Podcasts about latham watkins

This Day in Legal History: Fair Housing ActOn this day in legal history, April 11, 1968, President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act of 1968 into law, a pivotal expansion of civil rights protections in the United States. Commonly referred to as the Fair Housing Act, the legislation was enacted just days after the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., whose legacy of nonviolent activism heavily influenced its passage. The law made it illegal to discriminate in the sale, rental, financing, or advertising of housing based on race, color, religion, or national origin.It aimed to dismantle the systemic barriers that had long segregated American cities and suburbs, including redlining, racially restrictive covenants, and other discriminatory practices. Title VIII of the Act directly addressed these inequities and empowered the federal government to enforce fair housing standards for the first time. Though political resistance to housing integration had stalled similar legislation for years, the national mourning following Dr. King's death shifted public and congressional sentiment.Johnson, in a nationally televised address, described the signing as a tribute to Dr. King's life and a necessary step toward realizing the full promise of civil rights in America. Subsequent amendments expanded protections to include sex, disability, and familial status, making the Fair Housing Act one of the most comprehensive civil rights laws on the books. Enforcement mechanisms, however, remained a challenge, and litigation over housing discrimination has continued into the present day.The law has been central to major legal battles over zoning laws, gentrification, and access to affordable housing. It also laid the groundwork for subsequent legislation aimed at combating economic and racial segregation. While the Act did not instantly eliminate housing discrimination, it marked a legal turning point that recognized the home as a critical site of equality and opportunity.A small team from the Department of Government Efficiency (DGE), created under Elon Musk's initiative to reduce government spending and staffing, has arrived at the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. (FDIC), according to an internal email from the agency. While the team is working with FDIC leadership to identify internal efficiencies, it does not have access to sensitive or confidential bank data, including resolution plans, deposit insurance records, or examination materials. The FDIC emphasized that the DGE operatives are full-time federal employees working under formal interagency agreements and have not sought access to confidential information.DGE has previously drawn concern from industry participants during its visit to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau due to fears over data exposure. The FDIC oversees highly sensitive information about major U.S. banks and their failure plans, which regulators rely on during crises. The number and identity of DGE team members at the FDIC have not been disclosed, and the agency declined to comment further.The agency is also preparing for staff reductions, following the Trump administration's deferred resignation program that has already led to the loss of 500 FDIC employees. Additional buyouts and formal layoffs are expected soon. The timing of DGE's involvement comes as global markets react to new tariffs announced by President Trump, prompting concerns from former officials about weakening regulators' ability to respond to potential financial instability.DOGE Arrives at FDIC but Doesn't Have Access to Bank Data (2)At least three major law firms—Kirkland & Ellis, Latham & Watkins, and Simpson Thacher & Bartlett—are in talks with the Trump administration to reach a joint agreement that would commit over $300 million in pro bono services to causes favored by the White House. The potential deal is also intended to resolve federal investigations into the firms' diversity programs, which the administration has scrutinized for alleged discriminatory practices. If finalized, the arrangement would bring the total pledged in pro bono services from various firms to at least $640 million.President Trump, speaking at a Cabinet meeting, hinted that a handful of firms remain in negotiations, emphasizing that many firms have already paid significant sums or made concessions. He stated that he expects lawyers from participating firms to assist with policy efforts such as implementing tariffs and expanding coal mining.The administration has previously targeted several firms with executive orders for representing causes or clients viewed as oppositional to Trump's agenda. These orders have included punitive measures such as revoking security clearances and restricting federal access. Some firms—like Perkins Coie and Jenner & Block—have successfully blocked these actions in court, while others like Paul Weiss settled by agreeing to pro bono contributions. Firms such as Skadden and Milbank preemptively negotiated similar deals.Trump Talks Deal With Three Massive Law Firms as Others FightA U.S. immigration judge is set to rule today on whether Mahmoud Khalil, a Palestinian student activist at Columbia University, can be deported. Khalil, who holds Algerian citizenship and became a lawful U.S. permanent resident last year, was arrested last month at his New York City apartment and transferred to an immigration jail in rural Louisiana. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has called for Khalil's removal under the 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act, arguing that his presence in the U.S. poses foreign policy risks due to his role in pro-Palestinian campus protests.Rubio's letter to the court claims Khalil was involved in “antisemitic protests and disruptive activities” but does not accuse him of any crimes. Instead, Rubio argues the government can revoke legal status based solely on speech or associations if deemed harmful to U.S. interests. Khalil's attorneys say the case is an attempt to punish constitutionally protected speech and have called the letter politically motivated and authoritarian in tone.They are requesting to subpoena and depose Rubio as part of their defense. The immigration court hearing the case operates under the Department of Justice and is separate from the federal judiciary. Khalil is also suing in a New Jersey federal court, alleging that his arrest, detention, and transfer far from his legal team and family were unconstitutional.US immigration judge to decide whether Columbia student Mahmoud Khalil can be deported | ReutersPresident Trump signed a bill nullifying a revised IRS rule that would have broadened the definition of a “broker” to include decentralized cryptocurrency exchanges, or DeFi platforms. The rule, finalized in the final weeks of the Biden administration, was part of a broader IRS effort to tighten crypto tax enforcement and was rooted in the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. It would have required DeFi platforms to report user transactions to both the IRS and the users themselves.The crypto industry strongly opposed the rule, arguing that DeFi platforms do not function like traditional brokers and lack access to user identities, making compliance impossible. Centralized exchanges like Coinbase and Kraken, by contrast, already meet these reporting requirements as intermediaries. Both the House and Senate voted in March to repeal the IRS rule through the Congressional Review Act, which allows Congress to overturn recent federal regulations with a majority vote.Trump, who has positioned himself as a pro-crypto candidate, had campaigned on promises to support digital asset innovation. Since taking office, he has formed a federal cryptocurrency working group and signed an executive order to establish a national bitcoin reserve.Trump signs bill to nullify expanded IRS crypto broker rule | ReutersThis week's closing theme takes us back to April 13, 1850, when Richard Wagner's opera Lohengrin premiered in Weimar under the baton of his friend and supporter, Franz Liszt. Wagner, one of the most influential and controversial figures in classical music, was then in political exile, and unable to attend the debut of what would become one of his most iconic works. Known for his revolutionary approach to opera—melding music, drama, and mythology—Wagner crafted Lohengrin as a sweeping, mystical tale of a knight of the Holy Grail who arrives in a swan-drawn boat to defend the innocent Elsa of Brabant. The opera's shimmering textures, leitmotif-driven score, and spiritual overtones would set the stage for his later monumental works like Tristan und Isolde and the Ring Cycle.Lohengrin remains best known for its third-act bridal chorus—“Here Comes the Bride”—but the opera's deeper themes of identity, trust, and the cost of forbidden questions give it lasting emotional and philosophical weight. Set in a quasi-medieval world laced with mystery, the opera tells of a hero who must depart the moment his name is asked, leaving love suspended in silence. Wagner's orchestration in Lohengrin is luminous and patient, often evoking shimmering water and distant prophecy, with long-breathed phrases that seem to float above time.As a closing theme for this week, Lohengrin invites reflection—on belief, on leadership, and on how history so often pivots on names, silence, and the tension between loyalty and doubt. Its premiere on April 13th marks not only a moment in Wagner's evolution as a composer but also a cultural point of departure, where German Romanticism began leaning toward something darker and more transcendental. We end the week, then, with the slow unfurling of Lohengrin's prelude: a gentle, ascending shimmer that begins almost imperceptibly, and rises—like the swan on the river—toward the unknown.This week, we close with the prelude to Lohengrin by Richard Wagner—music of undeniable beauty from a composer whose legacy includes both brilliance and deeply troubling beliefs. We share it for its artistry, not its ideology. Without further ado, Richard Wagner's Lohengrin, the prelude. Enjoy! This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Market definition plays a central role in antitrust analysis. Is it appropriate for the U.S. antitrust agencies to identify "overlapping markets" and "submarkets" as relevant markets for antitrust purposes? Keith Klovers, Counsel at Latham & Watkins and former advisor to FTC commissioners Christine S. Wilson and Maureen K. Ohlhausen, talks to Blair Matthews and Anora Wang about why, in his view, the concepts of overlapping markets and submarkets are unsupported by judicial law and economics. Listen to this episode to learn about the alternative approach to market definition that Keith and other practitioners believe are better suited for antitrust analysis. With special guest: Keith Klovers, Counsel, Latham & Watkins LLP Related Links: Keith Klovers & Jonathan Jacobson, The Overlapping Markets Fallacy, 86 Antitrust Law Journal No. 2 (ABA 2024) Hosted by: Anora Wang, Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP and Blair West Matthews, Cleary Gottlieb

Join us for a conversation with Eyad Latif on the exciting developments in the ECVC ecosystem in the Middle East. Eyad generously shares from experience working in the Bay Area, New York, and Dubai serving both public and private companies in technology, life sciences, and other growth industries. We cover topics including what makes the region uniquely attractive for both startups and investors, the unprecedented growth of this region in recent years, and the personal qualities that make attorneys excel in serving fast paced industries.

In today's episode, I talk with Andrew Clark, a partner with Latham & Watkins and the global chair of the firm's Training and Career Enhancement Committee. Andrew shares how Latham develops its partners and other lawyers through a structured and comprehensive training program that evolves at every stage of their career.  From preparing new partners for leadership roles to equipping junior partners to deepen their client relationships and build their practices, Andrew gives us an inside look at how Latham is setting up its attorneys for long-term success.  We also discuss the unique role of business professionals in shaping law firm training and the firm's work in training its lawyers to leverage generative AI. At a Glance: 0:00 Introduction: Andrew  discusses ongoing training for partners beyond when they are promoted into their partner roles 1:20 Importance of partner development: Preparing for leadership and client management 2:24 Andrew's career journey: From Latham's London office to leading global training initiatives 4:02 Partner involvement in firm management and training programs 6:01 Multi-stage partner training: New Partner Academy and Junior Partner Development Retreat 9:17 Financial literacy and business development: Preparing partners for understand client needs and demands 12:13 Integrating lateral partners: Communicating and strengthening understanding of firm culture through structured training 14:28 Rainmaker panel: Insights into business development from partners who role-play a simulated client pitch 18:27 Contributions of business professionals: Elevating law firm training programs to include education and support from business and training experts in the firm 21:53 External experts in training: Lessons from outside speakers, including military leaders and others 24:57 Generational shifts: Adapting training for Gen Z attorneys 30:01 Latham's AI Academy: Preparing lawyers for the future of legal practice Rate, Review, & Follow on Apple Podcasts & Spotify Do you enjoy listening to Big Law Life?  Please consider rating and reviewing the show! This helps support and reach more people like you who want to grow a career in Big Law.  For Apple Podcasts, click here, scroll to the bottom, tap to rate with five stars, and select “Write a Review.” Then be sure to let me know what you loved most about the episode! Also, if you haven't done so already, follow the podcast here!  For Spotify, tap here on your mobile phone, follow the podcast, listen to the show, then find the rating icon below the description, and tap to rate with five stars. How to reach Andrew Clark: https://www.lw.com/en/people/andrew-clark  Link to more information Latham & Watkins' lawyer development and training: https://www.lw.com/en/about-us/lawyer-development Interested in doing 1-2-1 coaching with Laura Terrell? Or learning more about her work coaching and consulting? - here are ways to reach out to her: www.lauraterrell.com  laura@lauraterrell.com   LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/lauralterrell/  Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lauraterrellcoaching/  Show notes: https://www.lauraterrell.com/podcast  

Julia Shullman is the General Counsel and Chief Privacy Officer at Telly, the world's first dual-screen smart TV fully paid for by advertising. Prior to Telly, Julia was General Counsel and Chief Privacy Officer at TripleLift, through its $1.4B acquisition by Vista Equity Partners. She also held various leadership positions, including Chief Privacy Counsel and Lead Attorney, Publisher Technology Group at AppNexus, through its $1.6B sale to AT&T. Before advertising, Julia spent a decade in mergers and acquisitions at both Latham & Watkins and UBM. She is recognized as an industry leader at the intersection of privacy, products, advertising, policy, and strategy. In this episode… Navigating the intersection of privacy, product, and advertising demands strategy. Companies need to view privacy as integral to their operations and growth, especially in highly regulated industries like AdTech. Without effective privacy programs, companies face potential deal disruptions, diminished valuations, and reputational damages. For early-stage companies in particular, failing to integrate privacy into their operations can hinder growth, derail funding opportunities, and even lead to regulatory scrutiny. How can organizations ensure that privacy is both a priority and an enabler of success? Developing effective privacy programs requires a tailored, pragmatic approach. Leaders need to educate their teams on privacy obligations and integrate privacy practices into business processes. This includes fostering collaboration among privacy experts and cross-functional departments, such as engineering and marketing, while adapting to industry-specific nuances. In this episode of She Said Privacy/He Said Security, Jodi and Justin Daniels speak with Julia Shullman, General Counsel and Chief Privacy Officer at Telly, about building privacy programs that drive business success. Drawing from her extensive experience in M&A, privacy, and AdTech, Julia offers insights into balancing privacy with business monetization goals. She discusses the importance of understanding industry dynamics and the role of privacy in facilitating successful exits and partnerships. Julia emphasizes the value of cross-departmental collaboration and education in creating privacy solutions that resonate with a company's culture and business objectives. She also provides tips on how organizations can align their privacy programs with broader business strategies to build trust, ensure compliance, and drive innovation.

