Elite Trial Boutique Offers Gigantic Bonuses Of Up To More Than $770K To Associates – Above the Law

Biglaw
firms
continue
to
match
Cravath’s year-end
bonuses
 and
Milbank’s

special
bonuses
,
but
it’s
the
boutique
firms
where
associates
will
really
have
the
opportunity
to
stuff
their
wallets.

This
bonus
season,
boutique
firms
have
truly
spread
the
wealth
among
associates,
by
not
just
meeting
the
market
bonus
scale,
but
oftentimes
completely
blowing
it
away.
The
latest
boutique
firm
to
hand
out
unbelievable
bonuses
to
associates
is Bursor
&
Fisher
.

Sources
at
the
firm
have
told
us
that Scott
A.
Bursor
,
the
firm’s
founder,
announced
bonuses
last
week
during
B&F’s
year-end
reviews,
which
were
held
at
the
Aria
Resort
&
Casino in
Las
Vegas.
All
lawyers
and
staff
from
the
firm’s
four
offices
in
New
York,
California,
and
Florida
were
flown
to
Las
Vegas
and
put
up
at
the
resort
for
four
nights.

Bonuses
at
the
firm
are
not
lockstep,
and
are
instead
based
on
objective
criteria
like
business
origination
and
revenue

and
at
every
level,
they
were
well
above
the
Cravath/Milbank
scale
(which
ranges
from
$15,000
to
$115,000,
plus
special
bonuses
ranging
from
$6,000
to
$25,000,
in
case
you’ve
forgotten).

So,
how
big
of
bonuses
are
we
talking?

We’ve
been
told
that
lawyers
at
the
firm
were
very
handsomely
rewarded
for
their
work,
with
bonuses
ranging
from
$50,000
for
first-year
associates
to
$100,000
or
more
for
second-year
associates.
This
year’s
top
bonus
went
to
an
associate
with
three
years
of
experience
at
the
firm,
who
took
home
a
bonus
that
exceeded
$770,000.
Yes,
you
read
that
correctly

one
lucky
associate
at
this
firm
received
a
bonus
of

more
than

three
quarters
of
a
million
dollars.

A
very
big
congratulations
to
everyone
at
Bursor
&
Fisher.
Associates
at
the
firm
must
be
absolutely
thrilled
with
their
gigantic
bonuses!

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 BlueskyX/Twitter,
and Threads, or
connect
with
her
on LinkedIn
.

‘What Else Is Going to Change?’: What ACIP’s Hep B Guidance Means for the Future of Vaccines – MedCity News

Since
Robert
F.
Kennedy
Jr.

a
known
vaccine
skeptic

was
appointed
as
Secretary
of
Health
and
Human
Services
in
February,
it
was
only
a
matter
of
time
before
he
took
steps
to
loosen
requirements
around
vaccines.

In
June,
he

removed

all
members
of
the
Advisory
Committee
on
Immunization
Practices
(ACIP),
an
expert
panel
that
makes
vaccine
recommendations,
and
replaced
them
with
several
vaccine
critics.
In
September,
ACIP
changed
its
recommendations
for
measles,
mumps,
rubella
and
varicella
to

stop
recommending

the
combined
vaccine
before
the
age
of
4
years.

Now,
ACIP
is

proposing

to
roll-back
guidance
for
hepatitis
B
that
has
been
in
effect
for
more
than
30
years.
Last
week,
ACIP
voted
8-3
to
recommend
“individual-based
decision-making
for
parents
deciding
whether
to
give
the
hepatitis
B
vaccine,
including
the
birth
dose,
to
infants
born
to
women
who
test
negative
for
the
virus,”
according
to
a
news
release
from
the
CDC.
For
those
not
receiving
the
birth
dose,
ACIP
suggested
receiving
the
initial
dose
“no
earlier”
than
two
months.

Hepatitis
B
is
a
contagious
virus
that
infects
the
liver
and
is
a
leading
cause
of
liver
cancer.
It
is
transmitted
through
blood
and
bodily
fluids.
Since
1991,
when
the
CDC
recommended
the
vaccination
for
all
newborns,
infections
in
children
and
teens
have

fallen
by
99%

This
recommendation
has
led
to
an
outcry
from
many
in
the
medical
industry,
including
organizations
like
the
American
Medical
Association,
the
American
Academy
of
Pediatrics
and
the
National
Foundation
for
Infectious
Diseases.
The
latter
organization
told
MedCity
News
that
ACIP’s
guidance
could
lead
to
as
many
as
1,400
additional
infections
and
480
deaths
every
year,
and
expressed
concern
about
the
potential
implications
for
other
vaccines.

“The
U.S.
childhood
and
adolescent
immunization
schedule
is
built
on
decades
of
data
demonstrating
the
effectiveness
of
vaccines
that
have
resulted
in
dramatic
reductions
in
diseases
such
as
pneumonia,
measles,
diphtheria,
and
polio.
…These
vaccines
are
not
perfect,
but
they
have
a
strong
record
of
safety
and
cause
FAR
fewer
adverse
effects,
compared
with
the
lives
they
save
and
disability
they
prevent,”
said
Robert
H.
Hopkins,
Jr.,
MD,
medical
director
of
the
National
Foundation
for
Infectious
Diseases,
in
an
email.

He
added
that
recent
declines
in
vaccinations
have
already
led
to
outbreaks,
including
the
highest
number
of
measles
cases
since
it
was
declared
eliminated
in
2000
and
a
six-fold
increase
in
whooping
cough
in
2024.

Dr.
Georges
Benjamin,
executive
director
of
the
American
Public
Health
Association,
worries
about
all
other
vaccines
after
ACIP’s
recommendations
on
hepatitis
B
vaccines. 

