Category: News Feeds

For all of the accusations of dog-whistling and coded messages against it, subtlety has never been a notable feature of the Trump administration’s modus operandi. It and its potentially fatally fearless leader really do just say the quiet parts out loud. Why, it did so just last week, ordering federal agencies the stop all diversity training, building on a September executive order banning “offensive and anti-American race and sex stereotyping and scapegoating” that looks like it was written by John Paulson.

* McDonald’s is paying $26 million to settle a wage-theft lawsuit. That would go a long way on the dollar menu… [Business Insider]

* Senate Democrats met with Judge Amy Coney Barrett yesterday ahead of Supreme Court confirmation hearings next week. [Fox News]

* A new ABA ethics opinion suggests that lawyers need to disclose friendships and intimate relationships they have with opposing counsel to their clients. But some of us try to be friends with everyone… [Bloomberg Law]

* A lawyer for Britney Spears has purportedly likened Britney’s mental state to a comatose patient, and says that she is unable to give testimony. Maybe this lawyer is watching too much South Park. [TMZ]

* An Ohio lawyer has been suspended for calling another attorney a “complete idiot” and making other purportedly inappropriate response. They must have some strict civility standards in the Buckeye State… [ABA Journal]

---

Jordan Rothman is a partner of The Rothman Law Firm, a full-service New York and New Jersey law firm. He is also the founder of Student Debt Diaries, a website discussing how he paid off his student loans. You can reach Jordan through email at jordan@rothmanlawyer.com.

Our presidential debate drinking game got… dangerous. If you diligently played by the rules, there’s a decent chance you’re just now waking from a coma. Honestly, we’d never seen so many items hit so quickly in one debate.

Given that harrowing experience, one might think that we would discontinue these drinking games. Of course not. Once more unto the breach dear friends!

And, frankly, this is debate where you really need a game to keep yourself engaged. The Vice Presidential Debate is always much lower stakes than the varsity version. Can anyone even identify a memorable moment from a VP debate since the early 90s? Lloyd Bentsen dunked on Dan Quayle in 1988 and James Stockdale didn’t know who he was in 1992 and that about closed the door on VP debates. Since then the only interesting narrative from these exercises in dueling talking points was Joe Biden NOT openly making fun of Sarah Palin. Hardly thrilling political theater.

So grab your beverage and a shot of dexamethasone and get ready for this.

All references require a sip unless otherwise noted.

Supreme Court: We always have to put this one in there, but this should be far less dangerous this time around. The first presidential debate already thoroughly tilled this soil so the institution should only come up incidentally tonight, if at all. On the other hand…

Amy Coney Barrett… With The Virus… In The Rose Garden: Mike Pence is, ostensibly, the administration’s point person for COVID-19, and with the virus running roughshod throughout the White House and stemming directly from a mass gathering held by the administration, take a sip whenever that gathering is referenced or Amy COVID Barrett is name-checked.

On That Note…: Finish a bottle if someone slips up and uses the name “Amy COVID Barrett.”

Brown v. Board of Education: The dumbest part of every VP debate is when one candidate tries to make a big deal out of some narrow policy daylight between the presidential candidate and the running mate and pretend that matters more than the fact that the other party is diametrically opposed to both stances. Kamala Harris went after Joe Biden for being elected on a platform of opposing mandatory busing. It was a super big primary debate moment because the media amplifies shiny objects and utterly superficial takes. But then it turned out Harris also opposes mandatory busing. Meaning… she supports the same thing she criticized Biden for supporting? Oh. As I noted at the time, a good moderator’s follow-up should have been “and what is your position Senator?” Because these debates, if we have to have them, shouldn’t be about fights between the candidates, but about using the conversation to tease out and clarify distinct policy distinctions to help a voter understand each candidate. This is why I should be moderating these things. And, yes, I’d still do a better job even if I continued with the drinking game on live TV while doing it. GAAHHHH. I digress. Anyway, let’s watch Pence try to stir up a segregation problem for Biden while simultaneously pushing judicial candidates who refuse to even answer whether or not they’d bring back de facto Jim Crow.

“Crime”/”Criminal”: This might turn out just as bad as “Supreme Court” did last time. The Republicans are trying to paint the Russia investigation as a “crime,” several people in the president’s orbit have committed “crimes,” election fraud and voter intimidation are both “crimes.” Hopefully this only comes up in a relatively germane topic discussion, but I fear we’re going to hear a lot of it all over the place.

Was She A Prosecutor?: Sip every time we hear that Harris was a prosecutor/attorney general.