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit davidlat.substack.comWelcome to Original Jurisdiction, the latest legal publication by me, David Lat. You can learn more about Original Jurisdiction by reading its About page, and you can email me at davidlat@substack.com. This is a reader-supported publication; you can subscribe by clicking here.If you ever get prosecuted by the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York, I wish you luck—because you'll need it. “The Office” has a very high conviction rate—and, like most U.S. Attorney's Offices, the vast majority of its convictions get affirmed on appeal.If you want to maximize your chances of either prevailing at trial or on appeal against the S.D.N.Y., then you should call Alexandra Shapiro (if you can afford her). She's the rare lawyer who can go up against The Office and win—whether at trial, in the Second Circuit, or before the U.S. Supreme Court.An alum of the S.D.N.Y. herself, as well as a former law clerk to the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Alexandra is the co-founder (with Cynthia Arato) of a thriving boutique, Shapiro Arato Bach. Having her own firm allows Alexandra to take on cases and clients that she might not have been able to handle back when she was a partner at Latham & Watkins—whether because of client conflicts, the desire of large firms to steer clear of controversy, or Biglaw billing rates (because even if she's expensive, she's not Latham expensive, plus she enjoys more rate flexibility than a large firm).Speaking of controversy, Alexandra currently represents two high-profile defendants going up against The Office: FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried, appealing his fraud convictions to the Second Circuit, and Sean “Diddy” Combs, scheduled to go to trial in May 2025 on sex-trafficking and racketeering charges. She discusses these cases (to the extent that she can)—as well as her own interesting and impressive career, her approach to crafting appellate briefs, and her legal thriller, Presumed Guilty (2022)—in the latest episode of the Original Jurisdiction podcast. (Programming note: as some of you might have noticed, this episode is a week early, based on my usual every-other-week schedule. But between now and the end of the year, the schedule might get a little funky because of the demanding schedules of my next few guests, plus the holidays. I will try to stick to Wednesday as the drop date, but I can't guarantee much beyond that.)Show Notes:* Alexandra A.E. Shapiro bio, Shapiro Arato Bach LLP* Shapiro Arato Bach's Dynamite Trio: A Head-Turning Alternative to Big Law, by Emily Jackoway for Lawdragon* Presumed Guilty, AmazonPrefer reading to listening? For paid subscribers, a transcript of the entire episode appears below.Sponsored by:NexFirm helps Biglaw attorneys become founding partners. To learn more about how NexFirm can help you launch your firm, call 212-292-1000 or email careerdevelopment at nexfirm dot com.

Join Ben and Rahul for their in-depth discussion of Ben's recent three-week jury trial in which Ben represented a little girl who developed cerebral palsy following the development of necrotizing enterocolitis in the NICU.  Ben discusses how decision-making guided by big data led to him and his client to turning down an $11 million offer after closing arguments to take a verdict.  He discusses what he learned following extensive discussions with jurors following the trial. Ben describes how this verdict influences his thinking about data, risk and approach to trial moving forward.About Ben Gideonhttps://gideonasen.com/our-team/benjamin-gideon/Ben grew up in Portland, Maine, attended public schools and graduated from Deering High School in 1989. Ben's father, Martin Rogoff, was a prominent member of the Maine Law School faculty, so Ben grew up immersed in discussions of the law. Ben began to develop his legal skills early in life through nightly arguments with his father at the dinner table.In high school, Ben played varsity soccer and was the captain of the hockey team. Following high school, Ben attended Cornell University in Ithaca, NY. Ben attempted to walk on to the Cornell hockey team, but was eventually cut from the team, ending his hockey career. Depressed and disappointed at this failure, Ben became a poor student, failed several classes, and was told he was being suspended from college on academic probation.After rehabilitating himself through some community college courses, Ben was able to gain re-admission to Cornell and to complete his degree. Ben applied to law school and was admitted to Boston University School of Law. There, Ben was a standout student. His grades were so exceptional after his first year that he was accepted as a transfer student to Yale Law School where he earned his law degree.Ben began his career in private practice at a large, multi-national law firm, Latham & Watkins, in New York City. He practiced there for several years before deciding to return to Maine to join Berman & Simmons, PA, Maine's largest plaintiff's law firm.EDUCATIONCornell University, 1993Yale Law School, 1999RECOGNITIONSThe Inner Circle of Advocates, 100 of the Best Plaintiff Lawyers in the U.S., 2019-presentAmerican College of Trial Lawyers, Fellow, 2020-present, Top 1% of all lawyersAmerica's Top 100 Attorneys ― Listed in Maine for Personal Injury, Medical Malpractice, and Products Liability, 2017The Best Lawyers in America ― 2013–present; “Lawyer of the Year,” 2016–presentSuper Lawyers ― “Super Lawyer,” 2013–presentMartindale-Hubbell ― Top Rated “AV Preeminent”Chambers & Partners USA ― Listed for Litigation: Medical Malpractice & Insurance and Mainly PlaintiffBenchmark Litigation ― “Litigation Star”AVVO — Rated 10.0 out of 10MEMBERSHIPSMaine Board of Overseers of the Bar, Professional Ethics CommissionMaine State Bar AssociationAmerican Association for Justice (AAJ)American Bar AssociationGovernor, Maine Trial Lawyers AssociationADMISSIONSMaine (2003)U.S. District Court, District of Maine (2010)Vermont (2016)New Hampshire (2010)U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York (2002)New York (2000) A Leader at Berman & SimmonsDuring his years at Berman & Simmons, Ben rose from an associate to become an owner and practice leader at the firm. Ben was instrumental in helping the firm re-invent its approach to litigating and trying cases; expanded its areas of practice expertise; and recruited and trained many talented lawyers.During his 17 years at Berman & Simmons, Ben enjoyed many great successes and some disappointing failures, but overall managed to build the most successful plaintiff's personal injury and medical malpractice practice in the State of Maine. Ben achieved success in a broad range of different types of plaintiff's cases—police civil rights, product liability, medical malpractice, nursing home, maritime and industrial accidents.Early in his career, Ben achieved a landmark civil rights verdict against a police officer for violating his client's civil rights with a Taser shooting. The verdict was affirmed on appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit.In 2014, after 4 ½ year of litigation, Ben achieved a record-setting $22.5 million jury verdict in Burlington, Vermont, on behalf of a utility lineman who lost both of his legs during a high-voltage powerline switching operation.Ben followed his Vermont verdict with a verdict of $1.75 million jury verdict in a medical malpractice trial in Bangor, Maine.More recently, Ben recovered $2.5 million in a medical malpractice case tried to a jury in New Hampshire.Over the past decade, no other plaintiff's lawyer in Maine can match Ben's level of success on behalf of his clients, which include:Recovering more than $130 million in verdicts and settlementsAchieving 31 verdicts or settlements in excess of $ 1 millionRecovering more than $50 million for the victims of medical malpracticeRecovering tens of millions of dollars for victims of car and trucking accidents.Recovering more than $11 million in actions against major automobile manufacturers, including Toyota, Hyundai, and Fiat ChryslerRecovering more than $15 million from power and electrical utility companiesRecovering millions of dollars for families of the victims of the El Faro maritime disasterRecovering more than $5 million from 3 trials and several settlements of medical malpractice and personal injury against the U.S. GovernmentRecovering millions of dollars for victims of nursing home negligence and abuseRecovering millions of dollars for victims of dangerous and defective productsPeer RecognitionBen's accomplishments, professionalism and character have won him the recognition of his peers. Ben has been named in Best Lawyers in America every year since 2013 and was named “Lawyer of the Year” for the State of Maine twice. Ben has been listed in Super Lawyers every year since 2013. He has received the top rating of “AV Preeminent” from Martindale-Hubbell and has a 10.0 out 10 rating on AVVO.In 2019, Ben became only the second lawyer in Maine to be inducted into the Inner Circle of Advocates, an invitation-only group of the best 100 plaintiff lawyers in the United States.Here is how the Inner Circle describes its criteria for membership:Membership CriteriaMembership in The Inner Circle of Advocates is by invitation and based on criteria that include an applicant's performance and success in the courtroom. The Inner Circle carefully evaluates experience, reputation, judicial references, and peer evaluations to identify the best 100 trial lawyers in the country. Typically, applicants are expected to have at least three verdicts of one million dollars or a recent verdict in excess of ten million dollars to be considered for membership. The Inner Circle looks for cutting edge lawyers in their jurisdiction who are active courtroom lawyers with a willingness to learn and teach about our craft and to be part of a close-knit, sharing group of professional colleagues. Membership in The Inner Circle of Advocates is not just an accolade, it is a commitment to participate in a unique laboratory of professional advancement.In 2020, Ben was inducted as a Fellow in the American College of Trial Lawyers (ACTL), an invitation-only group limited to the top 1% of lawyers. Here is how ACTL describes the qualifications required for membership:Membership in the College cannot exceed one percent of the total lawyer population of any state or province.Founding Gideon Asen LLCAfter 17 years at Berman & Simmons, in November 2020, Ben decided to leave one firm he loved and had helped to build, to form a new law firm, Gideon Asen LLC.“I was very proud of everything we accomplished at Berman & Simmons,” Ben said, “but I was excited by the challenge of building a new firm that could be even better.”Ben's first step was to recruit Taylor Asen to join him.“Taylor and I have a common mission,” Ben said. “Although we're separated by 12 years, Taylor also attended Yale Law School and completed prestigious Federal clerkships. He's insanely smart.”“But perhaps more important, Taylor and I share a common vision of a plaintiff's law firm where clients have access to exceptional lawyers and service. We are both supremely competitive and don't tolerate mediocrity. We believe we owe it to our clients to give them the very best, and that is what Gideon Asen will provide.”Podcast, Writing and TeachingBen enjoys thinking about the practice of trial law and strategies for success and is a frequent writer and speaker on trial topics.Ben co-hosts a podcast called Elawvate! which focuses on the human factors and guiding principles that drive successful lawyers and law firms.Personal Life and InterestsBen lives in Freeport, Maine, with his wife, Sara Gideon, and three children, Julian, Aleksandr, and Anna Josephine. Sara is a former two-term Speaker of the Maine House of Representatives and was the 2020 Democratic Nominee for U.S. Senate in Maine. When Ben is not practicing law, he enjoys skiing at Sugarloaf, fishing in Casco Bay, hiking, canoeing, traveling and just spending time with his family.