“We’re
going
to
see
more
and
more
people
questioning
safety
and
efficacy
for
a
whole
range
of
vaccines,”
he
said
in
an
interview.
“We’re
going
to
see
more
measles
outbreaks,
more
pertussis
outbreaks,
in
addition
to
hepatitis.
We’ve
got
an
enormous
outbreak
occurring
in
South
Carolina
right
now
with
measles,
and
then
we’ve
had
kids
that
have
died
from
both
measles
and
pertussis
recently.
These
are
preventable
deaths.
They
were,
I
believe,
in
all
unvaccinated
kids.”

According
to
the

CDC
,
there
have
been
three
confirmed
deaths
from
measles
in
2025.
Two
of
these
cases
were
children,
and
neither
were
vaccinated,
Politico

reported
.
There
have
been
13
deaths
from
pertussis
in
2025,
according
to
the
Pan
American
Health
Association.
Data
is
not
available
on
how
many
of
those
deaths
were
in
people
who
were
unvaccinated
but
take
Louisiana
for
instance.
The
two
deaths
it
experienced
this
year

were
its
first

since
2018
amid
an
overall
fall
in
childhood
vaccinations.


The
recommendation

Specifically,
when
ACIP
recommends
“individual-based
decision-making,”
it
means
that
parents
and
healthcare
providers
should
consider
vaccine
benefits,
vaccine
risks
and
infection
risks,
and
parents
should
consult
with
their
healthcare
provider,
according
to
the
announcement.
For
example,
parents
and
providers
should
consider
whether
there
are
infection
risks
from
a
household
member
with
hepatitis
B,
or
if
there
is
frequent
contact
with
someone
who
emigrated
from
areas
with
high
hepatitis
B
rates.

In
addition,
ACIP
advised
that
when
deciding
if
a
child
needs
another
hepatitis
B
vaccine
dose,
parents
should
talk
with
their
healthcare
provider
about
whether
to
check
the
child’s
antibody
levels
to
make
sure
they’re
protected.  

Despite
these
recommendations,
hepatitis
B
vaccinations
will
continue
to
be
covered,
including
under
federal
programs
like
Medicaid
and
Medicare,
as
well
as
plans
under
the
Marketplace.
AHIP

said

back
in
September
that
“health
plans
will
continue
to
cover
all
ACIP-recommended
immunizations
that
were
recommended
as
of
September
1,
2025,
including
updated
formulations
of
the
Covid-19
and
influenza
vaccines,
with
no
cost-sharing
for
patients
through
the
end
of
2026.”

ACIP
provided
this
guidance
after
hearing
presentations
on
hepatitis
B
and
vaccine
safety
and
briefings
from
vaccine
manufacturer
representatives. 

One
of
the
presentations
was
from
Cynthia
Nevison,
Ph.D.,
a
climate
researcher,
on
hepatitis
B
disease
burden
since
1985.
The
presentation
suggested
that
the
universal
hepatitis
B
birth
dose
has
had
only
a
small
effect
on
reducing
acute
cases.
In
addition,
she
explained
that
57.9%
of
estimated
births
to
women
who
test
positive
for
the
hepatitis
B
surface
antigen
are
attributable
to
non-U.S.-born
women. 

Another
presentation
was
from
ACIP
Childhood/Adolescent
Schedule
Workgroup
Chair
Vicky
Pebsworth,
Ph.D.,
RN,
who
noted
that
the
U.S.
remains
an
outlier
among
low-prevalence
developed
countries
in
recommending
a
universal
hepatitis
B
vaccine
dose
at
birth.

The
United
Kingdom,
a
developed
country
by
all
definitions,
has
had
a
universal
hepatitis
B
vaccine
since
2017
but
only
high-risk
babies
get
the
dose
at
birth.
Others
get
their

first
dose
at
8
weeks,
then
again
at
12
and
16
weeks.
  

One
of
the
comparisons
during
the
meetings
was
Denmark,
which
does
not
recommend
a
universal
hepatitis
B
birth
dose

though
some
say
this
is
not
an
apples-to-apples
comparison
as
Denmark
is
a
significantly
smaller
country
with
universal
healthcare.
Canada
may
be
a
closer
comparison,
which
allows
provinces
and
territories
to
set
their
own
schedules,

generally
from
birth
to
grade
7

A

September
CDC
report

stated
that
“of
the
194
WHO
(World
Health
Organization)
member
states,
116
countries
recommend
universal
hepatitis
B
birth
dose
vaccination
to
all
newborns.” 

Both
Nevison
and
Pebsworth
who
testified
at
the
ACIP
meeting
are
known
to
have

anti-vaccine
ties
.

The
recommendation
from
ACIP
does
not
become
a
part
of
the
CDC
immunization
schedule
until
it
is
adopted
by
the
CDC
director.
Currently,
there
isn’t
a
CDC
director,
only
Acting
CDC
Director
Jim
O’Neill,
who
does
not
have
a
medical
background.
However,
the
acting
CDC
director
does
not
have
the
authority
to
make
this
decision,
so
it
will
likely
fall
on
RFK
Jr.,
though
he
may
delegate
the
task,
according
to
Benjamin
of
the
American
Public
Health
Association. 


The
reaction

Several
experts
in
the
industry
and
professional
medical
organizations
have
condemned
ACIP’s
guidance
on
hepatitis
B.

For
example,
Benjamin
said
the
meetings
to
discuss
the
vaccine
were
“poorly
done”
and
seemed
to
place
blame
on
immigrants
(and
used
immigrants
as
a
broad
category)
and
drug
use
with
very
little
evidence.
While
drug
use
is
a
risk
factor,
most
of
the
time
people
get
hepatitis
B
from
close
family
contact,
which
is
why
it’s
often
seen
in
households,
he
said.

This
will
create
a
lot
of
confusion
for
parents
when
giving
birth,
particularly
at
a
time
that
is
already
chaotic,
Benjamin
said.

“There’ll
be
kids
who
don’t
get
vaccinated
while
they’re
in
hospital,
whose
parents
intend
to
do
it,
but
they
just
don’t
get
around
to
it,”
he
stated.
“And
we
know
that
happens.
It’s
not
neglect,
it’s
just
life,
the
way
things
work.

