Anatomy Of A Modern Merger: A Step-By-Step Guide For GCs – Above the Law



Editor’s
note
:
First
in
a
three-part
series.  

Although
the
deals
market
has
shown
a
modest
rebound
in
early
2025,
a
recent
report
by
Deloitte
notes
that
today’s
dealmakers
must
“navigate
perpetual
uncertainty.”

This
uncertainty
is
driven
by
numerous
factors:
economic
changes,
evolving
risk
management,
and
emerging
technologies,
for
example. 

As
a
result,

Deloitte
says
,
“pivoting
has
emerged
as
a
core
competency”
for
dealmakers. 

The
same
goes
for
law
departments
involved
with
a
corporate
transaction

or
even
the
possibility
of
a
future
transaction.

“‘Logistics’
is
an
important
word
here,
because
the
whole
M&A
process
is
also
a
process
of
logistics,”
says
Kariem
Abdellatif,
the
head
of
Mercator
by
Citco
(Mercator),
a
specialist
entity
management
provider
that
helps
organizations
manage
their
global
entity
portfolios,
including
during
complex
M&A
transactions.  

Having
the
right
partner
in
place
to
oversee
a
transaction’s
numerous
and
intricate
details
will
allow
the
lawyers
to
focus
on
high-level
work
like
pricing
and
negotiation,
he
notes.
This,
in
turn,
enables
the
flexibility
that
today’s
dealmakers
must
cultivate.  

In
this
series
presented
by
our
friends
at
Mercator,
we’ll
be
providing
a
step-by-step
guide
for
general
counsel
navigating
a
merger
or
other
corporate
transaction.
To
start,
we’re
exploring
best
practices
for
corporate
law
departments
in
the
pre-merger
phase. 

Stay
tuned
for
our
upcoming
articles
detailing
how
GCs
can
help
negotiate
and
close
a
deal,
as
well
as
how
the
law
department
can
help
integrate
organizations
post-merger. 

We’ll
also
be
discussing
these
topics
in
a
webinar.

You
can
pre-register
here.


Get
Good
Data
(and
Know
What
to
Do
With
It) 

A
first
step
for
any
legal
department
involved
in
a
corporate
transaction
is
to
understand
the
portfolio
of
companies
involved.
The
only
way
to
do
this
is
by
gathering
trustworthy
data. 

“When
it
comes
to
data,
there
are
several
critical
questions
that
need
answering,”
Abdellatif
says.
“What
information
do
we
need?
Where
is
it
stored?
Who
maintains
it?
How
can
we
verify
its
accuracy?
Is
it
up
to
date?
Getting
clear
answers
to
these
questions
early
on
is
essential
for
making
informed
decisions
and
planning
effective
integration.”

A
platform
like
Mercator’s
Entica
can
take
this
a
step
further
by
applying
that
data
to
create
detailed
and
interactive
corporate
org
charts.
The
platform
can
also
generate
hypothetical
charts
to
model
potential
acquisitions. 

These
charts
map
out
the
“family
tree”
of
an
organization

showing
which
entity
sits
on
top,
what
happens
if
entities’
locations
are
moved,
what
it
would
mean
if
an
entity
were
liquidated.

“Our
technology
enables
legal
teams
to
visualize
the
entire
org
chart,”
Abdellatif
says.
“From
there
they
can
toy
around
with
it
to
see
how
changes
might
affect
the
overall
corporate
structure.
This
is
particularly
valuable
during
M&A
discussions,
where
understanding
complex
entity
relationship
is
key.” 


Determine
Your
Lane

While
gathering
corporate
data
is
critical,
knowledge
of
a
potential
deal
must
typically
be
kept
confidential
outside
of
a
few
key
stakeholders. 

When
the
GC
is
brought
under
the
umbrella,
their
first
step
is
to
determine
their
role. 

Will
the
GC
be
engaging
outside
counsel?
Will
they
be
managing
these
lawyers?
Will
the
GC
be
the
primary
point
of
contact
for
the
transaction?  

The
scope
of
these
potential
roles
varies
widely,
notes
Josh
Hollingsworth,
an
M&A
partner
with
Barnes
&
Thornburg
LLP.

The
GC
of
a
company
being
acquired,
for
example,
might
be
limited
to
assisting
the
buyer
in
conducting
due
diligence.
In
other
circumstances,
the
GC
might
be
expected
to
lead
the
entire
deal.

“Navigating
where
they
fit
in
and
asking
affirmative
questions
so
that
there
aren’t
any
assumptions

it’s
important
for
a
GC
to
just
figure
out
what
their
role
is
in
some
cases,”
Hollingsworth
says.


Master
Organizational
Psychology

When
a
GC
is
involved
in
advancing
a
transaction,
they
must
draw
on
their
soft
skills
as
much
as
their
legal
training
in
the
pre-merger
phase. 

Thinking
strategically
about
the
organization
and
the
stakeholders
involved
is
a
key
to
success.

“I
don’t
think
there’s
a
specific
playbook
for
each
circumstance,”
Hollingsworth
says.
“I
think
it’s
just
a
matter
of
being
aware
of
everyone
who’s
involved
and
making
sure
that
you
understand
the
universe
of
how
this
transaction’s
going
to
affect
everybody.” 

