
that
might
otherwise
have
fallen
short
in
NICE’s
evaluation.
These
products
include
drugs
for
cancers
and
rare
diseases.
The
government
also
says
this
deal
will
encourage
global
pharmaceutical
companies
to
prioritize
the
U.K.
for
early
launches
of
new
medicines,
which
could
make
British
patients
among
the
first
in
the
world
to
access
new
treatments.

The
Trump
administration
has
ongoing
investigations
under
Section
232
of
the
Trade
Expansion
Act,
which
could
support
the
imposition
of
tariffs
on
the
basis
of
national
security.
These
tariffs
could
be
imposed
on
particular
sectors,
such
as
pharmaceuticals.

The
U.K.
government
estimates
that
the
country’s
annual
pharmaceutical
exports
are
valued
at
more
than
£5
billion
(about
$3.5
billion).
The
new
agreement
exempts
U.K.-produced
drugs
from
potential
Section
232
tariffs
for
the
remainder
of
President
Trump’s
term
in
office.
This
exemption
includes
pharmaceutical
ingredients
and
medical
technology.
The
agreement
also
spares
U.K.-produced
drugs
from
Section
301
tariffs,
which
could
be
imposed
if
an
investigation
finds
unfair
trade
practices.
This
exemption
also
extends
for
the
remainder
of
Trump’s
term.

In
the
past
year,
many
pharmaceutical
companies
have
increased
their
U.S.
drug
manufacturing
capabilities
as
a

way
to
avoid
potential
tariffs
on
drugs
and
pharmaceutical
ingredients
made
overseas.
In
some
cases,
the
U.S.
construction
plans
appear
to
be
coming
at
the
expense
of
capital
investments
in
countries
such
as
the
U.K.
For
example,
in
recent
months,
Merck
has
canceled
plans
for
a
London
research
center
while
AstraZeneca
paused
plans
for
a
research
site
in
Cambridge,
England,
even
as
both
companies
ramp
up
investment
in
manufacturing
and
research
infrastructure
throughout
the
U.S.

The
new
agreement
could
restore
U.K.
competitiveness
in
the
global
life
sciences
supply
chain,
Jon
Roffman,
principal,
pharmaceuticals
&
biotech
at
consultancy
ZS,
said
in
an
email.
Zero
tariffs
encourage
pharma
firms
to
maintain
or
even
increase
their
R&D
spending
in
the
U.K.
While
the
U.K.
frames
the
deal
as
increasing
access
to
medicines
for
its
citizens,
it
could
also
accelerate
delivery
of
novel
therapies
to
patients
in
the
U.S.

“Faster,
lower-cost
cross-border
movement
of
medicines
reduces
logistical
friction
and
opens
the
door
for
smoother
launches
of
innovative
treatments,
especially
novel
or
high-value
therapies
that
rely
on
stable
supply
networks,”
Roffman
said.

In
a
prepared
statement,
U.S.
Trade
Representative
Jamieson
Greer
said
the
U.S.
agreement
with
the
U.K.
will
help
drive
investment
and
innovation
in
both
countries.
He
added
that
the
Trump
Administration
is
reviewing
the
pharmaceutical
pricing
practices
of
many
other
U.S.
trading
partners
and
“hopes
that
they
will
follow
suit
with
constructive
negotiations.”

Photo:
Jason
Alden/Bloomberg,
via
Getty
Images

Some
firms
enjoy
keeping
it
cool
with
associates
by
offering
bonuses
on
top
of
bonuses
to
flex
their
financial
prowess.
In
fact,
the
latest
firm
to
announce
bonuses
announced
a

different
round
of
bonuses
just
weeks
ago.

Sources
report
that
McKool
Smith
—
the
Texas-based
complex
trial
firm
that’s
been
offering
cash
to
associates
hand
over
fist
for
years
—
announced
its
year-end
bonuses
earlier
this
week,
and
it’s
not
surprising
that
the
firm
is
matching
the

Cravath
scale,
complete
with

Milbank’s
summer
bonuses,.
As
a
cherry
on
top
of
this
bonus
sundae,
the
firm
is
offering
additional
cash
to
associates
who
have
been
billing
their
butts
off,
with
some
attorneys
walking
away
with
bonuses
exceeding
the
market
scale
by
15%,
25%,
or
35%
and
higher.
If
you
recall,
just
before
Thanksgiving,
McKool
issued

special
appreciation
bonuses
to
all
attorneys
at
the
firm,
ranging
from
$2,500
to
$10,000,
based
on
their
tenure
at
the
firm.
No
matter
how
you
cut
it,
lawyers
at
McKool
are
making
more
money
than
their
colleagues
are
at
other
firms.

Here’s
what
the
base
bonus
scale
looks
like
at
McKool:

Bonuses
will
hit
bank
accounts
prior
to
December
19,
2025.
Congratulations
to
everyone
at
McKool
Smith!

Remember
everyone,
we
depend
on
your
tips
to
stay
on
top
of
compensation
updates,
so
when
your
firm
announces
or
matches,
please
text
us
(646-820-8477)
or email
us (subject
line:
“[Firm
Name]
Bonus/Matches”).
Please
include
the
memo
if
available.
You
can
take
a
photo
of
the
memo
and
send
it
via
text
or
email
if
you
don’t
want
to
forward
the
original
PDF
or
Word
file.