This Day in Legal History: William Rehnquist BornOn October 1, 1924, William Hubbs Rehnquist, the 16th Chief Justice of the United States, was born in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Appointed to the Supreme Court in 1972 by President Nixon, Rehnquist became a polarizing figure, known for his staunch conservatism and originalist approach to the Constitution. His judicial philosophy often focused on restricting federal authority and bolstering states' rights, positions that critics argued rolled back civil rights protections and hindered federal progress on social justice issues. In 1986, President Reagan elevated Rehnquist to Chief Justice, a decision that pushed the Court further right. At his swearing-in, Reagan hailed him as a defender of constitutional values, but opponents viewed his appointment as the solidification of an increasingly reactionary judiciary. The same ceremony saw Antonin Scalia, another conservative, sworn in, signaling a shift that would influence rulings on affirmative action, voting rights, and church-state separation.Rehnquist's tenure included controversial rulings, notably his role in Bush v. Gore (2000), which critics argue undermined democratic principles by halting the Florida recount and effectively deciding a presidential election. His leadership on the Court was also marked by decisions that curtailed congressional power under the Commerce Clause, weakening federal authority in areas like civil rights and environmental regulation. While his supporters celebrated him as a guardian of limited government, his legacy remains contentious, with lasting impacts on the Court's direction and the balance between federal and state power.A fun Rehnquist fact is that you'll see in any official pictures or portraits of him as Chief Justice, his sleeves have yellow arm bands. Rehnquist insisted on adding four gold stripes on each sleeve to distinguish himself from the associate justices. He was inspired by the costume of the Lord Chancellor in a production of the Gilbert and Sullivan opera Iolanthe. Rehnquist's addition of the stripes was an unusual departure from the traditional plain black robes worn by justices, and it became a symbol of his unique approach to the role.New York Mayor Eric Adams has brought on three high-profile litigators as he faces federal criminal charges. William Burck, a former George W. Bush White House lawyer and current Fox Corp. board member, is one of the lawyers advising Adams. Burck, known for representing figures like Stephen Bannon and Don McGahn, joins Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan partners John Bash III and Avi Perry on Adams' defense team. Alex Spiro, a partner at Quinn Emanuel with experience defending high-profile clients like Elon Musk, is leading the defense. The charges involve allegations that Adams accepted lavish travel perks and had improper ties to the Turkish government. Adams has denied wrongdoing and vowed to continue as mayor while fighting the charges. His legal team has requested the case's dismissal.Meanwhile, a legal defense fund for Adams has paid over $877,000 to law firm WilmerHale, and several staffers have left his administration amid ongoing investigations. Additionally, Theresa Hassler was recently appointed general counsel for the Mayor's Fund to Advance New York City, a nonprofit under scrutiny for its fundraising practices.Ex-Bannon Lawyer With Fox News Ties Joins NYC Mayor Defense TeamToday, on October 1, 2024, a Georgia judge will hear a challenge from Democrats against new election rules introduced by the Republican-led Georgia Election Board. These rules, approved in August, allow county officials to investigate discrepancies in vote counts and scrutinize election-related documents before certifying results. Democrats argue that these changes, which came just before the November 5 election, are designed to erode trust in the process and could delay certification. The rules were backed by three board members who are allies of Donald Trump, who continues to challenge his 2020 loss in Georgia. Trump has praised these board members for their efforts to increase election security, though critics, including Republican Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, say the changes could undermine voter confidence and strain election workers.A separate lawsuit was also filed to block a new requirement for a hand count of ballots. Democrats contend that these rules create confusion and provide too much leeway for local officials to investigate alleged fraud, potentially delaying results. The trial in Fulton County Superior Court is part of a broader national focus on battleground states like Georgia, where both Republicans and Democrats are intensely focused ahead of the upcoming presidential election.Challenge by US Democrats to Georgia election rules goes to trial | ReutersAs artificial intelligence (AI) continues to transform industries, more U.S. law firms are appointing executives to lead AI initiatives. Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld and McDermott Will & Emery both announced new AI leadership hires, with Akin appointing Jeff Westcott as director of practice technology and AI innovation, and McDermott hiring Christopher Cyrus as director of AI innovation. These moves reflect the growing belief that AI will have a permanent role in the legal profession, particularly in areas like research, drafting legal documents, and reducing administrative tasks.Law firms are responding to client expectations and the surge in AI technologies, which have expanded dramatically in the past two years. Other firms, such as Covington & Burling, Latham & Watkins, and Reed Smith, have similarly created AI and data science roles since the rise of tools like ChatGPT. Westcott will focus on how Akin Gump can strategically invest in AI technology, assessing whether to develop tools in-house, purchase products, or partner with vendors.Additionally, legal AI startup Harvey's chief strategy officer, Gordon Moodie, transitioned to Debevoise & Plimpton as a partner specializing in mergers and acquisitions. These developments underscore the legal industry's growing focus on AI integration as firms aim to remain competitive and adapt to technological advances.More US law firms turn to executives for AI leadership roles | Reuters This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Caroline Flanagan is a transformational coach, an inspirational keynote speaker, the author of two books and host of two podcasts. A magic circle trained ex-City lawyer, Caroline's mission is to bring greater diversity, equality and inclusion to the legal industry by increasing the number of people of colour who stay in the profession and progress to leadership. A woman of colour from a low income background, Caroline learned to navigate the challenges of being the only one in the room and achieve success in a white world. She is a recognised expert on Imposter Syndrome and specialises in career progression coaching for black lawyers. Caroline has had the pleasure of working with many of the world's leading law firms, including: Allen & Overy, White & Case, Mayer Brown, Latham & Watkins, Kirkland & Ellis, Ropes & Gray, Ashurst, Eversheds Sutherland and Weil, Gotshal & Manges. She has also worked with some of the world's most recognised organisations and brands, including: Morgan Stanley, Google, Accenture, Michael Kors, Shell and Starbucks.   Caroline is the author of the following books: – Be The First: People of Colour, Imposter Syndrome and the Struggle to Succeed in a White World (2022) – Business Book of the Year Awards finalist, and BabyProof Your Career: The Secret to Balancing Work and Family So You Can Enjoy It All (2015) Caroline's 3 mindset messages: Be the first You are uniquely valuable The conditions are never perfect The Food I have to quote Caroline's words for this part when I asked her what she would like me to cook for her, to explain why I chose this meal: ” I don't think I've been asked that question in a VERY long time. My sincere answer is anything you want to! But if it's more helpful for me to specify: I love Mediterranean food. Light, healthy and delicious. Fish would be delightful (altho I also eat meat) with something grainy or pulsey on the side perhaps.”  I love it when I get a challenge and get to experiment with new culinary recipes! I wanted to include all of the above to Caroline's meal and I decide to make Japanese infused salmon fillet, with buckwheat, roasted vegetables, cucumber & coconut yoghurt salad on a side. It was a very nourishing meal and Caroline enjoyed my creation.   Visit www.mindsetkitchen.co.uk for more information.

In der 251. Episode von Irgendwas mit Recht ist Rechtsanwältin Anastasia Dressler zu Gast, die von ihrem beeindruckenden Werdegang erzählt. Ursprünglich aus der Ukraine stammend, kam sie während der Finanzkrise nach Deutschland und musste sich nicht nur in einem neuen Land, sondern auch im deutschen Rechtssystem zurechtfinden – und das alles, während sie die Sprache erst erlernte. Wie hat sie es geschafft, Jura zu studieren und gleichzeitig Deutsch zu lernen? Was sind ihre Tipps, um mit dem hohen Druck während des Studiums und der Arbeit in einer Großkanzlei umzugehen? Und warum ist Networking für sie so essenziell in ihrer Karriere? Antworten auf diese und viele weitere Fragen erhaltet Ihr in dieser Folge von IMR. Viel Freude mit dieser neuen Episode Eures Jurapodcasts!

This Day in Legal History: Sherman Antitrust ActOn July 2, 1890, U.S. President Benjamin Harrison signed the Sherman Antitrust Act into law, marking a transformative moment in American economic history. This landmark legislation aimed to prohibit the formation of trusts and monopolies that restricted trade across states, fundamentally altering the landscape of American industry. Named after Senator John Sherman, the act sought to promote fair competition for the benefit of consumers.The Sherman Antitrust Act was a response to growing public concern over the power and influence of large corporations, which often stifled competition and controlled vast market shares. Notable entities affected by this law included John D. Rockefeller's Standard Oil and the Bell System of telecommunications. Standard Oil, once a dominant force in the oil industry, was dismantled into smaller companies in 1911, following a landmark Supreme Court decision that found it in violation of the act.Similarly, the Bell System, which had monopolized the telecommunications industry, was broken up in 1982, leading to the creation of several independent companies. The Sherman Antitrust Act thus paved the way for more robust enforcement of antitrust laws and inspired future legislation, such as the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914.The act's passage represented a significant shift toward greater governmental regulation of the economy, aiming to protect consumers and ensure a level playing field for businesses. Over the years, it has served as a critical tool for the U.S. Department of Justice in pursuing antitrust cases. The Sherman Antitrust Act remains a cornerstone of American antitrust policy, highlighting the ongoing importance of regulating corporate power to maintain market integrity.The transition from fossil fuels to renewable energy and new technology is providing a significant boost to private equity fundraising, benefiting law firms specializing in these areas. Investors have raised $17.4 billion for energy transition projects by June, surpassing last year's total of $10.3 billion, according to Preqin. This surge is driven by tax incentives from the Inflation Reduction Act, public demand for climate change solutions, and advancements in technologies like carbon capture.Prominent law firms, such as Davis Polk & Wardwell, Gibson Dunn, and Vinson & Elkins, are seeing increased activity due to the growing interest in energy transition investments. Michael Piazza of Gibson Dunn noted that despite the rise in renewable energy investments, continued investment in oil and gas remains necessary to support the energy transition responsibly.Major funds include Brookfield Asset Management's $10 billion fund announced in February and Morgan Stanley's plan to raise at least $1 billion. Firms like Blackstone, TPG, and KKR are also dedicating substantial resources to energy transition projects.While private equity fundraising has generally been sluggish, the energy transition sector stands out. Last year, private equity aggregate capital reached its lowest level since 2018, dropping over 8%. Limited partners are holding onto portfolio companies longer due to fewer exits via IPOs and secondary sales, complicating fundraising efforts.Law firms with expertise in private credit, fund formation, and energy deals are capitalizing on this trend. Firms such as Latham & Watkins and Simpson Thacher & Bartlett have been instrumental in advising on significant private credit loans and fund formations. The demand for legal services in energy transition has prompted firms like Paul Hastings and Sidley Austin to invest in hiring specialists in private credit and finance.Overall, the focus on environmental, social, and governance (ESG) initiatives has further fueled the energy transition boom, as limited partnerships increasingly include ESG criteria in their investment mandates. This shift provides incentives for investors to choose funds dedicated to climate technology and ESG projects over traditional private equity investments.Energy Transition Boom Aids Lawyers During Private Equity SlumpRudy Giuliani has requested to convert his Chapter 11 bankruptcy to a Chapter 7 liquidation. If approved by Judge Sean H. Lane of the US Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York, a trustee will manage Giuliani's estate and liquidate his assets to pay off his creditors, including a $148 million defamation judgment owed to two Georgia election workers.Creditors had previously called for a trustee, alleging that Giuliani had delayed financial disclosures and moved assets out of their reach. Giuliani's lawyers denied any dishonesty, stating he was correcting past financial mismanagement. The motion to convert the bankruptcy was filed as a one-page document, indicating Giuliani's decision to pursue this legal option against what his spokesperson described as a "partisan and politically motivated proceeding."Judge Lane has expressed frustration over the slow progress of Giuliani's bankruptcy case, noting Giuliani's focus on appealing the defamation judgment. Giuliani filed for Chapter 11 in December following the defamation ruling. His legal team is from Berger, Fischoff, Shumer, Wexler & Goodman LLP, while the committee of unsecured creditors is represented by Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP.Giuliani Moves to Liquidate Assets to Pay $148 Million Debt (1)Donald Trump is seeking to overturn his New York hush-money conviction following a U.S. Supreme Court decision that grants him some immunity from criminal prosecution for actions taken while president. Trump's lawyers have taken initial steps to request that the New York judge, Juan Merchan, set aside the jury's verdict, and propose delaying his sentencing to allow for briefing and arguments.The Supreme Court's 6-3 decision earlier stated that former presidents have immunity from prosecution for many official acts, reversing lower-court rulings and potentially influencing Trump's New York case. While two judges previously rejected Trump's immunity claims before this ruling, the decision could impact other legal proceedings against him.Trump's conviction involves 34 counts of falsifying business records related to payments made by his former lawyer, Michael Cohen, to adult-film star Stormy Daniels during the 2016 election. Prosecutors argued Trump reimbursed Cohen with payments falsely recorded as legal services. Despite Trump's defense, the jury found the payments were intended to silence Daniels about an affair, not for legitimate legal work.The Supreme Court ruling could also affect other cases against Trump, including federal charges related to the 2020 election and classified documents. The legal landscape for Trump remains complex and dynamic as he navigates multiple legal challenges.Trump Seeks to Toss NY Felony Conviction After Immunity Win (1)The U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision on presidential immunity leaves Judge Tanya Chutkan with the challenging task of determining the extent of immunity Donald Trump has in his federal criminal case related to his efforts to overturn the 2020 election results. The Court's 6-3 ruling affirmed that Trump has broad protection from prosecution for actions within his official duties as president. Judge Chutkan must now assess which actions fall under this protection and which do not, significantly impacting the four-count indictment brought by Special Counsel Jack Smith.This complex evaluation includes analyzing Trump's public statements before the January 6 Capitol attack and his attempts to organize alternate electors. Additionally, Chutkan will decide if prosecutors can overcome the presumption of immunity regarding Trump's pressure on then-Vice President Mike Pence. The Supreme Court's ruling suggests these communications are considered official acts.The process will delay the trial, originally scheduled for March, potentially pushing it beyond the November 5 presidential election where Trump is the Republican candidate. Chutkan, known for her no-nonsense approach, has previously shown little tolerance for delays and has a history of imposing strict sentences on Capitol rioters. Trump's legal team plans to appeal any unfavorable rulings, which could further prolong proceedings.Chutkan's previous ruling in December 2023 rejected Trump's broad immunity claims, but the new Supreme Court guidelines require her to reassess this stance. Additionally, a separate Supreme Court decision last week raised the bar for federal obstruction charges, directly affecting two of the four counts against Trump. The outcome of these legal challenges will set a significant precedent for future presidential immunity cases.US Supreme Court leaves Judge Tanya Chutkan to parse Trump immunity | Reuters This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Morrison & Forester's James Brosnahan and Latham & Watkins' Sean Berkowitz discuss how they use their voices as effective professional tools and how, yes, you likely can too.