An
initial
step
is
to
determine
who
will
be
brought
into
the
deal,
and
who
will
not
be
informed. 

This
requires
thinking
through
who
in
the
organization
will
be
important

the
IT,
HR,
and
risk
management
teams,
for
example. 

“If
nobody
in
HR
knows,
it’s
going
to
be
hard
to
get
through
employee
and
benefits
diligence,”
Hollingsworth
says.
“If
nobody
in
IT
knows
about
a
transaction,
and
an
IT
issue
comes
up,
similarly,
that
will
be
challenging.”

Abdellatif
notes
that
technology
like
Mercator’s
Entica
system
can
play
a
role
in
ensuring
the
knowledge
of
the
deal
sits
only
with
the
stakeholders
who
are
looped
in.

“What
we
want
to
make
certain
is
that
data
access
is
available
to
those
who
need
it,
but
not
beyond
that,”
Abdellatif
says.
“That
data
is
only
accessible
to
those
who
actually
require
it,
and
you
don’t
have
people
rummaging
through
information
they
shouldn’t.” 


Understand
Your
Team

It’s
also
important
to
gauge
the
likely
motivations
of
each
stakeholder
with
a
role
in
the
transaction. 

Hollingsworth
notes
that
anyone
informed
of
a
potential
deal
will
first
ask
themself
a
simple
question. 

“Literally,
‘What
does
this
mean
for
me?’
is
going
to
be
the
first
question
that
everybody
who’s
brought
under
the
tent
is
going
to
think
about,
and
that’s
just
human
nature,”
Hollingsworth
says.
“So
just
being
prepared
to
work
through
those
dynamics
is
important
for
a
GC.” 

If
a
company
is
being
acquired,
for
example,
that
could
be
seen
as
a
threat
to
many
stakeholders,
who
may
work
to
undermine
the
deal. 

It’s
true
of
acquiror
companies
as
well,
Hollingsworth
notes.
Some
may
see
someone
in
the
acquired
organization
as
a
threat
to
their
position.
Some
may
simply
think
it’s
too
much
work
to
go
through
with
the
deal.

Will
a
stakeholder
be
gaining
or
losing
in
job
title
and
status?
Are
there
financial
incentives,
like
parachute
payments
to
a
departing
CEO,
involved? 

“I
think
a
lot
of
people
take
it
for
granted
that
if
the
CEO
or
the
board
says,
‘We’re
gonna
do
something,’
that
we’re
gonna
do
it,”
Hollingsworth
says.
“What
ends
up
happening
in
any
group
dynamic
is
there
are
various
levels
of
resistance.”

For
a
company
potentially
being
acquired,
maintaining
impeccable
data
and
compliance
can
help
thwart
resistance
to
a
deal.
These
practices
can
even
provide
bargaining
leverage,
according
to
Abdellatif.

“Having
this
level
of
organization
builds
confidence
with
potential
acquirers
and
can
positively
influence
their
approach
to
the
transaction”
he
says. 

If
a
company
doesn’t
seem
to
have
well-maintained
regulatory
compliance,
by
contrast,
an
acquiring
company
will
likely
become
more
critical.

Technology
can
also
help.
Mercator’s
Entica,
for
example,
features
a
corporate
compliance
calendar
that
tracks
all
requirements
a
year
in
advance
and
ensures
a
company
maintains
proper
structures
around
compliance.

Abdellatif
has
seen
acquired
companies
impressing
acquirors
with
the
thoroughness
of
their
regulatory
compliance,
and
the
acquiring
companies
in
turn
seeking
to
adopt
their
systems.

This
thoroughness
can
also
help
stave
off
any
internal
resistance
to
a
deal.

“The
best
defense
is
making
sure
that
you
have
your
ducks
in
a
row,
that
your
information
and
data
is
properly
set
up,
and
that
you
can
demonstrate
just
how
effectively
you
run
your
department,”
he
says. 


Don’t
Forget
About
Your
JD

In
addition
to
organizational
management,
of
course,
a
GC
must
also
consider
legal
risks
at
this
stage.

One
top
risk
in
a
pre-merger
environment
is
confidentiality.
For
publicly
traded
companies,
insider
trading
laws
will
kick
in,
and
for
nonpublicly
traded
companies,
there
can
be
issues
with
employees
or
vendors
knowing
of
the
deal
at
the
early
stages.

A
GC
must
ensure
there
are
robust
nondisclosure
agreements

and
serious
consideration
around
which
internal
and
external
stakeholders
are
informed
to
begin
with. 

“Confidentiality
will
be
at
the
very
top
of
your
legal
risk
in
the
pre-transaction
phase,”
Hollingsworth
says.
“Similarly,
antitrust
considerations
go
hand-in-hand.”

Corporate
transactions
will
often
take
place
between
competing
companies,
which
must
make
a
pre-merger
filing
with
the
Federal
Trade
Commission
under
the
Hart-Scott-Rodino
Act.
If
there
are
foreign
operations,
a
variety
of
other
regulations
apply
as
well. 