Trump Administration Crimes (double): And if Harris parlays her career to say, “as a prosecutor I would charge…” while talking about this administration or those in its orbit you take two sips.

Defunding The Police (shot): If there’s one thing Kamala Harris likes, it’s putting people in jail. Despite this, the Trump campaign is working hard to position him as the “law & order candidate.” So take a hefty shot every time this comes up.

Mueller, Comey, FBI Agents: Through last night’s flurry of Tweets, it appears that the new Trump campaign strategy is to relitigate the Russia investigation. To that end, take a drink if they go in on any of the supposed masterminds of this diabolical plot to… something.

Jeff Sessions & Rod Rosenstein: Speaking of the Russia investigation, we now have confirmation that these numbnuts were lying about the administration’s child separation policy for years. Don’t be surprised if they find their way into conversation tonight.

Abolish ICE: The immigration corollary of defunding the police.

Marijuana: Pence is exactly the sort of guy who is scandalized that Harris says she’s smoked pot before and just dumb enough to think that’s still an issue for undecided voters.

Beau Biden: He was a state attorney general. Harris was a state attorney general. They were close friends. She likes to mention this a lot.

Pence’s Legal Career (finish your drink): Mike Pence worked as a lawyer for about 4 years before focusing on politics, but if he tries to compare resumes with a former state AG you may as well get as drunk as whoever told him that was a good idea.

Tupac Shows Up (drink like you know how to party): The Republicans have left a ticket for him.

Amendments (see description): Shots corresponding with the number of the amendment when mentioned. In other words, one shot for the First Amendment, Two shots for the Second Amendment, etc.

Oh God, they’re going to do the Twenty-Fifth, aren’t they? Maybe we’ll see you for the next debate.

---

Joe Patrice is a senior editor at Above the Law and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer. Feel free to email any tips, questions, or comments. Follow him on Twitter if you’re interested in law, politics, and a healthy dose of college sports news. Joe also serves as a Managing Director at RPN Executive Search.

Ed. Note: Welcome to our daily feature Trivia Question of the Day!

According to the Leopard Law Firm Index, presented by Leopard Solutions in partnership with Above the Law and Adam Smith, Esq., at the Top 200 law firms, which practice area has experienced the most headcount decline to date in 2020?

Hint: The practice area has seen headcount fall by 21 percent this year.

See the answer on the next page.

He may not have known what one was when he became president—and, let’s face it, that’s true of pretty much every subject—but, unlike many other things, Donald Trump has learned a thing or two about cryptocurrencies, and he doesn’t like them any more than he likes Nancy Pelosi or people with dark skin. Hates them enough to have ordered Steve Mnuchin to do something about them, which he’s finally gotten around to. Of course, consistency and competence haven’t been any more hallmarks of this administration than open-minded curiosity or learning, and so does it surprise you to learn that two different divisions of the very same Cabinet department—the best-run one we’ve got, or so we are terrifyingly told—would be operating at totally cross-purposes when it comes to imaginary money?

It is sometimes difficult for lawyers to evaluate how our actions affect other people. Indeed, the decisions lawyers make can have a massive impact on others, but we are often unable to observe the consequences of those acts. I, like many attorneys, regularly send certified letters asking for a return receipt to be signed confirming delivery. Sometimes, I send mail this way because I am required to by court rules or statutes, and other times, I use this method as a matter of preference. Although I have not received a certified letter that required a signature in years, I recently got two such letters in the mail. The experience has shown me that lawyers should try to send fewer certified letters with return receipt requested during the pandemic because of public health considerations and other reasons.

I have been an enthusiastic subscriber of Informed Delivery®, a service of the United States Postal Service, for years. This capability is amazing, and it basically allows you to see all of the mailpieces you will receive for a given day by email each morning. A few weeks ago, I noticed that I would be receiving two certified letters from a random attorney in my area that would be delivered that day.

All throughout the day, I racked my brain thinking about why I would be receiving such certified letters. I was pretty sure that the letters were part of a mass mailing, since the addresses on the letters were in a weird format that is listed on public records related to my condo. Unfortunately, my suspense about the purpose of the certified letters did not end that day because the mail carrier left me a note in my mailbox indicating that I would have to come to the post office to pick up my letters because a signature could not be obtained when the letters were delivered.

