Category: News Feeds

Biglaw
doesn’t
change
overnight
—
until
someone
comes
along
and
quietly,
persistently
forces
it
to.

That’s
exactly
what

Jami
McKeon
did
over
the
past
12
years
at
Morgan
Lewis
&
Bockius,
and
now,
as
she
prepares
to
hand
over
the
reins,
it’s
worth
taking
a
moment
to
appreciate
just
how
much
of
the
modern
law
firm
playbook
bears
her
fingerprints.
When
she
took
over
in
2014
as
the
firm’s
first
female
chair,
it
wasn’t
just
a
milestone
for
Morgan
Lewis,
it
was
a
signal
to
the
rest
of
Biglaw
that
the
“boys
club”
at
the
top
wasn’t
inevitable.

McKeon
didn’t
just
hold
the
job,
she
transformed
it.
She
led
the
firm
through
explosive
global
growth,
overseeing
thousands
of
lawyers
across
continents
while
steering
through
industry-shaping
moments,
from
major
lateral
integrations
to
the
pandemic
and
beyond.
Under
her
watch,
Morgan
Lewis
didn’t
just
get
bigger
—
it
got
smarter,
more
strategic,
and
more
intentional
about
culture,
technology,
and
what
leadership
actually
looks
like
in
a
modern
law
firm.

McKeon’s
successor,

David
McManus
—
who’s
been
working
at
the
firm
for
more
than
30
years
—
will
work
alongside
her
for
a
training
phase
of
sorts
before
he
officially
assumes
the
role
in
October
for
a
five-year
term.
McManus
has
had
several
leadership
positions
at
the
firm,
and
knows
that
he’ll
be
stepping
into
some
very
big
shoes
once
McKeon
steps
down,
saying
he’ll
work
hard
to
“carry
on
the
legacy
that
Jami
has
built.”

American
Lawyer
has
some
additional
details
from
his
statement:

“On
behalf
of
the
entire
partnership,
I
want
to
express
our
deep
gratitude
to
Jami
for
her
extraordinary
impact
on
Morgan
Lewis.
She
has
been
an
inspirational
and
passionate
leader
and
mentor,
guiding
our
firm
with
vision,
integrity
and
an
enduring
devotion
to
our
clients
and
our
people—while
shaping
a
culture
that
will
continue
to
propel
our
future
successes.”

“I
have
seen
firsthand
how
that
momentum
has
evolved,
and
I
look
forward
to
partnering
closely
with
Jami
in
the
months
ahead
to
ensure
a
seamless
transition
and
build
on
the
foundation
she
set
forth—reinforcing
what
makes
us
distinctive
while
developing
in
ways
that
position
our
firm
for
the
future.”

McKeon,
who
announced
her

plans
to
retire
from
the
firm
in
late
2025,
said,
“It
has
been
a
true
privilege
to
serve
as
chair
of
Morgan
Lewis
and
to
work
alongside
such
talented
and
dedicated
colleagues
around
the
world.
I
am
incredibly
proud
of
all
that
we
have
accomplished
together.”

Jami
McKeon
opened
the
door
for
other
women
leaders
in
Biglaw,
and
that’s
a
legacy
that
extends
far
beyond
any
one
firm.
As
Morgan
Lewis
turns
the
page,
Biglaw
is
still
operating
in
the
world
Jami
McKeon
helped
create,
whether
it
fully
realizes
it
or
not.

Congratulations
to
David
McManus
on
his
upcoming
leadership
role
at
Morgan
Lewis,
and
a
very
fond
farewell
to
Jami
McKeon
as
she
calls
time
on
a
tenure
that
reshaped
Biglaw.

Morgan
Lewis
Names
New
Chair
as
McKeon
Closes
Out
12-Year
Tenure
[American
Lawyer]

Staci
Zaretsky is
the
managing
editor
of
Above
the
Law,
where
she’s
worked
since
2011.
She’d
love
to
hear
from
you,
so
please
feel
free
to email her
with
any
tips,
questions,
comments,
or
critiques.
You
can
follow
her
on Bluesky, X/Twitter,
and Threads, or
connect
with
her
on LinkedIn.