Competing
companies
that
are
exploring
a
merger
must
also
be
careful
about
the
level
of
cooperation
during
this
stage
because
of
antitrust
concerns
known
as
“gun-jumping.” 

“The
expectation
is
that
you’re
going
to
operate
the
business
independently
all
the
way
up
through
closing,”
Hollingsworth
says. 


Leverage
Your
Tech

As
with
all
things
in
the
corporate
world,
AI-enabled
technology
is
playing
an
increasing
role
in
mergers
and
acquisitions. 

In
the
pre-merger
phase,
generative
AI
will
come
into
play
for
in-house
lawyers

particularly
when
drafting
pre-merger
documents
like
nondisclosure
agreements. 

New
technology
can
also
immediately
inform
counsel
of
“what’s
market,”
giving
negotiators
detailed
knowledge
of
precedent
regarding
every
aspect
of
a
transaction. 

The
Entica
platform
combines
workflows
with
data
management,
ensuring
actions
as
varied
as
filing
financial
statements,
appointing
directors
and
auditors,
and
executing
documents
are
all
tracked
and
accounted
for. 

It
allows
quick
access
to
this
data
throughout
a
company’s
full
portfolio,
and
segments
it
to
ensure
it’s
only
accessible
to
stakeholders
who
require
it. 

“When
you
come
back
to
logistics,
it
really
serves
as
the
backbone
in
many
ways,”
Abdellatif
says. 

Seasoned
practitioners
like
Hollingsworth
remember
the
due
diligence
process
of
decades
ago,
where
there
was
a
physical
data
room
that
contained
banker
boxes
full
of
documents
related
to
the
transaction.

These,
of
course,
have
been
replaced
by
online
data
rooms
that
can
be
accessed
24/7.
Similarly
to
due
diligence,
closings
and
negotiations
have
moved
from
in-person
to
virtual. 

For
negotiators,
though,
this
convenience
may
create
a
new
pitfall
to
avoid. 

If
you’ve
flown
across
the
country
for
an
in-person
meeting,
the
expectation
is
that
items
will
be
resolved
in
that
meeting,
Hollingsworth
notes.

“Allowing
virtual
negotiations
leads
to
more
iterations
of
the
document,”
he
says,
“and
it
may
actually
lead
to
the
negotiations
taking
longer.”


Stay
tuned
for
the
next
article
in
this
series,
where
we’ll
be
exploring
steps
to
consider
during
the
negotiation
and
closing
of
a
transaction. You
can
register
for
our
webinar
on
these
topics
here.

Anatomy Of A Modern Merger: A Step-By-Step Guide For GCs – Above the Law



Editor’s
note
:
First
in
a
three-part
series.  

Although
the
deals
market
has
shown
a
modest
rebound
in
early
2025,
a
recent
report
by
Deloitte
notes
that
today’s
dealmakers
must
“navigate
perpetual
uncertainty.”

This
uncertainty
is
driven
by
numerous
factors:
economic
changes,
evolving
risk
management,
and
emerging
technologies,
for
example. 

As
a
result,

Deloitte
says
,
“pivoting
has
emerged
as
a
core
competency”
for
dealmakers. 

The
same
goes
for
law
departments
involved
with
a
corporate
transaction

or
even
the
possibility
of
a
future
transaction.

“‘Logistics’
is
an
important
word
here,
because
the
whole
M&A
process
is
also
a
process
of
logistics,”
says
Kariem
Abdellatif,
the
head
of
Mercator
by
Citco
(Mercator),
a
specialist
entity
management
provider
that
helps
organizations
manage
their
global
entity
portfolios,
including
during
complex
M&A
transactions.  

Having
the
right
partner
in
place
to
oversee
a
transaction’s
numerous
and
intricate
details
will
allow
the
lawyers
to
focus
on
high-level
work
like
pricing
and
negotiation,
he
notes.
This,
in
turn,
enables
the
flexibility
that
today’s
dealmakers
must
cultivate.  

In
this
series
presented
by
our
friends
at
Mercator,
we’ll
be
providing
a
step-by-step
guide
for
general
counsel
navigating
a
merger
or
other
corporate
transaction.
To
start,
we’re
exploring
best
practices
for
corporate
law
departments
in
the
pre-merger
phase. 

Stay
tuned
for
our
upcoming
articles
detailing
how
GCs
can
help
negotiate
and
close
a
deal,
as
well
as
how
the
law
department
can
help
integrate
organizations
post-merger. 

We’ll
also
be
discussing
these
topics
in
a
webinar.

You
can
pre-register
here.


Get
Good
Data
(and
Know
What
to
Do
With
It) 

A
first
step
for
any
legal
department
involved
in
a
corporate
transaction
is
to
understand
the
portfolio
of
companies
involved.
The
only
way
to
do
this
is
by
gathering
trustworthy
data. 

“When
it
comes
to
data,
there
are
several
critical
questions
that
need
answering,”
Abdellatif
says.
“What
information
do
we
need?
Where
is
it
stored?
Who
maintains
it?
How
can
we
verify
its
accuracy?
Is
it
up
to
date?
Getting
clear
answers
to
these
questions
early
on
is
essential
for
making
informed
decisions
and
planning
effective
integration.”