This Day in Legal History: Loving v. VirginiaOn June 12, 1967, the United States Supreme Court issued a landmark decision in the case of Loving v. Virginia, striking down state laws prohibiting interracial marriage. Richard Loving, a white man, and Mildred Jeter, a Black woman, were married in Washington, D.C., in 1958 but were arrested upon their return to Virginia for violating the state's anti-miscegenation laws. The Lovings were convicted and sentenced to a year in prison, with the sentence suspended on the condition that they leave Virginia and not return together for 25 years. Challenging their conviction, the Lovings argued that Virginia's laws violated the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Supreme Court, in a unanimous decision authored by Chief Justice Earl Warren, agreed with the Lovings. The Court held that Virginia's anti-miscegenation statutes were rooted in racial discrimination and served no legitimate purpose other than to maintain racial segregation. This decision effectively invalidated similar laws in 15 other states, affirming that marriage is a basic civil right that cannot be restricted by racial classifications. The Loving v. Virginia decision was a significant step forward in the civil rights movement, reinforcing the principle that all individuals are entitled to equal protection under the law.Paul Weiss has been aggressively recruiting top-tier mergers and acquisitions and private equity partners, hiring over 20 from prominent firms such as Kirkland & Ellis and Latham & Watkins. This hiring spree, focused mainly in London and New York, reflects a broader trend of escalating compensation for elite lawyers, with some earning over $20 million annually. To fund these high-profile hires, Paul Weiss revamped its partner pay system and adopted a "black box" approach, where pay details are kept confidential among partners. The firm also introduced a new tier of non-equity partners to retain senior attorneys without sharing profits.This strategy mirrors moves by other top firms like Simpson Thacher & Bartlett and Davis Polk & Wardwell, which have adjusted their compensation structures to remain competitive. Paul Weiss's London office has notably expanded, recruiting high-profile partners from Kirkland to build a comprehensive practice there. The firm's longstanding relationship with Apollo Global Management continues to bolster its M&A and private equity profile. Despite lagging behind top deal advisors like Kirkland & Ellis and Wachtell Lipton Rosen & Katz, Paul Weiss's aggressive hiring positions it well for future market share gains.The firm's recruitment efforts underscore the importance of attracting top legal talent to handle complex and lucrative deals, reflecting a fiercely competitive legal market.Paul Weiss Hiring Binge Shows Big Law's Dealmaker Recruiting WarPower grid technologies (GETs) have gained traction recently as a way to integrate more renewable energy and meet increasing power demands without building new transmission lines. Historically, US electric utilities preferred constructing new lines because they offer guaranteed returns and are seen as less risky, despite the high consumer costs and long timelines associated with them. However, grid congestion in 2022 raised consumer bills by nearly $21 billion, pushing utilities to consider GETs. These technologies optimize existing infrastructure, offering significant cost savings and increased grid capacity.The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's new rule requires regional grid planners to consider using GETs. Additionally, a White House meeting led to a federal-state initiative involving 21 states to upgrade 100,000 miles of transmission lines in five years. Studies indicate that implementing GETs could save billions annually and facilitate the connection of more clean energy projects.Despite their benefits, GETs face challenges due to the traditional utility business model that favors large capital investments. Some states like Minnesota and Virginia are now mandating GETs in resource planning and offering incentives. Vermont Electric Power Co. and AES Corp. are examples of utilities testing GETs, such as dynamic line ratings and valve technology, to improve efficiency and reliability. As utilities and technology providers collaborate more, the industry aims to reduce the need for new transmission lines and overcome the associated regulatory and logistical hurdles.Grid Upgrades Gain Favor to Meet Power Demands of AI, Clean TechOn June 11, 2024, Elon Musk moved to dismiss his lawsuit against OpenAI and its CEO Sam Altman. The lawsuit, filed in February, accused OpenAI of deviating from its original mission to develop artificial intelligence for the benefit of humanity. Musk's attorneys did not provide a reason for the dismissal, which was filed in San Francisco Superior Court. The dismissal was without prejudice, allowing Musk the option to refile later.Musk co-founded OpenAI but has since expressed dissatisfaction with its direction, particularly its focus on profitability following substantial investments from Microsoft. The lawsuit sought to compel OpenAI to release its research and technology to the public and prevent its use for financial gain.OpenAI countered that Musk's claims were baseless and motivated by his desire to compete with OpenAI through his own AI venture, xAI, which recently raised $6 billion in funding. The court was scheduled to hear OpenAI's motion to dismiss the case the day after Musk's withdrawal. Neither OpenAI nor Musk's legal representatives commented on the latest development.Elon Musk withdraws lawsuit against OpenAI | ReutersAdobe faced significant backlash over updates to its terms of use, which users feared allowed the company to seize intellectual property and use data to train AI models. The controversy highlighted the need for clear communication of legal terms, especially in the context of evolving technologies like generative AI. In response, Adobe pledged to revise its terms, explicitly stating it won't train AI models on cloud content, with new terms set to be issued on June 18.The uproar began after Adobe's February update, which included provisions for automated and manual review of user content to screen for illegal material. Users, notified in May, expressed concerns on social media, fearing their confidential content could be exploited. Adobe's general counsel, Dana Rao, emphasized that the language had long been part of Adobe's agreements and was essential for practical tasks like uploading content to the cloud.Industry experts noted that such terms are common among cloud service providers but acknowledged the heightened sensitivity among creatives towards potential misuse of their work for AI. Adobe's commitment to clearer, user-friendly legal terms aims to rebuild trust, recognizing the unique and personal relationship users have with its products. The incident underscores the importance of transparent communication and the need for companies to preemptively address user concerns in the AI era.Adobe Responds to AI Fears With Plans For Updated Legal TermsJohnson & Johnson has agreed to a $700 million settlement with 42 U.S. states and Washington, D.C., resolving an investigation into the marketing of its talc-based products, which were allegedly linked to cancer. The settlement, announced on June 11, 2024, addresses accusations that J&J misled consumers about the safety of its talc products. While J&J did not admit any wrongdoing, it continues to assert that its products are safe and asbestos-free.This settlement, led by Florida, North Carolina, and Texas, marks a significant step in consumer product safety, according to Florida Attorney General Ashley Moody. Despite the settlement, J&J still faces tens of thousands of lawsuits related to its talc products, primarily from women with ovarian cancer and some with mesothelioma. As of March 31, approximately 61,490 individuals were suing the company.J&J ceased the global sale of talc-based baby powder last year, opting for corn starch instead. The company has made several attempts to resolve the litigation, including two failed efforts to use bankruptcy to manage its talc liabilities. On May 1, J&J proposed a $6.48 billion settlement to resolve most of the litigation through a third bankruptcy filing and has allocated an $11 billion reserve for talc liabilities. Erik Haas, J&J's worldwide vice president of litigation, stated that the company is pursuing various strategies to achieve a comprehensive resolution of the litigation.Johnson & Johnson reaches $700 million talc settlement with US states | Reuters This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

This Day in Legal History: Act of Toleration EnactedOn May 24, 1689, the Parliament of England enacted the Act of Toleration, a pivotal law that granted religious freedom to English Protestants. This legislation marked a significant shift in England's religious landscape, as it allowed non-Anglican Protestants, such as Baptists and Congregationalists, to practice their faith without fear of persecution. However, this tolerance came with limitations: it excluded Roman Catholics and non-Trinitarian Protestants, leaving them outside the protection of the Act.The Act of Toleration emerged in the context of the Glorious Revolution, which saw William of Orange and his wife Mary ascend to the English throne. Their reign, beginning in 1688, was characterized by a move towards greater religious and political stability. The Act was a response to the religious strife that had plagued England for decades, providing a framework for more inclusive, albeit limited, religious coexistence.Despite its exclusions, the Act of Toleration laid the groundwork for future expansions of religious freedom. It required dissenting Protestants to pledge allegiance to the Crown and reject the authority of the Pope, thus maintaining a degree of control over the newly tolerated groups. This compromise allowed for religious diversity while ensuring loyalty to the monarchy.The Act's passage was a milestone in the evolution of religious liberty in England, reflecting the changing attitudes towards religious pluralism. While it did not end all religious discrimination, it represented a step towards a more tolerant society. Over time, the principles enshrined in the Act influenced broader movements for religious freedom and civil rights, both in England and beyond.The significance of the Act of Toleration lies not only in its immediate effects but also in its lasting impact on the development of religious tolerance as a fundamental value in democratic societies.A Democratic operative, Steve Kramer, faces state criminal charges and a federal fine for using AI to fake President Joe Biden's voice in robocalls aimed at discouraging Democratic voters in the New Hampshire primary. Kramer, working for Biden's primary challenger Dean Phillips, was charged with 13 felony counts of voter suppression and 13 misdemeanors for impersonating a candidate. The FCC proposed a $6 million fine for the robocalls, which spoofed a local political consultant's number.New Hampshire Attorney General John M. Formella emphasized that these actions aim to deter election interference using AI. The incident has heightened concerns about AI's potential misuse in elections. FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel proposed a rule requiring political advertisers to disclose AI use in ads, while the FCC also proposed a $2 million fine against Lingo Telecom for transmitting the calls.The AI-generated robocall, circulated just before the primary, used Biden's catchphrase and urged voters to stay home. Despite this, Democratic leaders encouraged a write-in campaign for Biden, leading to high voter turnout in his favor.Faked Biden Robocall Results in Charges for Democratic OperativeThe US Supreme Court has made it more challenging for Black and minority voters to contest the use of race in legislative redistricting, according to civil rights advocates. In a 6-3 ruling, the conservative majority determined that South Carolina voters failed to prove that race, rather than partisanship, influenced Republican legislators when drawing district lines. This decision raises the bar for proving racial gerrymandering and could impact redistricting cases nationwide, not just in South Carolina's 1st Congressional District.Leah Aden of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund expressed concern that it is becoming increasingly difficult for plaintiffs to demonstrate racial discrimination. The ruling, which precedes the upcoming November election, could affect similar challenges in states like North Carolina and Tennessee.Justice Samuel Alito, writing for the majority, emphasized a presumption that legislatures act in good faith, making it harder to prove racial intent without blatant evidence. Critics argue this standard allows legislators to use partisan motives as a defense against claims of racial gerrymandering.The decision follows the Supreme Court's 2019 ruling that federal courts cannot oversee partisan gerrymandering claims, further complicating challenges to discriminatory redistricting. Justice Elena Kagan, in her dissent, criticized the majority for favoring state arguments and making it tougher for challengers to succeed. This case underscores the evolving legal landscape surrounding voting rights and redistricting in the US.Supreme Court Conservatives Add New Minority Voter RoadblocksA Jackson Walker partner alleged that former Texas bankruptcy judge David R. Jones requested the firm to file a potentially false disclosure about his relationship with attorney Elizabeth Freeman. This disclosure came amidst ongoing litigation involving Jones, Freeman, and Jackson Walker, who are accused of concealing their relationship. The scandal follows Jones' resignation after admitting to the romance.In late 2022, Jones wanted the relationship kept secret as Jackson Walker negotiated with Freeman regarding its disclosure. Despite Freeman's earlier claims that the relationship had ended, the firm discovered in February 2022 that it was ongoing. After confronting Freeman, she admitted the relationship had been rekindled.Jackson Walker's recent filings argue they shouldn't be held liable for Jones' misconduct and urge rejection of the US Trustee's efforts to reclaim $13 million in fees. Jones allegedly provided a misleading proposed disclosure that omitted the romantic aspect of his relationship with Freeman and insisted the firm use it in future cases. Jackson Walker refused and proceeded to separate from Freeman.The firm claims it acted reasonably and didn't breach any ethical rules, pointing out that the US Trustee hasn't penalized Jones or Freeman. The Justice Department's bankruptcy monitor seeks to recover fees from cases where Jackson Walker failed to disclose the relationship. The case highlights the complex ethical and legal issues surrounding judicial conduct and professional responsibilities.Jackson Walker Says Judge Tried to Mislead Court on Romance (2)The U.S. Justice Department, along with 30 states, has filed a lawsuit against Live Nation and its Ticketmaster unit, accusing them of monopolizing concert tickets and promotions. The case, filed in Manhattan federal court, aims to break up Live Nation. Leading the legal team is Jonathan Kanter, head of the DOJ's antitrust division, with Bonny Sweeney as the lead attorney. Sweeney, a veteran antitrust litigator, previously co-headed the antitrust group at Hausfeld and has extensive experience in high-profile cases against companies like Google, Apple, and major credit card firms.Live Nation and Ticketmaster are defended by teams from Latham & Watkins and Cravath, Swaine & Moore, which have deep experience in antitrust defense. The companies deny the allegations and plan to fight the lawsuit. Latham & Watkins, which has long defended Live Nation in private consumer lawsuits and was involved in the 2010 merger approval, has Daniel Wall, a seasoned antitrust defender, as their executive vice president for corporate and regulatory affairs. Cravath's team, led by Christine Varney, former head of the DOJ's antitrust division, also represents major clients like Epic Games in similar high-stakes litigation.US legal team in Live Nation lawsuit includes veteran plaintiffs' attorney | ReutersThis week's closing theme is by Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach. This week's closing theme takes us back to the 18th century, honoring a pivotal figure in the transition from the Baroque to the Classical era: Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach. Born in 1714, C.P.E. Bach was the second surviving son of prolific composer Johann Sebastian Bach. Despite his illustrious lineage, C.P.E. Bach carved out his own distinct legacy, becoming one of the most influential composers of his time in his own right.Today, we commemorate his contributions to classical music as we mark the anniversary of his death on May 24, 1788. Known for his expressive and innovative style, C.P.E. Bach's music bridges the complexity of Baroque counterpoint with the emerging Classical clarity and form. His works had a profound impact on later composers, including Haydn, Mozart, and Beethoven.One of his most celebrated pieces is the "Solfeggietto in C minor," H. 220, Wq. 117/2. This energetic and technically demanding keyboard composition remains a favorite among pianists and continues to captivate audiences with its vibrant character and virtuosic passages. The "Solfeggietto" exemplifies C.P.E. Bach's mastery of the empfindsamer Stil, or 'sensitive style,' characterized by its emotional expressiveness and dynamic contrasts.As we listen to the "Solfeggietto," let us reflect on the enduring legacy of Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach, whose music continues to inspire and delight over two centuries after his passing. Join us in celebrating his remarkable contributions as we close this week with the lively and spirited sounds of his timeless composition.Without further ado, “Solfeggietto in C minor” by Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach, enjoy.  Get full access to Minimum Competence - Daily Legal News Podcast at www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Anna Rathburn, Partner with Latham & Watkins, dives into the recent Federal Trade Commission's rule prohibiting non-compete agreements.Then, Adrianne Frech, a medical sociologist and Associate Professor at Ohio University's Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine, discusses the impacts of unsecured debt on health conditions.And Patrick Fabian and Catherine Semeraro from the Park City Dive Shop provide details on scuba diving classes here in Park City.