Normally a trip to the post office isn’t a big deal, but several weeks ago, I suffered my annual “back attack” which left me pretty sprung out for a handful of days (thankfully I have since recovered!). The post office in my town is over a mile away, and up a hill, and since the parking situation on the main drag of my town is a nightmare, I knew I would have to walk to the post office. After slowly making my way to the post office with my bad back, I discovered that the line at the post office was so long that it extended outside.

I stood in line at the post office for over an hour, my back hurting unbelievably the entire time, just to sign for the certified letters. I noticed that many of the people in line at the post office had the same slip of paper that I received directing us to come to the post office to sign for our mail. While in line, all of us had to stand inside for a long period of time next to dozens of other people, and post offices are not known for their good ventilation.

After finally signing for my certified letters, I discovered that I was receiving a notice because a developer wanted to make changes to the area in which my condo was located, and I was being given notice of a zoning board hearing to discuss the issue. I was pretty upset! I had absolutely no intention of attending the hearing that discussed this mundane issue. In addition, I did a cursory search of all the laws cited in the letter, and I could find no requirement that any notices be sent by certified mail with return receipt requested (although I readily admit I could have missed something!). In my frustration at wasting hours over these certified letters, I thought about sending the lawyer who wrote that letter a certified letter of my own with return receipt requested so she could get a taste of what I experienced. However, I soon thought better of the situation, and licked my wounds by heading to the White Castle near the post office to satisfy my craving. At least the trip was not a total waste!

There are some situations in which lawyers need to send certified letters with return receipt requested because a law or court rule requires this method. In addition, there are certain situations in which it is advantageous to use this method. As my adversaries will readily convey, I am a practitioner in the dark arts of spoliation, which often requires that a party be put on notice about a claim and their obligation to preserve evidence. One of the best ways to prove that a party has notice about a claim is to send them a spoliation letter and use the return receipt card to prove that the other party received the letter. In addition, sometimes parties wish to send certified letters with return receipt requested in order to broadcast to the other party that the letter is important.

However, we are currently enduring one of the worst public health crises in over a century. Forcing people to wait in line at the post office does not help with social distancing, and when lawyers send hundreds or even thousands of certified letters with return receipt requested in one community, it can overburden the postal service, which does not need any additional issues right now. As a result, lawyers should carefully evaluate if they really need to send letters by certified mail return receipt requested for the remainder of the pandemic.

---

Jordan Rothman is a partner of The Rothman Law Firm, a full-service New York and New Jersey law firm. He is also the founder of Student Debt Diaries, a website discussing how he paid off his student loans. You can reach Jordan through email at jordan@rothmanlawyer.com.

Today, we’ve got some unfortunate news from the law school community in Connecticut, where a young law student was killed about a mile from campus after being hit by a commercial truck.

The law student — a 25-year-old male whose name has not yet been released — was riding a bicycle when he was struck in an intersection close to the Yale-New Haven Hospital. The Yale Daily News has the details on the fatal crash:

A 10 p.m. news release from the NHPD indicated that the bicyclist was traveling north on York Street in the far-right, right-turn only lane. He continued to ride straight through the intersection.

Meanwhile, the 35-year-old truck operator was driving northbound in the center lane on York, which is both a straight and a right-turn lane. The cyclist collided with the truck’s passenger side as the driver turned right onto South Frontage.

Prior to the arrival of New Haven emergency responders, a passing North Branford Fire Department ambulance and a American Medical Response supervisor stopped to render aid. After New Haven police and fire departments arrived on the scene, the victim was transported to a nearby hospital, where he was pronounced dead.

The Yale Law student was killed in the same intersection where a Yale Medical School student was struck and killed by a car in 2008. We will offer updates on the victim’s identity when they are released by authorities.

We here at Above the Law would like to extend our condolences to this law student’s family, friends, and colleagues during this incredibly difficult time.

Yale Law School student killed in car crash Tuesday afternoon [Yale Daily News]

---

Staci Zaretsky is a senior editor at 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 Twitter or connect with her on LinkedIn.

So, what, exactly is going on with Biglaw bonuses? After the September rash of special COVID-19 appreciation bonuses, we’ve gone silent. After Cravath followed Kirkland into the whole “let’s just wait till the end of the year” camp, no other firm has stepped up with a Fall bonus. But speculation continues among the rank and file associates as to why the firms are delaying anteing up market bonuses.

A sort of answer came when Paul Weiss told their associates no Fall bonuses were coming. Firm Chair Brad Karp said special bonuses would not be “appropriate” and “[p]roviding a special cash reward in direct response to the pandemic does not feel right at this time.”