There
may
be
some
confusion
of
who
pays
for
it.
Even
though
the
insurance
companies
have
said
they’re
going
to
pay
for
it,
patients
may
not
be
sure
who’s
paying
for
it.
There
will
be
states
who
will
not
follow
the
ACIP
recommendation,
so
you
have
a
lack
of
coordination
at
the
federal,
state
and
local
level.”

Hopkins
of
the
National
Foundation
for
Infectious
Diseases
echoed
these
comments,
noting
that
the
greatest
risk
of
this
action
is
that
more
infants
could
be
left
unprotected.
The
hepatitis
B
birth
dose
has
prevented
more
than
500,000
childhood
infections
and
prevented
an
estimated
90,100
childhood
deaths
since
the
original
recommendation
was
put
in
place
in
1991,
according
to
the

organization
.

“Up
to
half
of
adults
with
chronic
hepatitis
B
don’t
know
they’re
infected,
and
babies
exposed
around
the
time
of
birth
face
the
highest
likelihood
of
lifelong
infection
and
severe
complications,
including
liver
cancer
and
cirrhosis,”
he
said.
“Even
small
declines
in
birth-dose
coverage
could
reverse
hard-won
public
health
gains.
The
hepatitis
B
vaccine
has
a
40+
year
legacy
of
safety;
there
have
been
no
common
severe
adverse
effects
linked
to
this
vaccine.”

Dr.
Yolanda
VanRiel,
chair
of
the
department
of
nursing
at
North
Carolina
Central
University,
agreed
and
raised
the
issue
of
what
this
might
mean
for
other
vaccines.

“What
else
is
going
to
change?

This
decision
won’t
be
in
isolation.
We
just
don’t
know
what’s
going
to
be
the
next
ones
that
they
are
looking
at,”
VanRiel
said
in
an
interview. 

The
administration’s
vilification
of
vaccines
will
likely
have
an
impact
on
vaccine
manufacturers
as
well.

“Vaccines
don’t
make
money
for
the
companies.
It’s
very
expensive.

So
if
the
private
sector
is
discouraged
because
they’re
going
to
produce
a
product
that’s
going
to
be
safe
and
effective,
[but]
have
poor
science
used
to
undermine
their
product,
their
investors
are
going
to
start
going
in
different
directions,”
Benjamin
argued.
“I
fear
for
the
whole
pipeline
of
vaccines
in
our
country.”

Not
everyone
in
the
medical
industry
is
upset
with
ACIP’s
recommendation,
however.
Dr.
Samantha
Mitchell,
DNP,
APRN,
AGPCNP-BC,
dean
of
nursing
(Houston
Campus)
and
interim
dean
of
nursing
(Denver
Campus)
at
Denver
College
of
Nursing,
said
this
decision
likely
wasn’t
made
lightly
by
ACIP
and
that
the
panel
is
“doing
what’s
best
for
those
that
are
affected,
which
are
the
neonates.”
She
added
that
she
anticipates
this
to
cause
a
lot
of
medical
providers
and
advisory
panels
to
look
more
into
other
vaccines.

“I
think
that
in
the
future,
it’s
just
going
to
lead
to
them
doing
more
research
studies
and
looking
more
in
depth
on
the
different
things
that
they’re
using
to
create
the
vaccines.
So
while
it
does
cause
benefits,
which
keeps
you
from
having
disease,
it’ll
also
not
cause
other
neurotoxic
effects
or
other
effects
to
the
body,”
she
said.

Hopkins,
meanwhile,
hopes
that
there
isn’t
a
rollback
on
recommendations
for
other
vaccines
in
the
near
future.
He
said
that
NFID
is
advocating
“for
the
re-establishment
of
broadly
representative
ACIP
expert
workgroups,
including
CDC
experts
and
external
experts
in
public
health,
vaccinology,
and
clinical
care,
to
help
ensure
that
vaccine
policy
remains
anchored
in
the
best
available
evidence.
Healthcare
professionals
can
help
by
educating
families,
answering
their
questions,
and
not
missing
opportunities
to
vaccinate.”


Photo:
baona,
Getty
Images

Morning Docket: 12.17.25 – Above the Law

*
Minority
law
school
enrollment
declines
at
most
schools.
[NY
Times
]

*
Harvard
morgue
manager
sentenced
to
8
years.
This
case
has
gone
on
forever…
the
legal
fees
must
have
cost
him
an
arm
and
a
leg.
[WCVB]

*
Lawmakers
noticing
that
Brad
Bondi’s
clients
keep
getting
good
deals
from
the
DOJ.
[Punchbowl
News
]

*
Lawyers
fined
for
hallucinations
in
OnlyFans
case
in
quintessential
2025
story.
[ABA
Journal
]

*
The
cure
for
AI
hallucinations
may
be
dusting
off
your
cross-examination
skills.
[JD
Supra
]

*
DOJ
trying
to
push
Maurene
Comey
case
to
Merit
Board.
[New
York
Law
Journal
]

*
Company
publicly
trying
to
abandon
its
former
name
files
trademark
suit
against
new
company
trying
to
use
the
name.
[Law360]

*
Supreme
Court
Shameless
Audition
Update:
Judge
Thapar
pens
gratuitous
separate
opinion
in
gun
case
arguing
that
the
Constitution
doesn’t
apply
to
immigrants.
[Reuters]

Bonuses For The Holidays! – See Also – Above the Law

Susman
Godfrey’s
Bonuses
Punch
Above
The
Market!:
They’re
doing
good
work
and
the
money
shows!
But
Wait,
There’s
More!:
Check
out
Goodwin
and
Massumi
+
Consoli
LLP!
‘Tis
The
Season
For
Promotions!:
Cadwalader
promotes
a
big
partner
class.
Catch
Up
On
This
Partners
To
Enemies
Arc:
Marc
Kasowitz
and
Eric
Herschmann
take
their
fight
to
the
courtroom.
Bring
Out
Ye
Nominations!:
Who
will
be
crowned
2025’s
Lawyer
Of
The
Year?