In the latest Thomson Reuters Institute Insights podcast, Natalie Runyon, strategist for environmental, social & governance (ESG) content at the Thomson Reuters Institute, speaks with Sarah E. Fortt, partner and global co-chair of the ESG Practice at Latham & Watkins, about the Securities & Exchange Commission (SEC) imposing a stay on its own climate rules amid pending litigation. In the podcast, the pair discuss the implications of the SEC's new rules, when the pending litigation can be resolved, and what companies need to do now to navigate the rules' uncertainty.

This Day in Legal History: The Trial of GalileoOn April 12, 1633, a pivotal moment in the annals of legal and scientific history unfolded as Galileo Galilei faced the Roman Catholic Church's formal inquisition on charges of heresy. This trial was not merely a religious condemnation but a significant clash between emerging scientific ideas and established ecclesiastical doctrine. Galileo, by advocating the heliocentric theory that posited the sun at the center of the universe—a view first propagated by Copernicus—directly challenged the Church's geocentric model, which placed Earth and, by extension, humanity, at the cosmos' core.The inquisition's core accusation was that Galileo held "as true the false doctrine taught by some that the sun is the center of the world," in stark contradiction to the theological view that emphasized Earth's central position. This confrontation was not just about celestial mechanics; it was fundamentally about the authority to define truth. The trial, therefore, was as much a legal battle over doctrinal correctness as it was a referendum on intellectual freedom and the role of evidence in shaping belief.Found "vehemently suspect of heresy," Galileo's conviction was a foregone conclusion given the Church's powerful influence over societal norms and scientific discourse at the time. His sentence to life imprisonment was a stark message to the intellectual community about the limits of inquiry. However, perhaps recognizing the harshness of this penalty or the potential for backlash, his punishment was later commuted to house arrest.During his house arrest, Galileo continued his scientific work, demonstrating a resilience and commitment to knowledge that would posthumously vindicate his theories. It wasn't until centuries later, however, that the Church would formally acknowledge the error in its judgment against Galileo. In 1992, Pope John Paul II officially conceded that the Church had erred in condemning Galileo's support for heliocentric theories.This episode serves as a critical reflection point on the interplay between law, power, and knowledge. Galileo's trial underscores the dangers of legal systems enmeshed with doctrinal control and highlights the enduring struggle between innovation and orthodoxy. It remains a poignant example of the need for legal frameworks that protect and promote intellectual freedom, emphasizing that the pursuit of truth should guide both scientific inquiry and legal principles.The $20 billion allocated from the White House to fight climate change through the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund aims to enhance the nation's clean financing capabilities while managing financial risks carefully. This fund is intended to catalyze up to $150 billion in private investments for clean energy projects and other initiatives to decarbonize the economy, prioritizing both greenhouse gas reduction and benefits to disadvantaged communities. However, these investments carry inherent risks, which have garnered scrutiny from congressional Republicans, who are vigilant for any signs of failure or financial missteps to politicize the issue.Sophie Purdom from Planeteer Capital notes the low threshold for political controversy, even if only a few investments do not perform as expected. Meanwhile, Beth Bafford of the Climate United Fund, which received the largest grant, emphasizes her organization's long-standing expertise in distinguishing between real and perceived risks and structuring financial transactions accordingly. This approach is aimed at enabling aggressive action towards achieving net zero emissions without jeopardizing financial sustainability.The discussion extends beyond financial returns, highlighting the potential for broader economic benefits, especially in underserved communities. For instance, investments are planned in areas like on-site solar, building decarbonization, and bringing electric vehicles to disadvantaged areas. The Climate United Fund alone plans to deploy significant capital towards these ends, leveraging their extensive experience in financing similar projects.Comparisons are drawn with other federal initiatives like the Paycheck Protection Program, where community development financial institutions played a crucial role with minimal risk of loss, suggesting a blueprint for successful deployment of the climate funds. Despite concerns about fraud which affected previous federal programs, advocates like Jessie Buendia from Dream.org suggest bolstering EPA staffing and education on using blended capital to mitigate risks and maximize the impact of investments.The political landscape remains contentious, with Republicans actively opposing the fund, citing concerns over waste and the influence of foreign supply chains. Yet, there is a call for bipartisan support to foster clean, thriving communities across all states, pointing towards a need for collaborative efforts between the government and the private sector for transformative market changes.Climate Lenders With $20 Billion in Grants Weigh Risk and RewardWinston & Strawn emerged as the top legal biller for the Major League Baseball Players Association (MLBPA), which significantly reduced its legal expenses to $1.7 million in 2023 after finalizing a new collective bargaining agreement. This figure marks a substantial decrease from the $3.7 million spent in the previous year during intense negotiations following a three-month league lockout. The legal fees covered a range of services, with Winston earning approximately $264,000 for salary arbitration work, signaling its longstanding role as a key advisor to the MLBPA.Following Winston in billing were several other prominent firms, including Latham & Watkins and Boston-based Hemenway & Barnes, with respective payments of $176,000 and $147,000. Additional significant contributions came from Weil, Gotshal & Manges and Sidley Austin, highlighting the diverse array of legal expertise enlisted by the MLBPA.The reduction in legal costs coincided with a major expansion of the MLBPA, which saw its membership grow from 1,200 to about 6,000 as minor league players were incorporated. This expansion suggests a broadening of the union's scope and responsibilities, potentially influencing its legal and operational strategies.Internally, the MLBPA faced discontent from some players critical of the union's direction and leadership under Executive Director Tony Clark and Chief Labor Negotiator Bruce Meyer. Clark's compensation nearly doubled over the past year, which, coupled with the union's strategic decisions, has fueled some unrest among members.The legal team at the MLBPA also saw changes, with significant salaries for roles such as the new general counsel and other senior positions, reflecting the union's complex legal and operational environment. Moreover, the MLBPA engaged other legal and advisory services, including risk analysis and lobbying efforts, to support its broadening agenda.Overall, the MLBPA's legal expenditures reflect its strategic navigation through labor negotiations, membership expansion, and internal challenges. The focus on managing both high-profile and routine legal matters underscores the critical role of legal counsel in supporting the union's evolving needs and ambitions in the dynamic landscape of professional sports.Winston, Latham Top Big Law Billers for Fractious Baseball UnionThe influence of U.S. News & World Report's law school rankings appears to be diminishing, evidenced by a significant decrease in web traffic for leaks of the rankings and a widespread boycott by law schools. Mike Spivey, a law school admissions consultant, noted a 50% drop in traffic when he published the top 25 law schools a week ahead of U.S. News' official release. This decline in interest is linked to recent controversies, including data errors in the previous year's rankings and a boycott that started in 2022, with 53 out of 197 American Bar Association-accredited schools refusing to submit data.Despite these challenges, the rankings still generate considerable attention, as noted by Staci Zaretsky from Above the Law, although the level of interest has waned compared to past years. A survey conducted by Kaplan Test Prep revealed mixed sentiments among law school admissions officers regarding the prestige of the rankings, with a majority acknowledging a loss in prestige over recent years.U.S. News has responded by adjusting its ranking methodology to de-emphasize LSAT scores and grades in favor of employment outcomes and bar pass rates. This change reflects broader concerns within the legal academy about the impact of ranking methodologies on financial aid distribution and academic priorities.The discussion around the rankings highlights a shift in priorities among law school applicants, with more emphasis being placed on employment outcomes rather than ranking positions. Spivey's own firm, which conducts rankings analysis, benefits from the ongoing relevance of the rankings, yet he advocates for greater transparency and meaningfulness in how the rankings are formulated and presented. This evolving perspective among stakeholders suggests that while the U.S. News rankings continue to influence applicant decisions to some extent, their dominance and credibility are increasingly being questioned within the legal education community.After setbacks, U.S. News law school rankings show signs of waning influence | ReutersEpic Games has called for significant reforms to Google's Play Store, following a jury's decision that Google had abused its dominant position in the Android app market. In a recent court filing, Epic suggested that the Play Store should allow third-party app stores and limit Google's agreements with device makers that prevent the preloading of alternative stores. These recommendations were part of a proposed injunction submitted to U.S. District Judge James Donato in San Francisco, who oversaw the antitrust trial concluding with a verdict against Google in December.Epic's proposal does not seek monetary damages but aims to alter Google's practices to foster greater competition. Specifically, Epic wants to prohibit Google from restricting how apps inform users about purchasing options outside of the Google Play Store. This move is part of a broader challenge against major tech companies' control over app distribution and transaction processes.While Google has denied any wrongdoing and defended its app store policies, it has been compelled to make concessions in the face of legal pressures. In December, alongside the jury verdict, Google agreed to a $700 million settlement addressing allegations related to its Play Store restrictions. Moreover, Google introduced "choice billing" as an alternative for in-app purchases in the U.S., allowing developers more flexibility.The case against Google could extend for years, especially as Google plans to appeal the December verdict and potentially challenge any reforms mandated by Judge Donato. This legal battle mirrors a similar ongoing dispute between Epic Games and Apple, emphasizing Epic's broader strategy to challenge the app distribution monopolies held by tech giants. The outcomes of these cases could have significant implications for the app development industry and consumer choice in digital marketplaces.Epic Games proposes Google app store reforms after antitrust win | ReutersThis week's closing theme is by Ludwig van Beethoven.Ludwig van Beethoven, born in 1770 in Bonn, Germany, stands as a monumental figure in the history of Western music. His works span the transition from the Classical period to the Romantic era in music and continue to be revered for their depth and innovative qualities. Beethoven was a virtuosic pianist and composer who was known for his profound ability to convey emotion and intellectual depth through his compositions. Despite suffering from progressive hearing loss that eventually led to complete deafness, Beethoven's relentless dedication to music allowed him to compose some of the most celebrated pieces of all time.Among his extensive body of works, Beethoven's symphonies particularly stand out, with each contributing uniquely to the evolution of the genre. His Symphony No. 6 in F Major, Op. 68, known as the "Pastoral Symphony," is an exemplary piece that depicts the composer's love for nature. Unlike many of his other symphonies, which are driven by dramatic heroism, the Pastoral Symphony is filled with warmth and expressions of the joy and peace Beethoven found in the countryside. This symphony is programmatic, meaning it intentionally evokes scenes or nature images, showcasing Beethoven's deep reverence for the natural world.The "Pastoral Symphony" is divided into five movements, each describing a different element of rural life. Of particular note is the first movement, marked "Allegro ma non troppo," which translates to "Lively, but not too much." This movement, titled "Awakening of cheerful feelings on arrival in the countryside," beautifully sets the stage for a symphonic expression of a day in the countryside. It starts with a leisurely pace that suggests the gentle unfolding of a landscape bathed in the rejuvenating light of spring. The melody is simple yet expressive, with flowing lines that mimic the tranquility of nature, perfectly capturing the essence of spring's awakening.In this movement, Beethoven uses a sonata form to explore musical themes that suggest the freshness of the season, the rustling of leaves, and the bubbling of streams. The development section weaves these elements together, creating a rich tapestry of sound that feels both vivid and idyllic. This movement not only sets the tone for the entire symphony but also offers listeners a sonic escape into the peacefulness and renewal that characterizes spring. Through the "Pastoral Symphony," particularly in the allegro of the first movement, Beethoven invites us to share in his reverence for nature and experience the restorative powers of the natural world.Without further ado, Ludwig van Beethoven's Pastoral Symphony, Allegro movement. Get full access to Minimum Competence - Daily Legal News Podcast at www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