And
if
you’d
like
to
sign
up
for
ATL’s
Bonus
Alerts
(which
is
the
alert
list
we
also
use
for
salary
announcements),
please
scroll
down
and
enter
your
email
address
in
the
box
below
this
post.
If
you
previously
signed
up
for
the
bonus
alerts,
you
don’t
need
to
do
anything.
You’ll
receive
an
email
notification
within
minutes
of
each
bonus
announcement
that
we
publish.
Thanks
for
your
help!

---

Staci
Zaretsky is
the
managing
editor
of
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 Bluesky, X/Twitter,
and Threads, or
connect
with
her
on LinkedIn.

*
Elite
law
firms
are
doing
all
the
heavy
lifting
among
the
Am
Law
50.
[American
Lawyer]

*
Trump
administration
continues
firing
immigration
judges
en
masse.
[Reuters]

*
Reviewing
Biglaw
cafeteria
options.
In
the
UK,
but
still.
[Legal
Cheek]

*
Law
professors’
divorce
gets
USC
Law
sued.
[ABA
Journal]

*
It’s
Tech
vs.
Media
as
amici
line
up
in
the
ROSS
and
Westlaw
copyright
battle.
[Legaltech
News]

*
A
new
documentary
chronicles
what
it’s
like
to
argue
before
the
Supreme
Court.
[Bloomberg
Law
News
via
YouTube]

*
Daniel
Richman
looking
to
block
DOJ
from
digging
into
materials
seized
years
ago.
[CBS
News]

*
Law
firm
referred
to
DOJ
over
misconduct
allegations.
[Law360]

Virginia
Is
For
Responsibility
Abdicators:
Virginia
State
Bar
throws
their
hands
up
instead
of
holding
Lindsey
Halligan
responsible.
They’re
Digging
Up
Skeletons.
Literally:
Conservatives
want
to
dig
up
William
O.
Douglas’s
bones
to
own
the
libs.
More
Bonuses!:
Sidley
Austin,
Sheppard
Mullin.
Once,
Twice,
Three
Times
The
Fentanyl:
Alabama
lawyer
accused
of
trying
to
kill
her
husband,
among
other
things.
The
Supremacy
Clause
Gives
And
Takes
Away:
State-level
workers’
rights
fall
through
because
of
federal
preemption.
Alex
Spiro,
Attorney
And
Witness:
Judge
lets
rare
occasion
fly
in
Twitter
price
manipulation
case.
King
&
Spalding
Appellate
Attorney
Dies
Climbing
New
Zealand’s
Tallest
Mountain:
We
extend
our
condolences.

Ed.
Note:
Welcome
to
our
daily
feature

Trivia
Question
of
the
Day!

What
law
school
did
Bruce
Wayne,
aka
Batman,
attend?

Hint:
It
was
revealed
in
Detective
Comics
#439,
via
a
diploma
on
the
wall.

See
the
answer
on
the
next
page.

Funny
thing
about
being
a
lawyer
and
testifying
on
your
client’s
behalf
—
the
zealous
advocacy
baked
into
your
job
makes
people
a
little
suspicious
of
whatever
you
say
on
the
witness
stand.
Despite
that,
we
may
see
Alex
Spiro
stepping
up
as
Elon
Musk’s
witness
against
the
accusations
that
Musk
manipulated
Twitter’s
stock
prices
before
he
was
forced
to
buy
the
company.

Reuters
has
coverage:

Elon
Musk
has
persuaded
a
judge
that
his
longtime
lawyer
Alex
Spiro
can
represent
him
in
a
shareholder
lawsuit
over
the
billionaire’s
2022
Twitter
acquisition
even
though
he
may
be
a
trial
witness
in
the
case.

San
Francisco-based
U.S.
District
Judge
Charles
Breyer
in
a
ruling
on
Monday
rejected
the
plaintiffs’
objections…Musk’s
lawyers
called
the
effort
to
disqualify
Spiro
a
“Hail
Mary”
before
a
January
2026
trial,
saying
the
investors
waited
too
long
to
object
to
Spiro’s
role.

Can
Elon
have
a
normal
trial
for

once?
If
it
isn’t
him
making
it
okay
for
his
lawyers
to
testify
on
his
behalf,
he’s

got
a
judge
with
sizeable
investments
in
Tesla
or
is

trying
to
turn
Texas
into
the
new
Delaware
if
it
means
he
gets
better
legal
outcomes.
The
quirk
in
norms
will
probably
a
wash
at
the
end
of
the
day
—
chances
are
the
guy
getting
paid
$3,000
an
hour
will
find
a
way
to
get
whatever
narrative
he
needs
to
on
the
witness
stand
without
setting
foot
on
it,
but
it
goes
to
show
the
wackiness
that
can
arise
when
plaintiffs
don’t
object
to
lawyer-witnesses
early
on.

Musk
Wins
Fight
To
Keep
Lawyer
Alex
Spiro
In
Twitter
Trial [Reuters]

---

Chris
Williams
became
a
social
media
manager
and
assistant
editor
for
Above
the
Law
in
June
2021.
Prior
to
joining
the
staff,
he
moonlighted
as
a
minor
Memelord™
in
the
Facebook
group Law
School
Memes
for
Edgy
T14s
.
 He
endured
Missouri
long
enough
to
graduate
from
Washington
University
in
St.
Louis
School
of
Law.
He
is
a
former
boatbuilder
who
is
learning
to
swim, is
interested
in
critical
race
theory,
philosophy,
and
humor,
and
has
a
love
for
cycling
that
occasionally
annoys
his
peers.
You
can
reach
him
by
email
at [email protected]
and
by
tweet
at @WritesForRent.