Law Schools Are Increasingly Popular – Above the Law



Ed.
Note:

Welcome
to
our
daily
feature

Trivia
Question
of
the
Day!


According
to
data
from
the
Council
of
the
ABA
Section
of
Legal
Education
and
Admissions
to
the
Bar,
how
much
did
first-year
law
school
enrollment
increase
this
year
over
2024?


Hint:
Law
school
enrollment
is
being
driven
up
by
economic
uncertainty
and
the
“Trump
bump,”
that
is,
political
divisions.



See
the
answer
on
the
next
page.

Why Lawyers Keep Casting Blind And How A Lawyer Coach Can Help You Hit The Right Water – Above the Law

A
few
days
after
a
fruitful
guided
fishing
trip
with
my
son,
I
told
the
story
of
our
bounty
to
my
friend
Rafi
Arbel
of
Market
JD,
who
works
with
law
firms
on
their
marketing.
I
explained
how
we
spent
the
morning
fishing
on
the
Chain
O’
Lakes
flipping
docks
for
crappies,
bluegills,
and
perch.
For
the
uninitiated,
flipping
docks
requires
precision.
You
fire
a
small
bait
and
bobber
into
tight
shadows
under
docks
to
get
to
where
the
fish
are
most
likely
to
lie
in
waiting.
When
you
hit
the
mark,
it
feels
sensational.
When
you
miss,
you
end
up
snagged
on
the
dock
or
having
to
recast,
which
can
get
frustrating.

Rafi
stopped
me
mid
story
and
asked
why
we
hired
a
guide.
Why
not
just
take
my
son
out
on
our
own.
The
answer
came
easily.
We
do
not
have
a
boat,
but
even
if
we
did,
that
is
not
why
we
brought
in
a
professional.
A
good
guide
changes
the
entire
outcome.
They
know
where
the
fish
are
and
what
bait
or
lures
have
the
greatest
probability
for
success.
They
position
the
boat
to
give
you
the
perfect
angle
and
move
on
quickly
you
when
the
spot
cools
off.
At
the
end
of
the
trip,
they
even
fillet
and
clean
the
fish
so
you
leave
with
dinner
in
the
cooler.

A
lack
of
guidance
on
the
water
is
incredibly
similar
to
the
challenges
lawyers
face
with
business
development
and
personal
branding.
Most
lawyers
are
on
the
“water”
every
week
with
no
clear
plan,
no
real
process,
and
without
an
experienced
guide
who
truly
knows
the
lake.
Lawyers
regularly
tell
themselves
they
can
figure
it
out
because
they
are
smart,
capable,
and
used
to
solving
complex
problems.
Yet
intelligence
does
not
replace
experience,
and
working
harder
does
not
replace
a
proven
system.

If
you
break
down
what
a
skilled
guide
does,
you
end
up
with
the
same
three
fundamentals
that
define
effective
legal
business
development
coaching.


First,
planning
the
trip.

Lawyers
often
jump
straight
into
activity
without
ever
defining
where
they
want
to
go
or
how
they
plan
to
get
there.
A
solid
plan
clarifies
the
targets,
the
strategy,
and
the
tools
needed
along
the
way.
This
includes
building
or
refining
a
marketing
plan,
tightening
your
LinkedIn
profile,
sharpening
your
infomercial,
identifying
the
targets
you
should
meet
with,
and
understanding
where
your
greatest
opportunities
actually
sit.
Most
lawyers
cannot
see
this
because
it’s
hard
to
read
the
label
from
inside
the
bottle.
An
experienced
coach
provides
that
external
view
and
turns
good
intentions
into
an
actionable
results-driven
direction.


Second,
following
a
real
process.

Fishing
requires
more
than
a
boat
and
bait.
It
requires
a
system
for
reading
the
water,
interpreting
conditions,
and
adjusting
to
what
is
happening
beneath
the
surface.
Business
development
works
in
much
the
same
way.
Without
a
proven
process,
lawyers
drift
into
random
acts
of
marketing
and
hope
something
eventually
sticks.
An
industry-focused
coach
brings
a
tested
framework
that
guides
who
to
meet,
how
to
qualify
opportunities,
how
to
lead
effective
business
conversations,
and
how
to
turn
relationships
into
real
work.
Not
every
coach
has
a
system.
Some
simply
react
to
your
ideas.
But
the
best
coaches,
like
the
best
guides,
provide
you
with
methods
and
language
you
can
follow
every
time.


Third,
feedback
and
evaluation.

A
fishing
guide
does
not
sit
still
when
nothing
is
biting.
They
change
tactics.
They
move
locations
and
constantly
evaluate
what
is
working
and
what
is
not.
Lawyers
need
the
same
level
of
course
correction.
An
effective
coach
reviews
what
you
are
doing,
identifies
where
you
are
drifting
off
the
mark,
and
suggests
adjustments
so
you
get
back
on
track.
This
is
where
long-term
success
is
built.
A
fun
question
to
ask
yourself
,
“Do
I
have
three
years
of
experience
in
business
development
or
do
I
have
one
year,
three
times?”
Think
about
that
for
a
moment.
Without
feedback,
lawyers
can
spend
hundreds
of
hours
a
year
on
business
development
with
little
to
show
for
it,
simply
because
no
one
is
helping
them
adjust
in
real
time.

The
broader
point
is
not
merely
about
the
value
of
coaching.
It
is
about
efficiency,
focus
and
clarity.
Lawyers
can
and
do
go
it
alone,
hoping
they
figure
it
out.
Or
they
can
work
with
someone
who
already
knows
the
water,
knows
the
patterns,
and
knows
how
to
accelerate
progress.