Ed.
note:
Please
welcome
Renee
Knake
Jefferson
back
to
the
pages
of
Above
the
Law.
Subscribe
to
her
Substack,
Legal
Ethics
Roundup, here.

Welcome
to
what
captivates,
haunts,
inspires,
and
surprises
me
every
week
in
the
world
of
legal
ethics.

This
week
is
all
about
books
for
me.

On
Wednesday,
you
can
join
me
from
6-7:30PM
eastern
for
an
event
hosted
by Hofstra
Law’s Monroe
H.
Freedman
Center
for
the
Study
of
Legal
Ethics
and
Fordham
Law’s
Stein
Center
for
Law
and
Ethics where
I
will
be
discussing
the
new
book
from Ray
Brescia (Albany)
— Lawyer
3.0:
A
Guide
to
Next-Wave
Lawyering —
along
with Bruce
Green (Fordham), Cat
Moon (Vanderbilt),
and Sateesh
Nori (NYU).
It’s
free!
Learn
more
and
register here.

You
can
also
find
me
this
week
over
at PrawfsBlawg,
where
I’ll
be
contributing
to
an
online
symposium
about
a
new
book
by Elizabeth
Burch (Georgia), The
Pain
Brokers:
How
Con
Men,
Call
Centers,
and
Rogue
Doctors
Fuel
America’s
Law
Suit
Factory.
Other
contributors
include Brooke
Coleman (Seattle), Seth
Endo (Seattle), Miriam
Giles (Northwestern), Tony
Sebok (Cardozo), Howard
Wasserman (FIU),
and Brad
Wendel (Cornell).
Visit PrawfsBlawg to
follow
along. (And
revisit
the
Recommended
Reading
section
in LER
No.
113 for
a
preview
of
the
book.)

Highlights
from
Last
Week
–
Top
Ten
Headlines


#1
“The
Perilous
War
Over
Legal
Ethics
in
Government
and
Politics.” From Bob
Bauer in Executive
Functions: “The
Trump
administration
is
waging
a
war
against
the
legal
profession
on
a
number
of
fronts.
…
How
these
actions
may
affect
the
profession
will
depend
on
how
far
the
administration
is
willing
to
take
this
fight,
but
also
on
how
the
conflict
is
understood
and
how
the
defense
against
the
administration
is
conducted.”
Read
more here.

#2
“US
Judges
Speak
Out
Against
Threats,
Mysterious
Pizza
Deliveries.” From Reuters: “A
group
of
federal
judges
on
Thursday
publicly
denounced
a
rise
in
threats
against
​them
and
their
colleagues,
including
hateful
messages
aimed
at
a
judge
who
ruled
against
part
of President
Donald
Trump’s ‌hardline
immigration
agenda.
Five
judges
appointed
by
both
Democratic
and
Republican
presidents
during
a
virtual
event
recounted
receiving
disturbing
emails
wishing
them
dead
and
mysterious
pizza
deliveries
to
their
private
homes
as
reasons
why
they
could
not
remain
silent.”
Read
more here.

#3
“John
Roberts
Is
Hanging
District
Court
Judges
Out
to
Dry.” From Balls
and
Strikes: “Chief
Justice
John
Roberts received
applause
from
an
audience
at
Rice
University
on
Tuesday
in
appreciation
of
his
defense
of
the
judiciary
from
inappropriate
attacks.
Roberts appeared in
conversation
with Lee
Rosenthal,
a
senior
federal
district
judge,
who
asked
the
chief
how
he
handles
criticism
of
the
Supreme
Court.
Roberts
responded
by
acknowledging
that
‘judges
around
the
country
work
very
hard
to
get
it
right,’
and
that
constructive
criticism
is
‘healthy’
and
‘important.’
But
he
stressed
that
‘personally
directed
hostility
is
dangerous,’
and
has
‘got
to
stop.’
…
[But
in]
September
2025,
a
dozen
sitting
federal
judges
spoke
to
NBC
News
about
how
the
Court’s
use
of
the
shadow
docket
was
putting
them
in
harm’s
way.”
Read
more here.