Above the Law has also heard murmurings from tipsters at other elite Biglaw firms that espouse a similar logic:

[H]ave heard from a few partners who would be in the know that partnership view is that giving COVID bonuses would not be a great look in this economic / social climate

I’m sorry, whaaaaa? Are these firms also not collecting on outstanding bills during a pandemic? Are they donating all of the firm’s profits this year to charities supporting those hit hard by COVID-19? Or is the money sitting in the firms’s coffers rather than being distributed to people who actually did the work? Cool. Cool. Coo-coo-cool.

It’s just so backwards for the top of the Biglaw pyramid to suggest giving money to the bottom rungs isn’t a “good look.” Real talk: if the money isn’t going to employees, it just gets divvied up between the (equity) partners. And here’s the thing, for the most part, Biglaw firms are doing pretty well during the pandemic, so there’s even more money to go around. In fact, revenue went up in the first half of 2020 over 2019, due, in part to annual rate hikes, as Sara Randazzo writes for the Wall Street Journal:

At 125 firms surveyed by Wells Fargo Private Bank’s legal specialty group, revenue rose an average of 6.4% in the first half of the year, compared with a year earlier. With demand roughly the same from last year, according to Wells Fargo, the boost stemmed from annual hourly-rate increases and momentum from a lucrative 2019.

And net income is up even more than that — 25.6 percent — largely because of lower expenses like travel.

King & Spalding’s chair also told the Journal the firm is doing well during the pandemic:

“It’s like building bridges in wartime—you prefer a different environment,” said Robert Hays, the Atlanta-based chairman of King & Spalding LLP. “But we’ve built the bridge. So in terms of the business of the firm, we’re doing quite well.”

And no, King & Spalding isn’t one of the firms that have handed out special bonuses. And yes, insiders at the firm have absolutely noticed:

K&S Chairman has large picture and indicates that the firm is doing quite well, but has not mentioned sharing any largesse with associates (as most people assumed, all bonus announcement have ceased since the cravath announcement). The article also mentions that firms have saved millions on routine costs (i.e., travel). Further, despite the fact that cravath and kirkland partners pocket 4-5 million/year, they are unwilling to share 7.5k with the first year associate who is saddled in law school debt, working day and night in his/her tiny NYC apartment, and potentially taking care of kids or family simultaneously. Please make a bigger deal out of this. Demonstrates that law firm partners are making out like bandits in his pandemic and keeping all the record profits to themselves (outside of the dozen firms that are paying bonuses)

Biglaw firms can talk all they want about how appreciation bonuses are somehow gauche, but the truth is they’re making more money. (And obviously, this rant only applies to firms on strong financial footing. No firm should collapse itself trying to keep up with the Davis Polks of the legal world. Though note, just because firms are laying off people does not necessarily mean there are rocky financials.  As Janet Stanton, a New York-based legal consultant, said, “I think a lot of firms are using 2020 as cover to do things they wanted to do anyway.” If we want to talk about things that are a bad look, that’s a far better target.)

For those increasingly profitable firms, the question is really about who gets the benefits of those profits, not whether making money during a pandemic is a good look. And yes, maybe — hopefully — these firms will account for the fall bonuses their competitors have doled out at the end of the year. But, as they well know, times are hard out there. And while it’s true Biglaw associates are generally well-compensated, even absent bonuses, you have no idea what someone else is going through. Maybe an associate has a relative who’s facing eviction or is supporting an out-of-work family member, or any other hardship, and the bonus money now — not in 3-5 months from now — could make a difference.

---

Kathryn Rubino is a Senior Editor at Above the Law, and host of The Jabot podcast. 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).

I had a test recently — actually, the day of that time that I was coughing — I coughed twice, actually, and I was clearing my throat — I had a test maybe two hours earlier, it came back yesterday, and I’m negative. That’s the second one I’ve had since I was with the group in the White House, and unfortunately most of them came down with it, I feel very bad for them.I almost feel a little guilty. I was one of the few along with Jared and Ivanka that didn’t, but so far I don’t, and I’ll go back and get tested again on Friday, and I’ll be out of the woods.

— Rudy Giuliani, who currently serves as President Donald Trump’s personal attorney, offering some insight on his COVID-19 test results. Earlier this week, Giuliani coughed his way through an interview on Fox News, while admitting, “I don’t wear masks as much as probably I should.” Giuliani says he’s been prescribed hydroxychloroquine as a preventative measure.

---

Staci Zaretsky is a senior editor at 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 Twitter or connect with her on LinkedIn.