Fishing
with
a
guide
is
not
about
catching
one
fish.
It
is
about
learning
the
system,
so
every
future
trip
is
more
productive.
Business
development
works
the
same
way.
When
lawyers
get
the
right
plan,
the
right
process,
and
the
right
feedback,
the
results
come
faster
and
with
far
less
struggle.

If
you
want
to
explore
how
this
applies
to
your
practice,
I
am
always
open
to
a
conversation.
You
can
reach
me
at

[email protected]

or
visit
bethatlawyer.com.

A
guide
makes
all
the
difference
on
the
water.
The
right
coach
makes
the
same
difference
in
your
career.
The
difference
is
that
one
leads
to
fun
and
a
great
meal,
for
you
it
leads
to
control,
freedom,
and
independence
as
a
lawyer.




Steve
Fretzin
is
a
bestselling
author,
host
of
the
“Be
That
Lawyer”
podcast,
and
business
development
coach
exclusively
for
attorneys.
Steve
has
committed
his
career
to
helping
lawyers
learn
key
growth
skills
not
currently
taught
in
law
school.
His
clients
soon
become
top
rainmakers
and
credit
Steve’s
program
and
coaching
for
their
success.
He
can
be
reached
directly
by
email
at 
[email protected].
Or
you
can
easily
find
him
on
his
website
at 
www.fretzin.com or
LinkedIn
at 
https://www.linkedin.com/in/stevefretzin.

AI Summit 2025: 10 Takeaways And Some Unanswered Questions – Above the Law

I
walked
into
the
AI
Summit
with
hard
questions
about
industry
maturity,
infrastructure
challenges,
and
implementation
realities.
My
previous
coverage
explored
some
of
these
issues
in
my

initial
fireside
chat
analysis

and

pre-Summit
post
.
Here’s
what
I
found

and
what
I
didn’t
find

across
10
key
takeaways.


My
10
Takeaways

1.
Did
the
show
focus
on
the
above
challenges?
Largely,
no.
There
were
a
few
sessions
that
mentioned
the
infrastructure,
for
example,
but
none
talked
about
the
energy
risks.
The
only
one
that
came
close
was
one
on
sovereign
AI
but
it
was
mainly
a
marketing
pitch
for
a
supercomputer.

2.
As
far
as
the
verification
and
economic
challenges,
there
was
not
much
discussion.
Rather
the
Summit
felt
like
another
AI
love
fest:
everyone
with
different
spoons
stirring
in
the
same
old
bowl.
I
get
it,
it’s
a
show
for
the
vendors
and
by
the
vendors.
But
shouldn’t
there
have
been
at
least
a
little
more
discussion
of
reality
and
the
challenges?

3.
One
bright
spot
was
the
cybersecurity
stage.
Most
of
the
presenters
for
this
stage
recognized
the
cybersecurity
risks
that
sophisticated
AI
could
pose.
Like
AI
platforms
that
could
adapt
to
the
defenses
and
then
attack
again
and
again.
One
presenter
mentioned
the
risks
to
the
electric
grid
and
infrastructure
which
could
impact
AI
and
slow
its
use.

4.
I
was
particularly
interested
in
hearing
from
the
New
York
City
presenters,
who
returned
to
discuss
how
the
City
uses
AI
to
serve
underserved
communities.
While
progress
has
been
made,
much
of
their
presentation
focused
on
political
threats
to
these
programs
under
the
incoming
mayoral
administration
and
in
general.
The
fears
were
palpable
and
understandable.

5.
There
were
several
references
to
ambient
AI

AI
that
works
in
the
background
without
people
realizing
it.
That’s
where
we
are
headed.
But
the
focus
should
have
been
perhaps
more
on
what
the
tools
that
AI
supports
could
actually
do
and
what
problems
those
tools
could
now
solve
with
AI’s
help.
Indeed,
there
appeared
to
be
lots
of
interest
in
the
use
of
AI
in
health
care
and
in
finance.
Those
sessions
were
the
most
well
attended
which
perhaps
reflects
an
interest,
as
mentioned
above,
in
how
AI
could
be
applied
practically
to
make
other
things
work
better.

6.
There
was
a
lot
of
interest
in
what
AI
will
do
to
creative
fields
and
how
AI
could
be
legitimately
used
by
humans
in
a
creative
fashion.
The
prevailing
view
seemed
to
be
that
ideas
come
from
humans,
and
the
AI
enables
implementation
and
the
fleshing
out
of
those
ideas
in
ways
not
previously
possible.
That’s
good
for
now.
But
the
issue
really
is
as
AI
advances,
what
will
it
do
to
human
creativity
fields
and
the
arts.
The
sessions
looked
less
at
this
and
what
AI
can
do
now.

7.
A
common
and
perhaps
by
now
trite
theme:
AI
with
humans
beats
AI
or
humans
alone.
It’s
the
human
in
the
loop
argument.
But
rarely
does
anyone
stop
and
ask
what
this
means.
What
human?
And
where
in
the
loop
does
the
human
fit
today
and
tomorrow?
I’m
not
faulting
the
AI
Summit
for
not
asking
these
questions,
no
other
conference
is
either.

8.
I
have
to
talk
about
the
facility,
the
Javits
Center,
in
particular,
since
it
will
be
the
site
of
the
legal
tech
conference,

Legalweek
.
In
2026,
that
conference
is
moving
from
midtown
Manhattan
where
it’s
been
for
years.
 The
good?
Javits
is
roomy,
the
exhibit
space
flows
well.
It’s
not
chopped
on
three
floors
like
the
Hilton
space
is.
 The
food
at
Javits
is
not
as
bad
as
some
conference
venues.
There’s
even
a
Starbucks
onsite.

The
bad?
Many
of
the
stages
took
place
on
the
exhibit
floor.
For
the
most
part
the
presentations
there
were
hard
to
hear
over
the
din
of
the
rest
of
the
floor.
Whether
Legalweek
will
resort
to
the
having
the
same
arrangement
remains
to
be
seen.
But
it’s
distracting
to
say
the
least.