#4
“The
Legal
Profession
Cannot
Litigate
Its
Way
Out
of
Technological
Change.” From
the ABA
Journal: “The
recent lawsuit
accusing
OpenAI
of
the
unlicensed
practice
of
law has
triggered
a
familiar
reflex
within
the
profession:
fear
that
technology
is
encroaching
on
protected
ground.
The
complaint
centers
on
a
disability
benefits
claimant
who
had
reached
a
settlement
with
her
insurer
and
then,
relying
on
ChatGPT,
fired
her
attorney
and
generated
new
filings
seeking
to
reopen
the
case.
The
insurer
now
argues
that
OpenAI
‘aided
and
abetted’
her
misuse
of
the
judicial
system.
Whatever
the
merits
of
that
claim,
the
reaction
of
many
in
the
profession
reveals
something
more
consequential
than
the
lawsuit
itself.”
Read
more here.

#5
“Proposed
California
Lawyer
Civility
Oath
Sparks
Free
Speech
Concerns.” From
the Marin
County
Visitor: “California
lawyers
in
Marin
County
will
soon
take
a
civility
pledge
as
part
of
their
annual
renewal
oath.
The
State
Bar
of
California
says
this
move
will
promote
dignity,
courtesy,
and
integrity
throughout
the
profession.
…
In
Marin
communities
like
San
Rafael,
Novato,
Sausalito,
and
Mill
Valley,
attorneys
are
watching
to
see
how
the
pledge
might
change
courtroom
conduct,
client
relations,
and
daily
professional
interactions.
There’s
a
sense
of
curiosity
mixed
with
a
bit
of
skepticism.”
Read
more here.

#6
“Judicial
Ethics
Committee
Issues
Opinion
on
Judges
Serving
as
TV
Analysts.” From
the Tennessee
Bar
Association: “The
Judicial
Ethics
Committee
released
an
ethics
opinion
on
March
6
in
response
to
a
request
for
guidance
on
whether
a
part-time
judge
or
a
pro
tempore
part-time
judge
may
function
as
a
legal
analyst
providing
‘gavel
to
gavel’
coverage
of
pending
cases
for
a
local
television
news
station.
The
committee
found
that
such
a
role
would
not
be
allowed
under
the
Rules
of
Judicial
Conduct.”
Read
more here.

#7
“Federal
Judge
in
D.C.
Issues
New
Grand
Jury
Policy
After
Failed
Indictments
of
Democrats.” From NBC
News: “The
chief
federal
judge
for
the
District
of
Columbia
has
ordered
that
the
judiciary
be
notified
when
a
grand
jury
rejects
the
Trump
administration’s
attempts
to
indict
defendants,
following
the
failed
effort
to
charge
six
sitting
members
of
Congress
over
a
social
media
video. Judge
James
Boasberg said
the
rule
applies
when
the
effort
to
indict
comes
first
as
a
grand
jury
investigation.
He
said
it
would
be
in
place
for
120
days
but
could
become
permanent.
Boasberg
wrote
the
decision
was
‘in
furtherance
of
the
interests
of
consistency
and
transparency.’”
Read
more here.

#8
“FTC
Pitches
California
Supreme
Court
on
Ways
to
Improve
Its
Ethics
Committee.” From Fix
the
Court: “Today,
Fix
the
Court
submitted
a comment to
the
California
Supreme
Court
on
a
proposed
rule
that
would
formally
establish
a
Supreme
Court
Advisory
Committee
on
the
Code
of
Judicial
Ethics.
The
proposal, Rule
9.81 of
the
California
Rules
of
Court,
would
codify
the
structure
and
procedures
of
a
committee
that
has
historically
advised
the
court
on
amendments
to
the
California
Code
of
Judicial
Ethics.
While
the
committee
has
existed de
facto for
several
years,
it
has
never
been
governed
by
a
formal
rule.
We
are
encouraged
by
the
Court’s
effort
to
formalize
the
committee’s
role,
but
we
are
urging
several
changes
designed
to
strengthen
transparency
and
public
confidence
in
the
process.”
Read
more here.