A
platform
like
Mercator’s
Entica
can
take
this
a
step
further
by
applying
that
data
to
create
detailed
and
interactive
corporate
org
charts.
The
platform
can
also
generate
hypothetical
charts
to
model
potential
acquisitions. 

These
charts
map
out
the
“family
tree”
of
an
organization

showing
which
entity
sits
on
top,
what
happens
if
entities’
locations
are
moved,
what
it
would
mean
if
an
entity
were
liquidated.

“Our
technology
enables
legal
teams
to
visualize
the
entire
org
chart,”
Abdellatif
says.
“From
there
they
can
toy
around
with
it
to
see
how
changes
might
affect
the
overall
corporate
structure.
This
is
particularly
valuable
during
M&A
discussions,
where
understanding
complex
entity
relationship
is
key.” 


Determine
Your
Lane

While
gathering
corporate
data
is
critical,
knowledge
of
a
potential
deal
must
typically
be
kept
confidential
outside
of
a
few
key
stakeholders. 

When
the
GC
is
brought
under
the
umbrella,
their
first
step
is
to
determine
their
role. 

Will
the
GC
be
engaging
outside
counsel?
Will
they
be
managing
these
lawyers?
Will
the
GC
be
the
primary
point
of
contact
for
the
transaction?  

The
scope
of
these
potential
roles
varies
widely,
notes
Josh
Hollingsworth,
an
M&A
partner
with
Barnes
&
Thornburg
LLP.

The
GC
of
a
company
being
acquired,
for
example,
might
be
limited
to
assisting
the
buyer
in
conducting
due
diligence.
In
other
circumstances,
the
GC
might
be
expected
to
lead
the
entire
deal.

“Navigating
where
they
fit
in
and
asking
affirmative
questions
so
that
there
aren’t
any
assumptions

it’s
important
for
a
GC
to
just
figure
out
what
their
role
is
in
some
cases,”
Hollingsworth
says.


Master
Organizational
Psychology

When
a
GC
is
involved
in
advancing
a
transaction,
they
must
draw
on
their
soft
skills
as
much
as
their
legal
training
in
the
pre-merger
phase. 

Thinking
strategically
about
the
organization
and
the
stakeholders
involved
is
a
key
to
success.

“I
don’t
think
there’s
a
specific
playbook
for
each
circumstance,”
Hollingsworth
says.
“I
think
it’s
just
a
matter
of
being
aware
of
everyone
who’s
involved
and
making
sure
that
you
understand
the
universe
of
how
this
transaction’s
going
to
affect
everybody.” 

An
initial
step
is
to
determine
who
will
be
brought
into
the
deal,
and
who
will
not
be
informed. 

This
requires
thinking
through
who
in
the
organization
will
be
important

the
IT,
HR,
and
risk
management
teams,
for
example. 

“If
nobody
in
HR
knows,
it’s
going
to
be
hard
to
get
through
employee
and
benefits
diligence,”
Hollingsworth
says.
“If
nobody
in
IT
knows
about
a
transaction,
and
an
IT
issue
comes
up,
similarly,
that
will
be
challenging.”

Abdellatif
notes
that
technology
like
Mercator’s
Entica
system
can
play
a
role
in
ensuring
the
knowledge
of
the
deal
sits
only
with
the
stakeholders
who
are
looped
in.

“What
we
want
to
make
certain
is
that
data
access
is
available
to
those
who
need
it,
but
not
beyond
that,”
Abdellatif
says.
“That
data
is
only
accessible
to
those
who
actually
require
it,
and
you
don’t
have
people
rummaging
through
information
they
shouldn’t.” 


Understand
Your
Team

It’s
also
important
to
gauge
the
likely
motivations
of
each
stakeholder
with
a
role
in
the
transaction. 

Hollingsworth
notes
that
anyone
informed
of
a
potential
deal
will
first
ask
themself
a
simple
question. 

“Literally,
‘What
does
this
mean
for
me?’
is
going
to
be
the
first
question
that
everybody
who’s
brought
under
the
tent
is
going
to
think
about,
and
that’s
just
human
nature,”
Hollingsworth
says.
“So
just
being
prepared
to
work
through
those
dynamics
is
important
for
a
GC.” 

If
a
company
is
being
acquired,
for
example,
that
could
be
seen
as
a
threat
to
many
stakeholders,
who
may
work
to
undermine
the
deal. 

It’s
true
of
acquiror
companies
as
well,
Hollingsworth
notes.
Some
may
see
someone
in
the
acquired
organization
as
a
threat
to
their
position.
Some
may
simply
think
it’s
too
much
work
to
go
through
with
the
deal.

Will
a
stakeholder
be
gaining
or
losing
in
job
title
and
status?
Are
there
financial
incentives,
like
parachute
payments
to
a
departing
CEO,
involved? 

“I
think
a
lot
of
people
take
it
for
granted
that
if
the
CEO
or
the
board
says,
‘We’re
gonna
do
something,’
that
we’re
gonna
do
it,”
Hollingsworth
says.
“What
ends
up
happening
in
any
group
dynamic
is
there
are
various
levels
of
resistance.”