The
ugly?
It’s
a
walk
from
most
hotels.
There
are
few
restaurants
in
the
vicinity.
There
is
no
shopping
nearby.
All
the
things
that
made
the
midtown
site
attractive
to
many
are
far
away
from
the
Javits
Center.
That
doesn’t
particularly
bother
me
since
I
go
to
several
shows
where
walking
some
distance
to
get
from
place
to
place
is
necessary.
But
based
on
the
feedback
to
this
year’s
ABA

TechShow

of
which
I
was
co-chair,
which
made
a
similar
move
to
a
similar
venue,
McCormick
Place
in
Chicago,
I
predict
Legalweek
will
hear
a
slew
of
complaints
over
this.
And
since
it
will
in
early
March,
it
may
be
a
cold
walk
as
well.

9.
As
I

have
written
,
there
were
some
useful
perspectives
from
business
leaders
on
the
proper
AI
mindset.
That
mindset
is
much
different
than
I
see
in
legal.
Part
of
that
is
by
necessity:
legal
thrives
on
accuracy
and
confidence.
But
as
one
of
my
clients
used
to
say,
we
always
need
to
be
careful
we
don’t
spend
too
much
time
in
the
closet
talking
to
ourselves.
That’s
the
beauty
of
attending
a
conference
like
the
AI
Summit.
But
like
most
nonlegal
conferences
I
attend,
there
were
few,
if
any,
legal
professionals
or
lawyers
in
attendance
at
the
Summit.
There
was
little
discussion
of
legal
issues.
It’s
not
good
for
legal
to
ignore
what’s
going
on
in
the
rest
of
the
world.
If
nothing
else,
many
of
the
exhibitors
and
attendees
are
likely
clients
of
lawyers
and
law
firms
(or
could
be). 
It
might
be
good
to
hear
what
they
are
thinking.

10.
Unlike
some
shows
I
have
been
to,
I
didn’t
get
the
sense
of
a
bro
culture.
People
were
energetic
and
enthusiastic
about
AI
in
general,
and
in
particular,
use
cases.
They
are
looking
to
push
the
envelope.
That’s
a
good
thing.
That’s
how
we
advance.
It’s
like
another
show
I
attend
every
year,
CES:
75%
of
what’s
talked
about
may
never
happen.
But
some
things
will.
Or
what’s
talked
about
will
inspire
new
things
to
happen
and
be
developed.
That’s
the
beauty
of
attending:
fresh
perspectives,
new
ways
of
thinking.


When
Can
We
Talk?

My
takeaways
lead
to
some
broader
questions
that
need
addressing.
Let
me
hasten
to
say
if
I
sound
like
I’m
an
AI
curmudgeon
of
late,
I’m
not.
I
believe
in
AI
and
its
vast
opportunities.

But
with
those
opportunities
come
challenges.
Like
how
we
can
ensure
we
have
the
infrastructure
to
support
all
the
things
we
want
AI
to
do.
 Like
how
AI
will
disrupt
the
workforce,
eliminate
jobs,
and
redefine
what
work
means.

We
get
too
many
pithy
concepts
tossed
around
like
truisms:
AI
won’t
replace
humans
it
will
just
replace
humans
that
don’t
use
it.
Or
there
will
be
other
jobs
to
replace
those
lost
to
the
technology.
Maybe
these
things
are
true.
But
just
mouthing
them
doesn’t
make
that
so.

Perhaps
shows
like
the
AI
Summit
are
not
the
place
to
talk
openly
about
these
things.
But
we
need
to
have
that
discussion
someplace:
a
first-time
attendee
asked
me
at
the
Summit
if
there
were
any
conferences
devoted
to
an
examination
of
the
hard
issues.
I
thought
for
a
moment
and
finally
said,
“None
that
I
can
think
of.”

Right
now,
our
relationship
with
AI
is
like
one
where
hard
issues
are
always
put
off.
That
never
ends
well.

It’s
great
to
sing
your
team’s
fight
song
and
cheer.
It’s
even
better
when
your
team
has
the
talent
to
meet
the
challenges
it
faces.
Let’s
recognize
the
difference
between
cheering
and
meeting
the
real
AI
challenges..




Stephen
Embry
is
a
lawyer,
speaker,
blogger,
and
writer.
He
publishes TechLaw
Crossroads
,
a
blog
devoted
to
the
examination
of
the
tension
between
technology,
the
law,
and
the
practice
of
law

Cadwalader Promotes Big Partner Class Amid Merger Talks – Above the Law



Ed.
note
:
Welcome
to
our
daily
feature,

Quote
of
the
Day
.


We’re
thrilled
to
share
this
news.
The
past
year
has
been
one
of
the
most
successful
in
our
firm’s
storied
233-year
history.
Our
strong
performance
is
thanks
to
the
extraordinary
talent
that
Cadwalader
has
long
been
known
for.
Our
new
partners,
special
counsel
and
counsel
will
carry
forward
this
legacy.






Patrick
Quinn
,
Cadwalader’s
comanaging
partner,
in
comments
concerning
the
firm’s
recent

partner
and
counsel
promotions
.
The
firm,
which
has
had
its

fair
share
of
troubles

this
year,
is
promoting
seven
attorneys
to
partner
and
17
attorneys
to
special
counsel
and
counsel
positions.





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 BlueskyX/Twitter,
and Threads, or
connect
with
her
on LinkedIn.

Unregulated mining sparks ‘environmental armageddon’ fears in Zimbabwe

The
concerns
were
raised
during This
Morning
on
Asakhe
,
a
programme
that
examined
the
depth
of
Zimbabwe’s
environmental
crisis.

Speaking
on
the
scale
of
environmental
degradation,
the
Executive
Director
of
the
Centre
for
Natural
Resource
Governance
(CNRG),
Farai
Maguwu,
said
the
country’s
mining
boom
had
reached
crisis
levels,
fuelled
by
economic
collapse
and
the
loss
of
formal
employment.