#9
“AI,
Privilege,
and
Work
Product:
Conflicting
Federal
Decisions
Create
a
New
Risk
Frontier.” From JDSupra: “Two
recent
federal
court
decisions—issued
one
week
apart—reach
sharply
divergent
conclusions
on
whether
materials
generated
using
artificial
intelligence
platforms
are
protected
by
the
attorney-client
privilege
or
the
work
product
doctrine.”
Read
more here.

#10
“Where
Calif.
State
Courts
Landed
On
Generative
AI
Use
Rules.” From Law360: “The
majority
of
California’s
58
superior
courts
—
together
making
up
the
country’s
largest
trial
court
system
—
have
decided
to
greenlight
the
use
of
generative
artificial
intelligence
in
their
work
this
year,
a
Law360
investigation
found.”
Read
more here.

Get
Hired


Did
you
miss
the
450+
job
postings
from
previous
weeks?
Find
them
all here.

Upcoming
Ethics
Events
&
Other
Announcements
️

Did
you
miss
an
announcement
from
previous
weeks?
Find
them
all here.

Keep
in
Touch


Do
you
have
colleagues
who
care
about
legal
ethics? Please
share
the
Roundup
with
them.
I’d
love
to
see
our
community
continue
to
grow!

News
tips?
Announcements?
Events? A
job
to
post? Reading
recommendations? Email

[email protected]
–
but
be
sure
to
subscribe
first,
otherwise
the
email
won’t
be
delivered.

Renee
Knake
Jefferson
holds
the
endowed
Doherty
Chair
in
Legal
Ethics
and
is
a
Professor
of
Law
at
the
University
of
Houston.
Check
out
more
of
her
writing
at
the Legal
Ethics
Roundup.
Find
her
on
X
(formerly
Twitter)
at @reneeknake or
Bluesky
at legalethics.bsky.social. 

It
makes
sense
on
the
surface.
Legal
work
is
the
core
of
what
a
firm
does,
so
legal
AI
feels
like
the
obvious
starting
point.
However,
firms
are
more
than
their
practice
groups.
Behind
every
matter
is
a
billing
team,
an
operations
team,
a
marketing
team,
and
a
network
of
business
professionals
who
keep
the
firm
running.
But
a
firm
where
attorneys
draft
with
AI
while
the
billing
team
still
reconciles
invoices
manually
hasn’t
adopted
AI,
it
has
procured
a
point
solution
for
one
department.

Most
legal
AI
tools
already
produce
good
research
and
solid
first
drafts.
The
harder
question
is
whether
one
platform
can
be
useful
to
both
the
partner
running
a
cross-border
deal
and
the
billing
team
closing
out
month-end.

The
“Lawyer-Only”
Problem

The
first
generation
of
legal
AI
tools
was
built
for
a
narrow
audience.
They
could
summarize
case
law
or
redline
a
contract.
While
they
may
be
useful
for
some,
they
were
designed
for
one
type
of
user
doing
one
type
of
work.

That
creates
a
problem.
When
your
lawyers
use
one
AI
platform,
and
your
finance
team
uses
another
(or
nothing
at
all),
you
end
up
with
fragmented
workflows,
duplicated
effort,
and
no
shared
context
across
the
firm.
The
billing
team
can’t
pull
from
the
same
system
that
the
attorneys
are
working
in.
Marketing
can’t
quickly
generate
client-facing
materials
informed
by
the
firm’s
actual
work
product.
Operations
is
still
stitching
things
together
manually.

The
average
firm
juggles
5
to
10
different
applications
to
manage
operations,
and
less
than
half
are
satisfied
with
how
those
tools
work
together.
That
fragmentation
only
gets
worse
when
AI
enters
the
picture
as
yet
another
disconnected
layer.