For
a
company
potentially
being
acquired,
maintaining
impeccable
data
and
compliance
can
help
thwart
resistance
to
a
deal.
These
practices
can
even
provide
bargaining
leverage,
according
to
Abdellatif.

“Having
this
level
of
organization
builds
confidence
with
potential
acquirers
and
can
positively
influence
their
approach
to
the
transaction”
he
says. 

If
a
company
doesn’t
seem
to
have
well-maintained
regulatory
compliance,
by
contrast,
an
acquiring
company
will
likely
become
more
critical.

Technology
can
also
help.
Mercator’s
Entica,
for
example,
features
a
corporate
compliance
calendar
that
tracks
all
requirements
a
year
in
advance
and
ensures
a
company
maintains
proper
structures
around
compliance.

Abdellatif
has
seen
acquired
companies
impressing
acquirors
with
the
thoroughness
of
their
regulatory
compliance,
and
the
acquiring
companies
in
turn
seeking
to
adopt
their
systems.

This
thoroughness
can
also
help
stave
off
any
internal
resistance
to
a
deal.

“The
best
defense
is
making
sure
that
you
have
your
ducks
in
a
row,
that
your
information
and
data
is
properly
set
up,
and
that
you
can
demonstrate
just
how
effectively
you
run
your
department,”
he
says. 


Don’t
Forget
About
Your
JD

In
addition
to
organizational
management,
of
course,
a
GC
must
also
consider
legal
risks
at
this
stage.

One
top
risk
in
a
pre-merger
environment
is
confidentiality.
For
publicly
traded
companies,
insider
trading
laws
will
kick
in,
and
for
nonpublicly
traded
companies,
there
can
be
issues
with
employees
or
vendors
knowing
of
the
deal
at
the
early
stages.

A
GC
must
ensure
there
are
robust
nondisclosure
agreements

and
serious
consideration
around
which
internal
and
external
stakeholders
are
informed
to
begin
with. 

“Confidentiality
will
be
at
the
very
top
of
your
legal
risk
in
the
pre-transaction
phase,”
Hollingsworth
says.
“Similarly,
antitrust
considerations
go
hand-in-hand.”

Corporate
transactions
will
often
take
place
between
competing
companies,
which
must
make
a
pre-merger
filing
with
the
Federal
Trade
Commission
under
the
Hart-Scott-Rodino
Act.
If
there
are
foreign
operations,
a
variety
of
other
regulations
apply
as
well. 

Competing
companies
that
are
exploring
a
merger
must
also
be
careful
about
the
level
of
cooperation
during
this
stage
because
of
antitrust
concerns
known
as
“gun-jumping.” 

“The
expectation
is
that
you’re
going
to
operate
the
business
independently
all
the
way
up
through
closing,”
Hollingsworth
says. 


Leverage
Your
Tech

As
with
all
things
in
the
corporate
world,
AI-enabled
technology
is
playing
an
increasing
role
in
mergers
and
acquisitions. 

In
the
pre-merger
phase,
generative
AI
will
come
into
play
for
in-house
lawyers

particularly
when
drafting
pre-merger
documents
like
nondisclosure
agreements. 

New
technology
can
also
immediately
inform
counsel
of
“what’s
market,”
giving
negotiators
detailed
knowledge
of
precedent
regarding
every
aspect
of
a
transaction. 

The
Entica
platform
combines
workflows
with
data
management,
ensuring
actions
as
varied
as
filing
financial
statements,
appointing
directors
and
auditors,
and
executing
documents
are
all
tracked
and
accounted
for. 

It
allows
quick
access
to
this
data
throughout
a
company’s
full
portfolio,
and
segments
it
to
ensure
it’s
only
accessible
to
stakeholders
who
require
it. 

“When
you
come
back
to
logistics,
it
really
serves
as
the
backbone
in
many
ways,”
Abdellatif
says. 

Seasoned
practitioners
like
Hollingsworth
remember
the
due
diligence
process
of
decades
ago,
where
there
was
a
physical
data
room
that
contained
banker
boxes
full
of
documents
related
to
the
transaction.

These,
of
course,
have
been
replaced
by
online
data
rooms
that
can
be
accessed
24/7.
Similarly
to
due
diligence,
closings
and
negotiations
have
moved
from
in-person
to
virtual. 

For
negotiators,
though,
this
convenience
may
create
a
new
pitfall
to
avoid. 

If
you’ve
flown
across
the
country
for
an
in-person
meeting,
the
expectation
is
that
items
will
be
resolved
in
that
meeting,
Hollingsworth
notes.

“Allowing
virtual
negotiations
leads
to
more
iterations
of
the
document,”
he
says,
“and
it
may
actually
lead
to
the
negotiations
taking
longer.”


Stay
tuned
for
the
next
article
in
this
series,
where
we’ll
be
exploring
steps
to
consider
during
the
negotiation
and
closing
of
a
transaction. You
can
register
for
our
webinar
on
these
topics
here.