In this episode, Rahul and Ben discuss major trends in trial practice and big picture take aways from the last 3 ½ years of the podcast.  The conversation begins with a discussion of nuclear verdicts in the golden age of trial, moves on to case analysis and key issues, then to strategies or courtroom success, and ends with discussion of the impact of the MAGA juror.   About Rahul https://www.panish.law/ravipudi.html Rahul Ravipudi is a partner at Panish | Shea | Ravipudi LLP and has spent his legal career handling catastrophic injury and wrongful death cases involving commercial vehicles, pedestrians, industrial or construction accidents, utility negligence, dangerous conditions of public and private property as well as cases of sexual abuse and sexual assault. Mr. Ravipudi also represents consumers in class actions against businesses who engage in unfair/illegal business practices and public entities in cases where corporations have endangered the safety, health, property or comfort of the public.Mr. Ravipudi currently serves as Plaintiffs' Co-Lead Counsel in the Social Media Cases litigation which involves cases of children and young adults harmed or driven to suicide by social media algorithms as well as Public Entity Plaintiffs' Co-Lead Counsel in the JUUL Labs Product Cases, representing school districts and other public entities in California involved in litigation against the electronic cigarette manufacturer. He also serves as Plaintiffs Co-Lead Counsel in the Southern California Fire Cases litigation arising out of the 2017 Thomas Fire and subsequent debris flows in Montecito, California as well as on the Plaintiffs Executive Committee in the California North Bay Fires litigation. Mr. Ravipudi previously served on the Steering Committee in the Blythe bus crash litigation.Named 2017 Trial Lawyer of the Year by Consumer Attorneys Association of Los Angeles, Mr. Ravipudi has obtained numerous landmark verdicts and settlements including a $160.5 million jury verdict for a man who suffered a traumatic brain injury as a result of a vicious beating by security personnel for a nightclub, a $46,475,112.33 jury verdict for a beginning Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu student who suffered a catastrophic spinal cord injury while sparring with a Del Mar Jiu-Jitsu Club instructor who performed a technique which rendered the student an incomplete quadriplegic, a $28,500,000+ settlement for a special needs student who was catastrophically injured after being struck by a vehicle while under the care and supervision of Victor Elementary School District (VESD) personnel, as well as a $23,500,000 settlement on behalf of the family of Paul Lee, a 19-year-old non-verbal autistic student who tragically died aboard a Whittier school bus after the driver left him behind to engage in a sexual tryst with a coworker. The Lee case was a catalyst for significant change in school transportation with Governor Jerry Brown signing the “Paul Lee School Bus Safety Law” in September 2016, requiring all school buses in the state of California to be equipped with a child safety alarm system that must be deactivated by the bus driver before departing the bus. The new law will go into effect at the start of the 2018-19 school year and requires bus drivers to receive training in child-safety check procedures.Committed to serving as an advocate for his clients, Mr. Ravipudi has obtained numerous eight-figure awards including a $20,500,000 jury verdict for the mother of a high school student who was killed while walking to a bus stop, a $19,786,818 jury verdict for a man who suffered severe burn and traumatic brain injuries when his rental home exploded as a result of Southern California Gas Company negligence, a $13,935,550 jury verdict for 19-year-old pedestrian who suffered extensive injuries as a result of being struck on the sidewalk by a vehicle driven by a Los Angeles County employee, a $13,000,000 settlement for the children and parents of a woman who was killed when her car was hit by a Hawthorne, California police officer, a $11,000,000 settlement for the family of a middle school student who drowned during a school-sponsored swim party, a$10 million for the family of an independent truck driver killed by an intoxicated heavy lift operator at a stevedoring terminal in Long Beach, and an$8,000,000 jury verdict in Clark County District Court for a Nevada man who suffered significant internal injuries after he was served and ingested what he believed was a Honey Blonde Ale but was actually a chemical cleaning compound left in the tap lines.Mr. Ravipudi shared his insight into successfully litigating cases against the stevedoring companies in an article entitled, “Danger on the Docks – Where there is an injury or death on the waterfront, drugs or alcohol are too often involved” published in the February 2011 edition of Advocate, journal of the Consumer Attorneys Association of Los Angeles.Additional recoveries obtained by Mr. Ravipudi include a $15,950,000 settlement for a teen who suffered a brain injury on an HOA playground, $8,000,000 settlement for an 81-year-old woman who suffered severe spinal cord injuries after falling at a hotel, a $7,000,000+ settlement during trial for the family of a man killed at SpeedVegas when the vehicle he was driving slammed into a track wall and burst into flames, $6,500,000 settlement for the two minor children and friend of a Southern California man who was killed after being struck on the highway by a freight truck whose driver had fallen asleep behind the wheel, a $6,000,000 settlement for a woman who suffered severe burn injuries when a faucet in the bathtub of her apartment detached and sprayed scalding hot water onto her body, a $5 million for an HVAC worker who suffered serious injuries when he fell through a skylight while working on a customer's roof, a $3.3 million gross jury verdict arising out of the death of a pest control person crushed and killed when a semi-truck reversed into him at a warehousing facility, and $9 million from the State of California (Caltrans) when a 16-year-old girl on a restricted license lost control of her vehicle and collided into a guardrail damaged two days earlier resulting in a bilateral traumatic below knee amputations. This case involved significant appellate issues which led to Mr. Ravipudi's article, “Dealing with the state of California's first line of defense – stonewalling any meaningful discovery” published in Advocate, Journal of Consumer Attorneys Association of Los Angeles in February 2009.  About Ben https://gideonasen.com/our-team/benjamin-gideon/ When clients come to us, they are looking for financial compensation. They are often struggling just to stay above water, and they need money to provide safety and security to meet basic life needs and to build a new and better life for themselves and their family in the future.But for many of our clients, their case is also about something more—something larger—than money. It's about accountability. It's about wanting to create a society where individuals, corporations, medical providers and insurance companies don't get away with selfish, neglectful or greedy choices that put people at risk. It's about obtaining the catharsis and closure the only comes when justice is done to make up for the precious things that another's harmful conduct took away from them.In short, I have come to realize that my clients don't just want a lawyer. They want a Champion—that is, someone who will fight for them individually, but also be willing to fight for the larger cause for which they stand.Let Us Be Your Champion.– Ben Gideon, 2021 Early YearsBen grew up in Portland, Maine, attended public schools and graduated from Deering High School in 1989. Ben's father, Martin Rogoff, was a prominent member of the Maine Law School faculty, so Ben grew up immersed in discussions of the law. Ben began to develop his legal skills early in life through nightly arguments with his father at the dinner table.In high school, Ben played varsity soccer and was the captain of the hockey team. Following high school, Ben attended Cornell University in Ithaca, NY. Ben attempted to walk on to the Cornell hockey team, but was eventually cut from the team, ending his hockey career. Depressed and disappointed at this failure, Ben became a poor student, failed several classes, and was told he was being suspended from college on academic probation.After rehabilitating himself through some community college courses, Ben was able to gain re-admission to Cornell and to complete his degree. Ben applied to law school and was admitted to Boston University School of Law. There, Ben was a standout student. His grades were so exceptional after his first year that he was accepted as a transfer student to Yale Law School where he earned his law degree.Ben began his career in private practice at a large, multi-national law firm, Latham & Watkins, in New York City. He practiced there for several years before deciding to return to Maine to join Berman & Simmons, PA, Maine's largest plaintiff's law firm. A Leader at Berman & SimmonsDuring his years at Berman & Simmons, Ben rose from an associate to become an owner and practice leader at the firm. Ben was instrumental in helping the firm re-invent its approach to litigating and trying cases; expanded its areas of practice expertise; and recruited and trained many talented lawyers.During his 17 years at Berman & Simmons, Ben enjoyed many great successes and some disappointing failures, but overall managed to build the most successful plaintiff's personal injury and medical malpractice practice in the State of Maine. Ben achieved success in a broad range of different types of plaintiff's cases—police civil rights, product liability, medical malpractice, nursing home, maritime and industrial accidents.Early in his career, Ben achieved a landmark civil rights verdict against a police officer for violating his client's civil rights with a Taser shooting. The verdict was affirmed on appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit.In 2014, after 4 ½ year of litigation, Ben achieved a record-setting $22.5 million jury verdict in Burlington, Vermont, on behalf of a utility lineman who lost both of his legs during a high-voltage powerline switching operation.Ben followed his Vermont verdict with a verdict of $1.75 million jury verdict in a medical malpractice trial in Bangor, Maine.More recently, Ben recovered $2.5 million in a medical malpractice case tried to a jury in New Hampshire. Founding Gideon Asen LLCAfter 17 years at Berman & Simmons, in November 2020, Ben decided to leave one firm he loved and had helped to build, to form a new law firm, Gideon Asen LLC.“I was very proud of everything we accomplished at Berman & Simmons,” Ben said, “but I was excited by the challenge of building a new firm that could be even better.”Ben's first step was to recruit Taylor Asen to join him.“Taylor and I have a common mission,” Ben said. “Although we're separated by 12 years, Taylor also attended Yale Law School and completed prestigious Federal clerkships. He's insanely smart.”“But perhaps more important, Taylor and I share a common vision of a plaintiff's law firm where clients have access to exceptional lawyers and service. We are both supremely competitive and don't tolerate mediocrity. We believe we owe it to our clients to give them the very best, and that is what Gideon Asen will provide.”

In this episode, Hrutika and I talk about Temu's bid to catch up with Shein and how Latham & Watkins's latest move confirms the shift in how global companies are doing business in Hong Kong these days…

Jonathan Lippman is an American jurist who served as Chief Judge of the New York Court of Appeals from 2009 through 2015. He is currently Of Counsel in the Litigation & Trial Department of Latham & Watkins' New York office.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This episode features Charles Lu, VP of Operations at LexCheck. LexCheck accelerates contract review and streamlines negotiations by delivering redlines and issues lists in minutes while ensuring consistency across contracts. There, Charles is responsible for executing the C Suite's strategies to grow its product offerings and customer base.Charles explains how he uses RevOps as a strategic tool for not only tracking revenue, but assessing performance and identifying areas for improvement. He also describes the biggest challenge in modern sales leadership: balancing creativity and process to empower teams while providing insights on performance.---Guest BioCharles Lu is the VP of Operations at LexCheck where he is responsible for executing the C Suite's strategies to grow its product offerings and customer base. With a background in law, Charles has served as an M&A Associate at leading law firms such as Latham & Watkins and Goodwin. He holds a J.D. from the University of Michigan Law School and a BASc in Mechanical Engineering from the University of Waterloo. In his current position, Charles leverages his legal expertise and engineering knowledge to drive operational excellence at LexCheck. With a Juris Doctor degree, he possesses a comprehensive understanding of the legal intricacies. Additionally, his Bachelor of Applied Science in Mechanical Engineering equips him with a versatile skill set. Charles' multifaceted background makes him a valuable asset in executing growth strategies at LexCheck. His commitment to operational excellence and deep understanding of the legal industry contribute to advancing the company's impact on the legal tech industry.---Guest Quote“One of the mantras that I live by is that time kills all deals, right? Inactivity kills all deals. Open decision points will kill a deal, right? And so the challenge that we solved was taking those exit criteria and boiling them down to can you write a proposal for this client. Not a proposal that they need necessarily to sign. But can you write a proposal that will basically set out something that we can provide them that will provide them value.”---Time Stamps00:24 - How Charles got started01:54 - Defining Revenue Operations06:46 - RevObstacles15:14 - Scaling legal review26:26 - RevOops29:20 - The Tool Shed35:56 - Quick Hits---SponsorRise of RevOps is brought to you by Qualified. Qualified's Pipeline Cloud is the future of pipeline generation for revenue teams that use Salesforce. Learn more about the Pipeline Cloud on Qualified.com. ---Links Connect with Charles Lu on LinkedInConnect with Ian Faison on LinkedinCheck out LexCheck

Tisha Schuller welcomes Kristina Wyatt, chief sustainability officer at Persefoni, to the Energy Thinks podcast. Listeners will hear Kristina cover what she expects of the upcoming SEC climate disclosure rule. Kristina started at Persefoni in 2022 as senior vice president of Global Regulatory Climate Disclosure. Prior to her start at the company, she was the senior counsel for climate and ESG to the SEC's director of the Division of Corporate Finance where she worked on the rule. Kristina also is a former director of sustainability and a former senior counsel at the law firm Latham & Watkins. She received a B.A. in philosophy from Duke, a law degree from the University of Colorado, and an MBA from Yale School of Management. Follow all things Adamantine Energy and subscribe to Tisha's weekly Both of These Things Are True email newsletter at www.energythinks.com. Thanks to Adán Rubio who makes the Energy Thinks podcast possible. [Interview recorded on Aug. 21, 2023]