What
a
Firmwide
Approach
Actually
Looks
Like

Hughes
Hubbard
&
Reed,
an
Am
Law
200
firm
with
a
presence
on
four
continents,
recently
took
a
different
approach.
After
a
four-month
evaluation,
they
selected

August
as
their
firmwide
AI
platform,
deploying
it
not
just
across
practice
areas
but
across
finance,
billing,
marketing,
operations,
and
administration.

The
decision
wasn’t
driven
by
a
single
flashy
feature.
It
came
down
to
whether
the
platform
could
handle
the
range
of
work
that
actually
happens
at
a
global
law
firm,
without
creating
more
overhead
for
the
people
using
it.

“We
have
lawyers
spread
around
the
world
working
across
transactional,
litigation
and
regulatory
matters.
The
bar
for
any
new
technology
here
is
whether
it
can
handle
that
range
without
creating
more
work
for
the
people
using
it,”
said
Neeraj
Rajpal,
Chief
Information
Officer
at
Hughes
Hubbard.
“August
mirrors
how
our
attorneys
work
while
also
delivering
real
value
to
our
finance,
marketing,
and
operations
teams.
That
made
this
a
firmwide
decision,
not
just
a
legal
one.”

That
last
line
is
worth
sitting
with.

A
firmwide
decision,
not
just
a
legal
one.
That’s
a
fundamentally
different
way
to
evaluate
AI.

Why
This
Matters
Now

The
legal
industry
has
moved
past
the
‘should
we
use
AI’
debate.
According
to
Thomson
Reuters,
26%
of
legal
organizations
are
now
actively
using
gen
AI,
up
from
14%
in
2024,
and
78%
of
law
firm
respondents
believe
it
will
become
central
to
their
workflow
within
five
years.
The
open
question
is
no
longer
adoption
but
architecture:
how
do
you
deploy
AI
in
a
way
that
serves
the
full
firm?

Point
solutions
don’t
scale.
They
create
tool
sprawl,
security
headaches,
and
the
kind
of
fragmented
experience
that
makes
people
abandon
technology
rather
than
adopt
it.
A
firm
running
separate
AI
tools
for
contract
review,
research,
business
operations,
and
client
communications
has
a
procurement
problem,
not
a
strategy.

Firms
don’t
need
a
dozen
different
tools,
they
need
one
platform
that
can
capably
and
accurately
cover
their
workflows.
The
consolidation
pressure
is
real,
and
it’s
coming
from
firm
leadership,
not
just
IT.

The
Practice


and

the
Business

The
phrase
that
keeps
coming
up
in
conversations
with
forward-thinking
firms
is
“the
practice
and
the
business
of
law.”
It
captures
something
important.
A
law
firm’s
competitive
position
depends
on
both
halves
working
well
and
working
together.

When
a
single
AI
platform
connects
the
work
lawyers
do
with
the
work
that
supports
it,
the
whole
firm
moves
faster.
Attorneys
can
focus
on
the
substance
of
their
matters.
Business
teams
get
the
context
they
need
without
chasing
it
down.
And
firm
leadership
gets
a
clearer
picture
of
how
the
entire
operation
is
performing.

The
Evaluation
Bar
Is
Rising

What
stood
out
about
the
Hughes
Hubbard
process
was
its
rigor.
Instead
of
merely
testing
whether
an
AI
tool
could
draft
a
document
or
a
contract,
they
tested
whether
it
could
work
across
every
part
of
the
firm.
That
evaluation
took
more
time
upfront,
but
it
avoids
the
more
expensive
problem
of
deploying
something
that
only
serves
half
your
people.

If
your
firm
is
evaluating
AI
right
now,
here’s
the
question
worth
asking:

Is
this
a
tool
for
our
lawyers,
or
is
this
a
platform
for
our
firm?

The
answer
will
determine
whether
you’re
making
a
technology
purchase
or
a
strategic
investment
in
innovation.

 If
you’d
like
to
see
how
August
works
across
your
firm, book
a
meeting
with
our
team
at
august.law.

Private
equity
ownership
of
healthcare
facilities
has
led
to
significant
problems
—
including
hospital
closures,
reduced
staffing
and
compromised
healthcare
services
—
showing
the
need
for
regulation,
a
new
report
shows.