Kamala Harris Calls Out CEOs For Not Fighting Against Donald Trump. There’s Just One Glaring Issue With That… – Above the Law

(Photo
by
Win
McNamee/Getty
Images)

Kamala
Harris
is
hawking
her
new
book,

107
Days
,
and
so,
she
sat
down
with
Rachel
Maddow
on
MSNBC
last
night.
Harris
had
plenty
to
say
about
Donald
Trump
and
how
he’s
a
“tyrant,”
but
Trump
wasn’t
the
only
figure
that
drew
Harris’s
fire.

Harris
turned
her
attention
to
private
companies
for
not
holding
the
line
vis-à-vis
Trump.
“I’ve
worked
closely
with
the
private
sector
over
many
years.
And
I
always
believed
that
if
push
came
to
shove,
those
titans
of
industry
would
be
guardrails
for
our
democracy,
for
the
importance
of
sustaining
democratic
institutions.
And
one
by
one
by
one,
they
have
been
silent.
They
have
been,
you
know,
yes,
I
use
the
word
feckless,”
Harris
said.

Harris
also
pointed
out
that
this
lack
of
courage
is
motivated
by
the
bottom
line.
“Perhaps
it’s
because
they
want
a
merger
approved
or
they
want
to
avoid
an
investigation.
But
at
some
point
they’ve
got
to
stand
up
for
the
sake
of
the
people
who
rely
on
all
of
these
institutions

to
have
integrity
and
to,
at
some
point,
be
the
guardrails
against
a
tyrant
who’s
using
the
federal
government
to
execute
his
whim
and
fancy
because
of
a
fragile
ego.”

Bold
words.
But…

I
just
have
one
question:
Does
she
know
where
her
husband
works?

Listen,
I’m
sure
the
last
year
or
so
has
been
hella
crazy
for
Harris
and
maybe
she
just
isn’t
tracking
where
her
husband
is
currently
practicing
law.
If
she
*does*
know,
this
whole
interview
is
giving
big

do
as
I
say,
not
as
my
husband
does

energy.

Because
for
those
who
don’t
know
and/or
care,
after
his
stint
as
Second
Gentleman,
Doug
Emhoff
chose
to
return
to
Biglaw
and
is
currently

a
partner
at
Willkie
Farr
.
You
know,

one
of
the
nine

“feckless”
Biglaw
firms
that

bent
a
knee

to
Donald
Trump

and
promised
$940
million
in
pro
bono
payola

to
avoid
the

unconstitutional

Executive
Orders

targeting
major
law
firms

that

pissed
off

Donald
Trump.

So
yes,
quite
like
the
“titans
of
industry”
that
are
supposed
to
be
“guardrails
for
our
democracy”
the
law
firm
where
Emhoff
is
a
partner
did
the
Exact.
Same.
Thing.
It’s
actually
worse,
because
Willkie
is
giving
Donald
Trump
$100
million
is
free
legal
services
for

Trump-approved
causes
and
clients.

This
is
not
as
simple
as
holding
a
woman
accountable
for
what
her
husband
does,
as
some
Harris
apologists
might
opine.
There
is
a
direct
financial
benefit
that
Kamala
Harris’s
household
receives
when

Willkie
Farr

does
well

and
that
firm
sold
out
the
rule
of
law
in
order
to
ensure
that
their
bottom
line
didn’t
take
a
hit.

And
I
don’t
think
Harris’s
comments
pass
the
blush
test
just
because
Emhoff
was

publicly
critical

of
Willkie’s
deal
with
Trump.
Because
HE
SILL
WORKS
THERE!
As
a
partner,
no
less!

Associates

(and
of
course,

partners
too
)
are
bailing
from
Willkie
to
get
the
stink
of
capitulation
off
their
career.
Emhoff

both
as
an
experienced
partner
and
as
a
household
name

has
vastly
more
opportunities
than
junior
attorneys
yet
he
chooses
to
stay
at
Willkie.
And
that
says
a
lot
more
about
who
is

and
who
is
not

actually
willing
to
fight
for
democracy
than
the
MSNBC
clip.




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].

Nothin’ Says Lovin’ Like A Benchslap – Above the Law

Perkins
Coie
cut
ties
with
an
attorney

over
Charlie
Kirk
comments
on
social
media
.
The
remarks
were
measured
and
reasonable,
but
the
firm
is
still
fighting
the
Trump
administration
in
court
and

seemingly

does
not
want
any
distractions
or
mere
appearance
of
bias.
But
is
that
a
worthy
excuse?
A
Pillsbury
partner
received
a
benchslapping
over
what
the
judge
considered

unchecked
entitlement
.
A
Biglaw
partner?
Entitled?
No!
Also,
a
law
school
responds
to
the
new
federal
loan
caps
with

guaranteed
scholarships

to
cover
the
gap.
Is
this
the
start
of
a
trend?

Law Department Professionals: How Does Your Patent Management Stack Up? – Above the Law

Does
your
organization
see
intellectual
property
as
a
key
value
driver?
How
is
your
patent
portfolio
integrated
into
business
strategy?
Do
you
have
sufficient
resources
for
growth
in
this
area?

As
technology
reshapes
the
functioning
of
in-house
law
departments,
Above
the
Law
and
our
friends
at
Tradespace
are
gauging
how
in-house
law
departments
are
managing
their
IP. 