0:00 -- Intro. *reference to our episodes reviewing Succession Season 1: E98 of this podcast (May 22, 2023) and Season 2: E102 (June 26, 2023).2:00 -- Start of interview. 3:50 -- About Sean Berkowitz and the Enron Case: prosecuting Ken Lay and Jeff Skilling (2006).7:05 -- On whistleblowers and avoiding retaliation. "Whistleblowers are one of the trickiest things you can deal with as counsel representing a corporation."11:05 --  Kendall's whistleblower scenario. Conducting internal investigations.15:02 -- On government relations and political interference with federal investigations. "It essentially doesn't work." "The discretion and judgment of a line prosecutor is always going to rule the day."17:22 -- Cooperating with Federal investigations. 21:12 -- The role of the board of a public company under federal investigation.22:52 -- On "shifting to legals", internal investigations by outside counsel, and creating a special committee of the board to remove conflicts of interest.29:16 -- Explaining joint defense agreements. The Archer-Daniels-Midland case (reference to movie The Informant).33:34 -- On the link between good governance and how shareholders value the company, including activists (Josh Aronson scene) and the proxy battle.43:36 -- On sexual harassment complaints (situation between Roman and Gerri involving explicit pictures). The factor of CEO succession and how the board should conduct their selection.50:30 -- On potential GoJo red flags and need for due diligence, including leadership assessment and kicking the tires on their numbers. What could/should board be doing in this situation?55:33 -- Dealing with moguls and founders like Lukas Matsson. "I think that one of the elements at the heart of corporate governance is personal integrity and character... and Matsson is not a good guy."59:49 -- Family governance within public companies. "Ultimately it all comes down to the documents: who can vote what, who has control, who has the ability in a tie break, etc." The problem with "rubber stamping boards." Question: "would any of us invest in a company run by Kendall or Roman?"01:06:11 -- Kendall's Unreliable Testimony to the DOJ ("Queen for a day" opportunity) and Preparation Failure.Kate O'Leary is the Global Executive Litigation Counsel at General Electric Company.Sean Berkowitz is a Partner at Latham & Watkins and the Global Chair of the Complex Commercial Litigation Practice. He represents clients in complex litigation and regulatory investigations.__ You can follow Evan on social media at:Twitter: @evanepsteinLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/epsteinevan/ Substack: https://evanepstein.substack.com/__Music/Soundtrack (found via Free Music Archive): Seeing The Future by Dexter Britain is licensed under a Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License

Explore financing solutions and lucrative real estate opportunities with our guest, Ethan Gao, who shares insider tips about loans, life insurance, and property investing. Don't miss this chance to expand your horizon and create savvy decisions for a future filled with wealth and success!   Key Takeaways To Listen For • The role of key principals in closing real estate deals  • Gap funding: What it is and how it helps real estate investors  • Why you should buy life insurance policies and ways to maximize its benefits • Possible reasons why some people lose money on life insurance policies • Tax benefits associated with cash value life insurance policies   About Ethan Gao Ethan Gao graduated from Cornell with a BS in Economics and a JD from Columbia Law School. He has had substantive large international law firm experience focusing on corporate work, mergers and acquisitions, capital markets, and financing transactions, including 4 years as a senior associate at the Houston office of Latham & Watkins focusing on oil and gas transactions. A substantial amount of his corporate experience has been representing private equity sponsors and their portfolio companies. Ethan has also spent several years as in-house counsel at a mutual fund and a hedge fund and as general counsel of a manufacturing company in Houston.   Ethan has originated and funded over 130 private loans to real estate investors in the Houston area over the last 5 years (hard money lending). Additionally, he has purchased, rehabbed, and sold over 100 single-family homes in the past 4 years. Ethan also has experience evaluating syndications and private equity sponsors and has invested in a number of them. Connect with Ethan • LinkedIn: Ethan Gao  • Email: ethan@gaofamilyoffice.com    Connect With Us If you're looking to invest your hard-earned money into cash-flowing, value-add assets, reach out to us at https://bobocapitalventures.com/.   Follow Keith's social media pages • LinkedIn: Keith Borie • Investor Club: Secret Passive Cashflow Investors Club • Facebook: Keith Borie • Twitter: @BoboLlc80554

McConnell Center welcomes Professor Jeffery Pojanowski to discuss Constitutional Interpretation and the Classical Legal Tradition. Jeff Pojanowski joined the faculty and community of Notre Dame Law School in 2010 and was promoted to full professor in 2015. He teaches and writes in the areas of administrative law, jurisprudence, legal interpretation, and torts. He has published work in the Georgetown Law Journal, Harvard Law Review, Michigan Law Review, Northwestern University Law Review, the Virginia Law Review, and the Yale Law Journal, among other publications. He serves as co-editor of The American Journal of Jurisprudence. Pojanowski earned his A.B. in Public Policy with highest honors from Princeton University and graduated magna cum laude from Harvard Law School in 2004, where he was Articles Co-Chair for the Harvard Law Review. After law school, he served as a law clerk to then-Judge John Roberts on the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit and then to Justice Anthony Kennedy on the Supreme Court of the United States. He then practiced law with Latham & Watkins in Washington, D.C., where he specialized in appellate litigation and administrative-law matters. Important Links More about Jeff Pojanowski Stay Connected Visit us at McConnellcenter.org Subscribe to our newsletter  Facebook: @mcconnellcenter Instagram: @ulmcenter  Twitter: @ULmCenter This podcast is a production of the McConnell Center at the University of Louisville. Views expressed in this show are those of the participants and not necessarily those of the McConnell Center.  

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit davidlat.substack.comIn the last episode of this podcast, I wondered: are boutiques the future of litigation? If you're looking to make that case, today's guest would be a star witness.Last week, leading litigator Christopher Clark left Latham & Watkins, one of Biglaw's biggest and best names, to launch his own boutique. Together with Patrick Smith, a former colleague of his from the U.S. Attorney's Office, and Rodney Villazor, another former federal prosecutor, Clark is a founding partner of Clark Smith Villazor.For this new podcast episode, Clark and I discussed his time at the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York, which he joined right after clerking; his time in Biglaw, including Dewey & LeBoeuf during its downfall; why he admires his most controversial client, Hunter Biden; helpful advice for representing billionaires; and, finally, a key skill for success as a lawyer—which, sadly, many lawyers overlook.Thanks to Chris Clark for joining me, and good luck to him, Patrick, and Rodney, as they launch and grow their new firm.Sponsored by NexFirm, which helps Biglaw attorneys become founding partners. To learn more about how NexFirm can help you launch your firm, call 212-292-1000 or email careerdevelopment@nexfirm.com.

This week Azeem looks at the personal changes in the Project and Infrastructure Finance World. The DBSA has appointed Boitumelo Mosako as its new CEO  Harbert Management Corporation (HMC) has promoted Claude Estes Link Legal has appointed Prashanth Sabheshan Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher has hired banking and finance specialist Laleh Shahabi  OYA Renewables has appointed Rob Roberti as Executive Vice President of Project Finance, effective March 13, 2023.  Latham & Watkins has unveiled a raft of new partners. Owain Davies, in Singapore, is a member of the Project Development & Finance Practice and Finance Department. José María Alonso, in Madrid, is a member of the Environment, Land & Resources Practice and Litigation & Trial Department. Joshua Marnitz, based in Los Angeles and Houston, is a member of the Environment, Land & Resources Practice and Corporate Department. Denham Capital has appointed Richard Burrell as an Operating Partner for its Sustainable Infrastructure business (DSI).  Gaetan Frotte has been appointed as Chief Financial Officer  CBRE Investment Management (CBRE IM) has appointed Kerron Lezama  DLA Piper has appointed Thananan Sangnuan as a partner  Fabrizio Pierdomenico has been appointed as Brazil's new National Secretary for Ports and Waterway Transport. Nomi Ahmad has been appointed CEO of GE Energy Financial Services (EFS) to succeed Susan Flanagan, effective March 1.  Emmanuel Rollin has been appointed chief executive of Iberdrola France. Copenhagen Infrastructure Partners (CIP) has appointed Martin Neubert as Partner, Group Chief Investment Officer (CIO) and member of the CIP management board. Dele Kuti is due to become head of a new energy and infrastructure group at Standard Bank in Johannesburg, South Africa, according to a source with knowledge of the matter. Kuti is currently global head of oil and gas at the bank. As part of the transition, Stephen Barnes will move from his position as head of power and infrastructure to a new role within the bank.   Shoutout: Don't miss out on the opportunity to join ADNOC, ACWA Power, AMEA Power, Saudi Electric Company, and other industry leaders in Dubai for MENA 2023: EXPORT, PROJECT & DEVELOPMENT FINANCE. This two-day event begins tomorrow, March 14th, and ends on March 15th. Experience a unique networking opportunity, participate in engaging discussion formats, and meet with trailblazers in the field. Hurry and secure the last remaining spots with a 30% leader discount. You can still register virtually, so it's not too late to join us for this exciting event!

with @milesjennings @brianquintenz @colinmccune @smc90We provide an overview of policy and regulation in the crypto industry right now -- from a lay of the land to pulse checks on sentiment -- as well as share helpful frameworks for policymakers, and quick guidance on how things work (and how to navigate and participate) for builders.  We also dig into the mindsets, myths, debates, nuances; and quickly discuss what to expect for regulation in a few specific domains -- from DeFi to DAOs, to briefly touching on CEX vs DEX, stablecoins, banks custodying crypto, unhosted wallets, etc.Our expert guests include: Miles Jennings, general counsel at a16z crypto; he was also previously at Latham & Watkins, where he co-chaired its global blockchain and cryptocurrency task force -- Jennings has written a lot for us here, including developing frameworks for regulating crypto while preserving both innovation and protecting consumers; developing and evolving legal frameworks for DAOs; releasing "can't be evil" licensing for NFTs; and sharing detailed guides to decentralization for builders.Brian Quintenz, now head of policy at a16z crypto; previously, he was a commissioner of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), where he had led the agency's Technology Advisory Committee -- during his service, the CFTC oversaw the listing of the first U.S. regulated Bitcoin and Ether futures contracts on derivatives exchanges, and the rapid expansion of DeFi.Collin McCune, who joined as head of government affairs at a16z crypto a few months ago; he has spent a decade on Capitol Hill, and most recently was Deputy Staff Director of the House Financial Services Committee. I asked McCune to jump in on this episode for where we cover navigating Congress and the legislative process....all in conversation with editor in chief Sonal Chokshi.To stay up to date on our ongoing efforts, regular regulatory recaps, and other resources or educational materials that you can use or point others to, please also subscribe to our newsletter for the latest dispatches.As a reminder: none of the discussion is investment, business, legal, or tax advice; please see a16z.com/disclosures for more important information -- including a link to a list of our investments. 

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit davidlat.substack.comGary Feinerman served as a judge for the U.S. District Court or the Northern District of Illinois, with chambers in Chicago, from 2010 to 2022. He also served as the Solicitor General of Illinois, from 2003 until 2007, and as a law clerk to Justice Anthony M. Kennedy. In our interview, we discussed why he left the bench, what it was like to clerk for Justice Kennedy alongside two future Supreme Court justices, his most noteworthy case from his time on the bench, how he worked his magic as a Supreme Court “feeder judge,” and the type of practice he plans to build at Latham & Watkins.

On this episode of Not Billable, we sat down and chatted with James Walker, Associate Counsel and Investments at Draper Associates (an investor of Lawtrades), a venture capital firm run founded and managed by Tim Draper.James shares his experience getting his MBA/JD through the J-Term program at Columbia University and what it was like to pivot from Big Law at Latham & Watkins into a hybrid business legal role at Draper Associates.Working at Latham & WatkinsJames started his career as an associate attorney at Big Law firm, Latham & WatkinsLatham & Watkins is institution in the legal industry and a well known player in the emerging companies space.While in this role, James gained valuable experience and skills that he still uses today.The J-Term Program at Columbia UniversityAfter more than 2 years in Big Law, James decided to pivot and get his MBA.James ended up applying to the impressive J-Term MBA program at Columbia University, which would give him the ability to earn his graduate degree in just 18 months (instead of 2 years).Unfortunately, when James was set to graduate in 2020, COVID-19 hit the United States.James needed to pivot fast.Draper AssociatesJames ended up reaching out to Tim Draper to see if any of his portfolio companies needed legal counsel.Instead of referring James out, Tim decided to bring him on to help save on legal expenses.Eventually that role evolved into much more of a hybrid of business and legal.James is now more of a 1/2 internal counsel, 1/2 strategic business advisor.Closing ThoughtsBig law firms can offer many opportunities and experiences, but it's not the only path a lawyer can take.In-house legal is a dual-hat wearing role (law and business).By regularly evaluating your skills and interests and seeking out opportunities to grow and develop, you can determine where you are most useful in your legal role.

Today's guest is Richard Groff, Senior ServiceNow Program Manager at Latham & Watkins in Berlin, Germany. Latham & Watkins is a global law firm who has internationally recognized practices in a wide spectrum of transactional, litigation, corporate and regulatory areas. Their success is grounded in their devotion to the collaborative process, which reaches across global offices & practices and draws upon their deep subject matter expertise, an abiding commitment to teamwork and a powerful tradition of creative lawyering. Richard is an experienced Program Manager with a demonstrated history of working in the law practice, investment banking and entertainment industries. He is skilled in Operations Management, Personnel Management and Team Building, System Deployment, Agile Project Management and Transformational Change Management. Richard is also a strong program and project management professional with a Bachelor of Arts focused in History from New York University. In the episode, Richard will discuss: How key drivers relate to business outcomes and drive strategy at L&W, The reality of implementing ServiceNow in your business, Challenges to be aware of when putting your strategy into practice, The importance of team building & talent development, Finding talent in a competitive ServiceNow market, How to effectively manage your service models and CMDB, and The future of AI in ServiceNow

If you're in the world of Biglaw, odds are you've come across various law firm rankings, including the Vault 100, Am Law 100, Global 100, Legal 500, and Chambers rankings. What are the differences between all these different rankings? What are their uses—and their limitations? How do firms move up or down on these lists? As an attorney, what should you consider when looking at these rankings? Our hosts explain all this and much more in this week's episode of Movers, Shakers & Rainmakers. Also, Zach breaks down a notable hire from the in-house world by Latham & Watkins, while David talks about a leading litigator jumping from Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP to King & Spalding. As always, please be sure to rate, review, and subscribe!