The
report
was
published
in
March
by
the

NYU
Stern
Center
for
Business
and
Human
Rights.
It
analyzed
peer-reviewed
health
outcomes
research,
bankruptcy
records
and
transaction
data.
It
also
examined
case
studies
from
health
systems
like
Steward
Health
Care
and
Prospect
Medical.

NYU
Stern
details
that
private
equity
firms
have
invested
more
than
$1
trillion
in
debt-financed
healthcare
deals
in
the
last
decade.
Some
studies
show
that
private
equity
ownership
increases
in-hospital
complications
by
25%
and
reduces
nursing
staff
by
4.4%.
In
addition,
private
equity
ownership
of
nursing
homes
correlates
with
11%
higher
patient
mortality
rates.

Research
also
shows
that
private
equity
ownership
increases
the
risk
of
bankruptcy
by
10
times.
In
just
2023
alone,
there
were
34
bankruptcies
of
PE-backed
healthcare
businesses.

Steward
Health
and
Prospect
Medical
are
examples
of
health
systems
that
went
bankrupt
following
private
equity
ownership.
Steward
Health
was
owned
by
PE
firm
Cerberus
Capital
Management
from
2010
to
2021
and
went
bankrupt
in
2024,
while
Prospect
Medical
Holdings
was
owned
by
Leonard
Green
&
Company
from
2010
to
2021
and
went
bankrupt
in
2025.
These
bankruptcies
disproportionately
harmed
low-income
and
rural
communities.

“The
private
equity
model
needs
to
be
adapted
for
the
healthcare
sector,
because
otherwise,
they’re
an
unhealthy
fit.
Here,
on
the
one
side,
you
have
a
business
model
that
is
based
on
public
anonymity,
legal
immunity,
remote
and
financialized
ownership
and
a
lack
of
self-restraining
norms.
On
the
other
side,
you
have
a
sector
where
all
the
stakes
are
life
and
death,”
said
Michael
Goldhaber,
author
of
the
report,
in
an
interview.

That
said,
Goldhaber
noted
that
the
report
is
not
advocating
for
a
ban
of
private
equity
in
healthcare.
PE
firms
do
offer
benefits,
like
providing
capital
and
improving
operational
efficiency.
But
there
is
a
need
for
reform,
he
said.

The
report
provides
several
recommendations
to
private
equity
investors
for
self-reform.
Self-regulation
can
be
a
way
to
avoid
“harsher”
government
regulation,
Goldhaber
said.
These
reforms
include:

• Provide
  ongoing
  public
  reporting
  on
  company
  finances,
  as
  well
  as
  ownership,
  workforce
  details,
  patient
  outcomes
  and
  customer
  satisfaction.
• Avoid
  sale-leaseback
  deals
  or
  debt-funded
  dividends,
  and
  don’t
  burden
  healthcare
  companies
  with
  new
  financial
  obligations
  that
  could
  make
  them
  vulnerable
  during
  revenue
  downturns.
• Keep
  a
  maximum
  ratio
  of
  debt
  to
  cash
  flow,
  which
  would
  help
  prevent
  cost-cutting
  measures
  that
  could
  harm
  care
  quality
  or
  lead
  to
  facility
  closures.
• Don’t
  cut
  essential
  services,
  shut
  down
  facilities
  or
  reduce
  staff
  or
  wages
  except
  in
  urgent
  situations
  and
  only
  with
  regulatory
  approval.