Participants
in
this
brief
and
anonymous
survey
will
receive
a
chance
to
win
a
$250
gift
card,
along
with
the
opportunity
to
pre-register
for
a
report
detailing
its
findings.


Morning Docket: 09.24.25 – Above the Law

*
Court
blocks
arbitrary,
capricious,
and
retaliatory
grant
cuts
until
Supreme
Court
can
shadow
docket
them
back.
[Bloomberg
Law
News
]

*
AI
hallucinations
strike
at
Boies
Schiller.
[Original
Jurisdiction
]

*
[Dr.
Manhattan
Meme]
It’s
2013
and
we’re
talking
about
Cooley
Law
School’s
accreditation.
It’s
2016
and
we’re
talking
about
Cooley
Law
School’s
accreditation.
It’s
2025
and
we’re
talking
about
Cooley
Law
School’s
accreditation.
[Law.com]

*
Meanwhile,
St.
Thomas
Law
is
out
of
compliance.
[ABA
Journal
]

*
Isaac
Chotiner
interviews
Cass
Sunstein
and
it
goes
predictably
poorly
for
the
interviewee.
[New
Yorker
]

*
Nexstar
and
Sinclair
will
continue
preempting
Jimmy
Kimmel…
but
their
affiliate
agreements
carry
limits
on
the
number
of
times
they’re
allowed
to
preempt
ABC
programming
before
the
network
can
declare
them
in
breach
and
cut
them
off
entirely.
[Politico]

*
RadioShack
comeback
allegedly
gets
scammy.
[Law360]

*
Law
school
application
boom
delivers
record
classes.
[Reuters]

*
Now
convicted
attempted
Trump
assassin
attempts
to
kill
himself.
[CNN]

AAA Readies November Launch of AI-Powered Arbitrator for Construction Disputes

For
an
established
dispute-resolution
organization
that
is
turning
100
next
year,
the

American
Arbitration
Association

seems
to
be
doing
everything
but
acting
its
age.
Long
among
the
world’s
leading
providers
of
human
arbitrators
and
mediators
for
a
range
of
disputes,
the
AAA
is
now
preparing
to
launch
its
first
AI-powered
arbitrator
in
November.

The
AI
arbitrator
will
initially
handle
documents-only
construction
cases,
a
high-volume
area
where
the
organization
sees
efficiency
and
speed
as
particularly
valuable.
The
system
is
designed
to
automatically
evaluate
case
merits,
generate
recommendations,
and
prepare
draft
awards

to
be
reviewed
by
human
arbitrators
before
they
are
issued.

In
an
interview
for
my
LawNext
podcast
that
will
air
next
week,

Bridget
Mary
McCormack
,
the
AAA’s
president
and
CEO,
projected
that
the
AI
arbitrator
could
reduce
the
cost
to
parties
of
construction
arbitration
by
30
to
50
percent
and
the
time
required
for
a
case
by
25
to
30
percent
at
launch,
with
those
metrics
improving
as
the
technology
advances.

Eventually,
the
AAA
plans
to
expand
the
AI
arbitrator
into
other
types
of
disputes.

Diana
Didia
,
executive
vice
president
and
chief
technology
and
innovation
officer,
in
that
same
LawNext
interview,
said
that
the
next
area
of
development
will
be
insurance
cases,
and
specifically
payer-provider
disputes,
where
there
is
a
high
volume
of
cases,
usually
involving
claims
of
lower
dollar
amounts.

Trained
On
Actual
Cases

The
AI
arbitrator
was
developed
through
an
extensive
training
process
using
more
than
1,500
actual
construction
awards
from
AAA-ICDR’s
case
repository.
The
system
was
specifically
designed
around
legal
reasoning
as
its
foundation,
Didia
said,
with
human
arbitrators
providing
input
throughout
the
development
process.

The
training
dataset
was
chosen
strategically,
Didia
said.
Construction
cases
typically
include
reasoned
awards
that
allow
the
AI
system
to
map
the
decision-making
chain
of
thought
that
human
arbitrators
use
when
analyzing
evidence
and
reaching
conclusions.

Although
the
system

which
was
developed
in
collaboration
with

QuantumBlack,
AI
by
McKinsey


has
not
yet
been
tested
in
actual
cases,
the
AAA
has
tested
it
across
over
1,000
simulated
cases
using
actual
completed
disputes
from
AAA’s
data
repository,
with
arbitrators,
lawyers,
and
law
school
students
playing
the
roles
of
the
parties
and
neutrals
in
the
disputes.

Human-in-the-Loop
Framework

A
key
component
of
the
system
is
its
“human-in-the-loop”
framework.
After
the
AI
generates
its
draft
decision,
human
arbitrators
review
the
results,
with
full
access
to
the
case
materials,
and
can
revise
the
AI-generated
decisions
before
they
are
finalized.

When
parties
submit
their
materials,
the
AI
system
deconstructs
their
submissions,
identifying
claims,
evidence
and
legal
frameworks.
Crucially,
this
analysis
is
presented
back
to
the
parties
for
validation.

“The
parties
get
to
say,
yes,
that’s
right,
or
no,
this
part’s
wrong,”
McCormack
said,
“and
they
get
to
move
it
to
a
place
where
they
are
satisfied
that
it
fully
understands
what
they
think
their
case
is.”