“It
has
reached
a
crisis
level.
When
you
look
at
what
is
happening
in
Zimbabwe
today
regarding
mining,
it
is
like
we
have
discovered
minerals
for
the
first
time

everybody
is
getting
into
mining,”
Maguwu
said.
“There
are
push
factors
where
the
economy
has
failed
to
take
off,
factories
and
industries
have
closed,
and
many
people
have
lost
formal
employment.
There
is
now
a
consensus
that
the
only
place
where
you
can
get
rich
quickly
is
mining.”

Maguwu
warned
that
governance
in
the
mining
sector
had
significantly
weakened,
allowing
mining
activities
to
spread
into
ecologically
sensitive
and
protected
areas.

“We
have
seen
the
weakening
of
governance
to
the
extent
that
ecologically
sensitive
areas
are
no
longer
spared.
Mountains
are
disappearing,
and
rivers
are
being
destroyed,
even
though
there
is
a
policy
banning
mining
in
rivers,
it
is
simply
not
being
respected,”
he
said.

He
cited
mining
activities
at
UNESCO
heritage
sites
and
protected
areas
such
as
Mavuradona
Wilderness,
as
well
as
destruction
in
areas
including
Shurugwi
and
Poterekwa
Mountain.

“What
is
even
more
worrying
is
that
those
who
should
be
enforcing
the
law
are
now
part
of
the
syndicates
destroying
the
environment,”
Maguwu
said.

He
added
that
in
areas
such
as
Penhalonga
in
Mutare,
some
police
officers,
soldiers,
senior
government
officials
and
Central
Intelligence
Organisation
(CIO)
operatives
were
allegedly
involved
in
mining
activities.

“This
has
gone
beyond
being
an
environmental
crisis,
it
has
become
a
national
security
threat,”
he
said.

Maguwu
further
warned
that
mining
was
taking
place
beneath
roads
and
residential
areas,
increasing
the
risk
of
disasters.

“They
are
digging
massive
holes
in
mountains,
creating
underground
dams.
When
these
collapse,
they
will
cause
flash
floods,
and
people
will
be
washed
away,”
he
said.

He
expressed
concern
over
what
he
described
as
the
government’s
apparent
lack
of
urgency
in
addressing
destructive
mining.

“The
level
of
environmental
destruction
taking
place
in
Zimbabwe
should
be
alarming
to
the
government
if
it
is
concerned
about
the
people
and
the
future
of
this
country,”
Maguwu
said.

Maguwu
also
noted
that
the
shift
from
underground
mining
to
open-cast
mining
had
accelerated
environmental
damage.

“Before
2000,
mining
in
Zimbabwe
was
largely
underground
and
did
not
disturb
the
surface
as
much.
Today,
forests
are
being
cleared
over
one,
two
or
even
three
kilometres.
Agricultural
land
is
being
turned
into
mining
land,
undermining
food
sovereignty,”
he
said.

He
warned
about
the
uncontrolled
use
and
disposal
of
toxic
substances
such
as
mercury
and
cyanide,
particularly
during
the
rainy
season.

“There
are
no
punitive
measures
to
prevent
irresponsible
disposal
of
these
substances.
Mercury
and
cyanide
are
being
dumped
indiscriminately,”
Maguwu
said.

He
explained
that
gold
processing
methods
such
as
heap
leaching
were
worsening
contamination.

“When
the
rains
fall,
these
chemicals
are
washed
into
rivers,
streams
and
dams,”
he
said.

Maguwu
expressed
particular
concern
for
rural
communities
that
rely
on
untreated
water
from
shallow
wells,
especially
in
areas
such
as
Marange
and
Matabeleland
North.

“The
majority
of
Zimbabweans
live
in
rural
areas
where
people
drink
water
from
shallow
wells.
All
that
water
is
contaminated,”
he
said.
“What
comes
from
irresponsible
mining
is
something
we
cannot
fully
comprehend
at
this
stage,
but
many
Zimbabweans
are
dying,
and
will
die
prematurely,
because
of
this.
That
is
why
I
call
it
environmental
Armageddon.
No
one
is
safe.”

Echoing
similar
concerns,
the
Executive
Director
of
the
Centre
for
Environmental
and
Corporate
Accountability
Research
(CECAR),
Nkosikhona
Sibanda,
said
the
crisis
was
widespread,
with
Matabeleland
North
experiencing
a
surge
in
mining
activities,
particularly
by
Chinese-owned
companies.

“The
crisis
is
similar
across
the
country.
In
Matabeleland
North,
we
have
seen
an
influx
of
Chinese
mining
companies
in
areas
such
as
Hwange,
Kamativi
in
Binga,
and
other
parts
of
the
province,”
Sibanda
said.

“When
you
hear
about
foreign
investment,
you
expect
development,
but
for
communities
in
these
areas
it
has
been
the
opposite.
Mining
has
come
with
severe
environmental
degradation.”

Sibanda
said
studies
conducted
between
2024
and
2025
revealed
alarming
levels
of
air
pollution
in
Hwange.

“The
outcomes
were
shocking.
The
air
residents
are
breathing
is
far
beyond
safe
levels.
People
are
essentially
walking
corpses
because
they
are
inhaling
toxic
gases,”
he
said.

He
added
that
health
facilities
had
reported
a
sharp
increase
in
respiratory
and
chronic
diseases.

“This
shows
that
it
is
not
only
the
environment
that
is
being
damaged,
people’s
lives
are
at
risk
as
well,”
Sibanda
said.

Trump Lawyer Fight Club: Marc Kasowitz Sued By Former Partner Eric Herschmann – Above the Law

Entropy
rules
the
universe,
no
matter
how
closely
you
flirt
with
authoritarians.

Once
upon
a
time,
Marc
Kasowitz
and
Eric
Herschmann
were
partners
at
Kasowitz’s
eponymous
firm.