The
report
also
provides
recommendations
to
state
and
federal
governments
on
how
to
regulate
private
equity
in
healthcare,
including:

• State
  legislatures
  should
  give
  health
  regulators
  the
  authority
  to
  block
  or
  place
  conditions
  on
  healthcare
  acquisitions.
• States
  should
  use
  the
  review
  process
  for
  deals
  to
  enforce
  specific
  requirements.
• Federal
  and
  state
  lawmakers
  should
  deter
  sale-leaseback
  deals
  and
  debt-funded
  dividends
  by
  making
  companies
  that
  use
  these
  practices
  ineligible
  for
  government
  healthcare
  payments.
• Lawmakers
  should
  hold
  parent
  or
  controlling
  entities
  accountable
  when
  their
  portfolio
  companies
  commit
  fraud
  against
  government
  healthcare
  programs,
  if
  the
  investors
  knew
  about
  the
  misconduct
  and
  failed
  to
  report
  it.
• Congress
  should
  require
  private
  equity
  firms
  to
  disclose
  detailed
  financial
  information
  to
  the
  SEC
  and
  restrict
  access
  to
  401(k)
  investments
  for
  firms
  that
  do
  not
  comply.

Photo:
atibodyphoto,
Getty
Images

*
Robert
Mueller
died
over
the
weekend.
Mueller’s
investigation
found
widespread
criminality
among
Trump’s
circle
including
ample
evidence
—
under
ordinary
circumstances
—
to
pursue
obstruction
charges
against
Trump
himself.
[NY
Times]

*
“Good,
I’m
glad
he’s
dead,”
Trump
wrote,
reacting
to
news
of
Mueller’s
passing
with
all
the
class
one
would
expect.
Clearly
the
same
people
who
called
for
private
citizens
to
be
fired
as
insensitive
for
merely
quoting
Charlie
Kirk
after
he
was
killed.
[CNN]

*
Jurors
conclude
Elon
Musk
tried
to
mislead
investors
when
he
threatened
to
back
out
of
the
Twitter
deal.
[BBC]

*
Fifth
Circuit
knocks
down
FTC
cease-and-desist
over
TurboTax
misleading
consumers.
Happy
tax
season!
[Law360]

*
Kirkland
lawyer
who
represented
Epstein
retiring
from
the
firm.
[American
Lawyer]

*
Supreme
Court
prepares
to
hear
challenge
to
latest
state
voting
obstacle.
[New
York
Times]

*
Ruemmler
receiving
$25
million
as
she
departs
Goldman.
[Bloomberg
Law
News]

ATL
Bracket:
Which
Of
These
Ghouls
Should
Get
Disbarred
First?
There
are
still
a
few
hours
left
to
vote
in
our
annual
March
anger
bracket.
Which
Trump
lawyer’s
ethically
fraught
work
most
warrants
disciplinary
inquiry.
We
have
4
regions
worth
of
matchups…
here,
here,
here,
and
here.
Back
In
The
Day,
Megafirms
Cut
Local
Back
Office
Staff,
Moving
It
All
Offsite…
AI
Now
Comes
For
Those
Jobs:
The
jobs
that
were
once
cheaper
in
Tampa
are
now
a
lot
cheaper
with
Claude.
Judge
Calls
Out
NJ
US
Attorney’s
Office
For
Three-Raccoons-In-A-Trench-Coat
Management
Style:
Who
is
actually
running
the
NJ
US
Attorney’s
Office?
Because
the
Trump
DOJ’s
inability
to
do
anything
right
is
starting
to
risk
putting
child
predators
back
on
the
streets.
I
mean…
other
than
the
ones
in
the
redacted
Epstein
files.
Todd
Blanche
Still
Laser
Focused
On
Covering
Up
For
Pedophiles:
The
Deputy
AG
seems
to
take
a
personal
interest
in
blocking
anything
that
might
reveal
Epstein’s
accomplices.
Weil
Gotshal
Names
First
Female
Executive
Partner:
Ramona
Nee
will
become
Weil’s
first
woman
to
hold
the
executive
partner
title
in
firm’s
history.
Trump
Rage-Posts
1,000
Words
About
The
Supreme
Court
At
11
PM
On
A
Sunday:
With
a
war
in
Iran,
a
China-Taiwan
standoff,
and
DHS
in
shutdown,
the
president
still
found
time
for
a
meandering
rant
about
the
Court
he
packed.
Because
I
Got
Sued
(Because
I
Got
Sued):
Afroman
mocked
the
cops
who
wrongfully
raided
his
house…
so
they
sued
him
for
hurting
their
feelings.