This
validation
step
is
a
fundamental
game
changer
compared
to
traditional
dispute
resolution,
McCormack
said,
where
parties
often
feel
that
decision-makers
did
not
understand
or
address
their
most
important
arguments.
The
AI
arbitrator’s
transparent
breakdown
ensures
parties
know
they
have
been
heard
and
understood
before
any
decision
is
rendered.

Once
all
submissions
are
complete,
a
human
arbitrator
from
AAA’s
permanent
panel
is
appointed
through
a
traditional
round-robin
system,
maintaining
the
same
disclosure
and
conflict-checking
procedures
as
would
apply
in
any
AAA
case.

‘A
Muscular
Co-pilot’

The
appointed
arbitrator
gets
access
to
what
Didia
described
as
“a
very
muscular
co-pilot”
interface,
featuring
organized
case
summaries,
timeline
views,
claims
analysis,
and,
crucially,
a
complete
draft
award.

The
system
gives
arbitrators
access
to
all
relevant
evidence
in
an
organized
format,
allowing
them
to
click
through
to
source
documents
while
reviewing
the
AI’s
reasoning.

Once
the
human
arbitrator
reviews
the
draft
award
and
supporting
analysis,
the
arbitrator
can
make
any
adjustments
and
edits.
These
modifications
feed
back
into
the
AI
system
for
continuous
improvement.
The
final,
issued
award
carries
the
arbitrator’s
name
and
certification

they
are
issuing
the
decision,
not
merely
reviewing
an
AI
output,
the
AAA
emphasizes.

Arbitrators
participating
in
the
testing
process
reported
reviewing
case
materials
30
to
50
percent
faster
than
they
would
normally,
while
still
maintaining
confidence
in
the
outcomes.

“The
AI
is
issuing
an
award,
but
the
human
is
validating
it
and
the
human
is
signing,”
Didia
said.

Potential
to
Enhance
Access

The
AI
arbitrator’s
benefits
to
litigants
could
be
substantial.
McCormack
estimates
that
the
process
could
cut
the
cost
of
construction
cases
by
30
to
50
percent
and
the
time
by
25
to
30
percent.

Beyond
the
immediate
benefits
to
the
parties,
the
AI
arbitrator,
by
reducing
costs
and
complexity, 
could
open
dispute
resolution
to
parties
who
currently
cannot
afford
traditional
processes.

“By
bringing
the
cost
down
and
the
time
down
and
also
making
the
process
just
simpler
for
users,
it’s
going
to
mean
that
if
right
now
we
resolve
half
a
million
disputes
a
year,
we
can
resolve
10x
that,”
McCormack
said.
“That’s
amazing,
right?
And
it’s
just
going
to
open
up
completely
new
frontiers
for
dispute
resolution.”

Impact
on
Arbitrators

Does
the
advent
of
AI
arbitrators
mark
the
beginning
of
the
end
for
human
arbitrators?

“I
don’t
think
so
at
all,”
McCormack
told
me,
but
they
will
have
to
change
their
business
models.

“I
do
think
that
you
want
to
be
able
to
be
one
of
those
arbitrators
who’s
able
to
accommodate
an
AI-native
process
because
you’re
going
to
continue
to
have
a
big
career,”
she
said.

Because
AI
is
going
to
open
the
arbitration
process
to
more
people,
she
emphasized,
that
means
more
opportunities
for
arbitrators.

“It’s
not
going
to
put
you
out
of
business.
Quite
the
opposite.
It’s
going
to
allow
significantly
more
disputes
to
come
our
way.

“But
you
do
have
to
come
along
for
the
ride.
I
do
think
that
if
you’re
not
along
for
the
ride,
then
you
might
want
to
think
about
what
the
next
phase
of
life
looks
like.”

A
Century
of
Innovation

The
AAA’s
launch
of
the
AI
arbitrator
represents
the
culmination
of
a
broader
generative
AI
and
innovation
initiative
it
has
been
pursuing
for
the
past
several
years,
and
which
has
already
produced
several
tools,
including
chatbots
for
rules
and
customer
support,
AI-enhanced
panelist
search
capabilities,
document
summary
and
Q&A
functions,
and
various
case
management
enhancements.

It
also
comes
as
the
AAA
approaches
its
centennial
anniversary.
In
these
latest
innovations,
McCormack
draws
parallels
to
the
organization’s
founding,
noting
that
arbitration
itself
was
considered
an
innovation
100
years
ago,
designed
to
provide
broad
access
to
dispute
resolution
for
all
parties,
not
just
large
businesses.

“We
think
this
technology
allows
us
to
deliver
on
that
in
a
modern
world,”
she
said.
“Arbitration
is
a
really
important
process
for
lots
of
users,
but
the
world
has
gotten
significantly
more
complicated
and
we
need
more
options,
and
we’re
ready
to
deliver.”


[Disclosure:
I
am
an
arbitrator
listed
on
the
AAA’s
labor
relations
roster.
I
receive
case
appointments
through
the
AAA,
but
any
compensation
I
receive
is
paid
by
the
parties
to
the
dispute,
not
by
the
AAA.]