Now
Herschmann
is
suing
Kasowitz

seeking
“millions”
in
unpaid
compensation
and
alleging
a
pattern
of
financial
mismanagement.
Then
Donald
Trump
decided
to
enter
politics
and
everything
fell
apart
as
these
two
decided
to
hitch
their
wagons
to
his
sundowning
star.

Back
in
2017,
Trump
sauntered
into
office
convinced
that
his
longtime
real
estate
litigator
could
serve
as
his
White
House
consigliere.
It
did
not
go
well.
Between
the

ethics
complaints

and

diplomatic
blunders
,
Kasowitz
retreated
from
the
presidential
power.
Toward
the
end
of
Trump’s
first
term,
while
the
boss
told
Americans
to
consider
injecting
themselves
with
Lysol
and
horse
dewormers,
Eric
Herschmann
decided
to
take
his
turn
in
the
Trump
orbit.
He
showed
up
just
in
time
to

be
with
Trump
on
January
6


oops

but
embarked
on
a
reasonably
successful
rehabilitation
effort
as

someone
out
there

kept
telling
the
press
amusing
anecdotes
about
him
bluntly
clowning
on

the
most
decidedly
clownish
Trump
lawyers
.

Most
of
America
remembers
Herschmann
for
his
genuinely
eloquent
advice
that
Coup4Dummies
lawyer
John
Eastman
needed
to
“get
a
great
f***ing
criminal
defense
lawyer.”

While
both
Kasowitz
and
Herschmann
once
reached
for
the
stars
with
their
proximity
to
power,
they
are
now
barely
remembered
among
Trump’s
cast
of
supporting
characters.
But
brash,
litigious
egos
are
a
feature
that
Trump
selects
for
in
his
lawyers,
meaning
it
was
only
a
matter
of
time
before
they
earned
a
chaotic
post-credits
scene
in
the
Trump
Cinematic
Universe.

As
the
New
York
Law
Journal
explains:

“The
complaint
claims
that
Kasowitz
overextended
the
firm’s
finances
by
promised
lucrative
compensation
guarantees
to
lateral
partners,
who
then
failed
to
generate
enough
business.
Herschmann
also
alleges
the
firm
began
offering
‘heavily
discounted
hourly
fee
rates’
to
induce
important
clients
not
to
switch
representation.”

Herschmann
claims
that
he
didn’t
know
about
this
at
the
time
and
was
“induced”
to
return
to
the
firm
after
his
January
6
misadventures
“by
claims
of
financial
stability,”
and
that
he
wouldn’t
have
come
back
if
he
had
a
better
sense
of
its
financial
state.

“Kasowitz
would
use
the
firm’s
profits
to
pay
off
most
or
all
of
the
bank
debt
by
the
end
of
each
year,
which
left
grossly
insufficient
profits
to
pay
the
partner
distributions
Kasowitz
wished
to
pay
to
keep
partners
from
leaving
the
firm,”
the
lawsuit
claimed.
“To
cover
up
these
financial
problems,
Kasowitz
then
secretly
went
into
further
debt.”

For
a
story
that’s
only
tangentially
about
Trump,
there
are
a
lot
of
allegations
that
would
be
right
at
home
in
a
story
about
running
an
Atlantic
City
casino
into
the
ground.
Or,
for
that
matter,
in
a
story
about
the

current

federal
budget
under
Trump.

In
a
lengthy
statement,
a
Kasowitz
spokesperson
said
the
lawsuit
was
“written
for
the
media,
not
for
the
court.”

“As
Mr.
Herschmann
is
well
aware,
any
dispute
concerning
the
firm
is
subject
to
confidential
arbitration,”
the
statement
said.
“For
30
years,
Mr.
Herschmann
was
paid
extraordinarily
well
for
relatively
few
billable
hours
and
small
amounts
of
business.
In
a
case
of
‘no
good
deed
goes
unpunished,’
when
his
outrageous
compensation
demands
near
the
end
of
his
career
were
not
met,
he
decided
to
file
a
thoroughly
false
public
pleading
violating,
among
other
things,
the
partnership
agreement’s
confidential
arbitration
requirement.
Our
filings
will
address
Mr.
Herschmann’s
frivolous
claims,
and
his
own
conduct
as
a
partner
in
the
firm.”

“Mr.
Herschmann
was
paid
extraordinarily
well
for
relatively
few
billable
hours
and
small
amounts
of
business.”
Speaking
of
Trump
parallels,
the
firm
couldn’t
get
through
its
statement
without
hurling
a
random
insult
Herschmann’s
way.
If
he
brought
in
enough
business
to
get
paid
more
under
his
agreement,
it
doesn’t
really
matter
if
the
firm
wants
to
claim
they
were
just
being
generous.
The
response
begins
by
accusing
Herschmann
of
playing
to
the
media…
and
immediately
pivots
to

yeah,
and
he
sucks
too!

I
mean,
what
are
we
doing
here,
people?

But
it
allows
the
firm
to
inject
a
little
bit
more
Trump-branded
chaos
into
the
proceedings.
No
wonder
he
liked
these
guys.


Marc
Kasowitz,
Kasowitz
Sued
Over
Alleged
Unpaid
Wages,
Financial
Mismangment

[New
York
Law
Journal]


Earlier
:

Oh
Look,
It’s
A
Former
Biglaw
Partner
Hanging
Out
With
Trump
Before
The
Capitol
Riot!


Axios
Story
Confirms
That
Trump
Lawyers
REALLY
Want
To
Be
Able
To
Re-Enter
Polite
Society


Everyone
Thought
John
Eastman
Was
Crazy
And
Just
Kind
Of…
Let
Him
Do
It
Anyway

Trump
White
House
Lawyer
Eric
Herschmann
Called
BS
On
Trump’s
Personal
Lawyers




HeadshotJoe
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 or

Bluesky

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
.