New rules and regulations that aim to prevent concussions can teach sports kids to respect their opponents. And they don't undermine mental game skills like determination, focus and intensity. That's the word from Thomas Heiden, who played college hockey at Notre Dame University and has coaches many different sports for a few decades. He's also a trial lawyer with Latham & Watkins who has handled high-profile youth sports cases. Visit us at https://YouthSportsPsychology.com  

04th July

This week we're replaying a classic episode where your hosts Steve Lowry and Yvonne Godfrey interview John Gomez of Gomez Trial Attorneys (https://www.thegomezfirm.com/)   Remember to rate and review GTP in iTunes: Click Here To Rate and Review   Episode Details: Award-winning trial lawyer John Gomez of Gomez Trial Attorneys shares how he secured justice for a California couple whose lives changed forever after a slip-and-fall in an El Pollo Loco restaurant. Because WKS Restaurant Corporation refused to pay overtime for workers to clean the grills after closing, employees chose to violate company policy and began cleaning an hour before closing. The resulting slippery floors caused a customer to fall, tear his quadricep and suffer a traumatic brain injury that has left him with severe optical problems.    Click Here to Read/Download Trial Documents   Guest Bio: John Gomez John Gomez founded the firm alone in 2005. He acts today as President and Lead Trial Attorney. From humble beginnings, he attended three separate San Diego public high schools and Grossmont Junior College before graduating from the Nation's top-ranked law school, Yale University, in 1993. In between, John was named an Academic All-American football player for the University of San Diego's Toreros. He clerked for a federal judge, worked for the international law firm of Latham & Watkins and served the United States as an Assistant United States Attorney until becoming a trial lawyer for people in 2000. Since that time, he has established himself as one of California's most recognized and accomplished trial lawyers. Lawyers USA named him the national Lawyer of the Year in 2010. He has twice been named San Diego's Trial Lawyer of the Year. The Consumer Attorneys of San Diego have awarded him an unprecedented nine separate Outstanding Trial Lawyer Awards. He has been named a Top 100 California Attorney overall by the Los Angeles Daily Journal, a Top 10 San Diego attorney overall by San Diego Metropolitan Magazine, and has been voted by peers a top 10 San Diego Super Lawyer every year since 2012.  He was featured as the subject of the cover story in that 2012 publication. Read Full Bio   Show Sponsors: Legal Technology Services - LegalTechService.com Digital Law Marketing - DigitalLawMarketing.com Harris Lowry Manton LLP - hlmlawfirm.com   Free Resources: Stages Of A Jury Trial - Part 1 Stages Of A Jury Trial - Part 2

Michèle Penzer is a Managing Partner at the renowned New York City-based law firm Latham & Watkins. After attending Harvard University for her undergraduate degree and Yale University for law school, Penzer forged an impressive career in negotiation law and leveraged financial transactions, and was named as a leading woman lawyer in New York City by Crain's Business in 2017. In this episode, Penzer imparts advice on facilitating successful negotiations, opens up about how she harnessed confidence in high-pressure professional environments, shares how her definition of success has evolved over time, and highlights that “it is so important for women to recognize” the significance of networking.

We speak all the time on this podcast about the many ways, lawyers can advance their careers and find more satisfaction in an out of the law. If you at a law firm that emphasizes professional development, chances are, you are learning how to be successful in your practice area. If you are fortunate to have a good mentor, perhaps you are also learning how to succeed at your firm and maybe how to begin to build your own practice.  But if you are like most law firm associates, it is on you to decide what direction you want your career to go.  Career counseling has not traditionally been provided by your employer.  That was for your law school career services office. But if you have been practicing for a few years, maybe you are unsure what comes next. Is partnership in your future?  SHOULD you be building a practice? Is in-house an option and how do you get there?  Is an alternative legal career in your future?  Do you want to leave the practice of law altogether? Most law firms leave those questions for you to figure out on your own (or by seeking out resources outside of your firm). But there are several firms that have now brought that function in-house.  In this episode, I am very pleased to bring in one of the pioneers of the field of law firm career counseling, Kevin Agnew. Kevin Agnew is Director of Attorney Career Services at Latham & Watkins an international law firm with almost 3000 lawyers. He runs the firm's Career Design program and oversees the global alumni program. In a confidential coaching environment, he works with attorneys on the full range of career issues. Kevin also is an Adjunct Professor at Northwestern Pritzker School of Law, where he was named Adjunct Professor of the Year in in 2017. Kevin shares valuable career advice for associates and describes how Latham has embraced the notion that there can be different definitions of success (and that each of these paths can be benefit attorneys and their firm). Related Podcasts Episode 30-The Key to Happiness in the Practice of Law Episode 27-Downsizing from Biglaw Episode 25-Thirty Years of Biglaw Wisdom

Of all the factors in the college admissions process, few seem as subjective or elusive as the interview. Do these even happen any more? Amy and Mike invited author Richard Montauk to explain how to prepare for a college admissions interview. What are five things you will learn in this episode? How common are college interviews, and which schools most rely on them? Who usually conducts college interviews? Do interviews have a substantial impact upon admission decisions? What advice do you have for how applicants can prepare to perform their best in their interviews? What are the biggest—or most common—mistakes applicants make regarding interviews? MEET OUR GUEST Richard Montauk has been consulting to applicants to college, professional school (especially law and business school), and other graduate programs since 1991. Richard received a BA in literature from Brown University, an MA in government from Harvard, an MS in finance, and a JD from Stanford Law School. Pursuant to a graduate fellowship, he also studied at the London School of Economics and the Institute of Advanced Legal Studies (University of London). While an undergraduate at Brown University, Richard was also the head coach of the women's varsity track & field team. After graduating from Stanford Law School, he worked as a corporate lawyer for Latham & Watkins in Los Angeles, then as a corporate strategy consultant for Bain & Co. in London, before devoting himself full-time to admissions consulting. Since 1991, he has consulted to candidates for the world's top universities, for both undergraduate and graduate programs. A member of the National Association of Fellowship Advisors, he has also periodically served as a judge for Venture for America's fellowship. Richard is the author of a series of best-selling guides, all published by Prentice Hall: How to Get Into the Top Colleges (with Krista Klein), How to Get Into the Top MBA Programs, and How to Get Into the Top Law Schools. More recently, he's authored College Interviews: The Definitive Guide, Getting into Brown, Getting into Dartmouth and has completed the first in a series of books designed to help college students pay for college, Waiting Tables for Very Good Money.  His writing has appeared in multiple career and education journals, including the Wall Street Journal's Career Journal, the Economist Intelligence Unit's Which MBA?, The Postgrad Guide, Executive Education Casebook, and MBA Career Guide. His articles for university fellowship advisors are to be found in Roads Less Travelled (and Other Perspectives on Nationally Competitive Scholarships) and All In: Expanding Access through Nationally Competitive Awards. Richard has also served as Contributing Editor for two annual international publications, The Global MBA Guide and LLM Guide, both published by Hobsons. Find Richard at richardmontauk.com. LINKS College Interviews: Practice Questions & Strategies RELATED EPISODES SHAPING AN ADMISSIONS CLASS ADMISSIONS INSIGHTS FOR HIGHLY SELECTIVE UNIVERSITIES TRANSPARENCY IN COLLEGE ADMISSIONS ABOUT THIS PODCAST Tests and the Rest is THE college admissions industry podcast. Explore all of our episodes on the show page. ABOUT YOUR HOSTS Mike Bergin is the president of Chariot Learning and founder of TestBright. Amy Seeley is the president of Seeley Test Pros. If you're interested in working with Mike and/or Amy for test preparation, training, or consulting, feel free to get in touch through our contact page.  

In this inspiring episode, Ben (www.gideonasen.com) talks about how many trial lawyers face personal challenges they must overcome to find happiness and success in their practices.  Ben reveals how his own journey to overcome anxiety helped to shape his character and approach as a trial lawyer.  ABOUT BEN GIDEONBEN'S PHILOSOPHYWhen clients come to us, they are looking for financial compensation. They are often struggling just to stay above water, and they need money to provide safety and security to meet basic life needs and to build a new and better life for themselves and their family in the future.But for many of our clients, their case is also about something more—something larger—than money. It's about accountability. It's about wanting to create a society where individuals, corporations, medical providers and insurance companies don't get away with selfish, neglectful or greedy choices that put people at risk. It's about obtaining the catharsis and closure the only comes when justice is done to make up for the precious things that another's harmful conduct took away from them.In short, I have come to realize that my clients don't just want a lawyer. They want a Champion—that is, someone who will fight for them individually, but also be willing to fight for the larger cause for which they stand.Let Us Be Your Champion.– Ben Gideon, 2021ABOUT BENEarly YearsBen grew up in Portland, Maine, attended public schools and graduated from Deering High School in 1989. Ben's father, Martin Rogoff, was a prominent member of the Maine Law School faculty, so Ben grew up immersed in discussions of the law. Ben began to develop his legal skills early in life through nightly arguments with his father at the dinner table.In high school, Ben played varsity soccer and was the captain of the hockey team. Following high school, Ben attended Cornell University in Ithaca, NY. Ben attempted to walk on to the Cornell hockey team, but was eventually cut from the team, ending his hockey career. Depressed and disappointed at this failure, Ben became a poor student, failed several classes, and was told he was being suspended from college on academic probation.After rehabilitating himself through some community college courses, Ben was able to gain re-admission to Cornell and to complete his degree. Ben applied to law school and was admitted to Boston University School of Law. There, Ben was a standout student. His grades were so exceptional after his first year that he was accepted as a transfer student to Yale Law School where he earned his law degree.Ben began his career in private practice at a large, multi-national law firm, Latham & Watkins, in New York City. He practiced there for several years before deciding to return to Maine to join Berman & Simmons, PA, Maine's largest plaintiff's law firm.A Leader at Berman & SimmonsDuring his years at Berman & Simmons, Ben rose from an associate to become an owner and practice leader at the firm. Ben was instrumental in helping the firm re-invent its approach to litigating and trying cases; expanded its areas of practice expertise; and recruited and trained many talented lawyers.During his 17 years at Berman & Simmons, Ben enjoyed many great successes and some disappointing failures, but overall managed to build the most successful plaintiff's personal injury and medical malpractice practice in the State of Maine. Ben achieved success in a broad range of different types of plaintiff's cases—police civil rights, product liability, medical malpractice, nursing home, maritime and industrial accidents.Early in his career, Ben achieved a landmark civil rights verdict against a police officer for violating his client's civil rights with a Taser shooting. The verdict was affirmed on appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit.In 2014, after 4 ½ year of litigation, Ben achieved a record-setting $22.5 million jury verdict in Burlington, Vermont, on behalf of a utility lineman who lost both of his legs during a high-voltage powerline switching operation.Ben followed his Vermont verdict with a verdict of $1.75 million jury verdict in a medical malpractice trial in Bangor, Maine.More recently, Ben recovered $2.5 million in a medical malpractice case tried to a jury in New Hampshire.Over the past decade, no other plaintiff's lawyer in Maine can match Ben's level of success on behalf of his clients, which include:Recovering more than $130 million in verdicts and settlementsAchieving 31 verdicts or settlements in excess of $ 1 millionRecovering more than $50 million for the victims of medical malpracticeRecovering tens of millions of dollars for victims of car and trucking accidents.Recovering more than $11 million in actions against major automobile manufacturers, including Toyota, Hyundai, and Fiat ChryslerRecovering more than $15 million from power and electrical utility companiesRecovering millions of dollars for families of the victims of the El Faro maritime disasterRecovering more than $5 million from 3 trials and several settlements of medical malpractice and personal injury against the U.S. GovernmentRecovering millions of dollars for victims of nursing home negligence and abuseRecovering millions of dollars for victims of dangerous and defective products

Anna Berces, Assistant General Counsel of home insurtech Hippo, joins the show to discuss milestones and mental health in the progression of a legal career in Biglaw and tech. Anna discusses her time on Latham & Watkins' Associates Committee, where she saw the inner-workings of the firm's People Management first hand.  She takes us through big feather-in-her-cap moments like going to trial, going through an acquisition, and taking a company public through a SPAC, and broadening her legal skills with new roles. She discusses how those moments impacted her mental state, her health, and her self-reflection on what she wants out of a legal career.  Lastly, we talk about how Hippo uses technology and aligned incentives to save itself and its clients money.  Find Anna on LinkedIn, check out Hippo.com for your home insurance needs, and head to lw.com if you'd like some very talented, very expensive attorneys. 

In Cochran v. SEC the Fifth Circuit court of appeals sitting en banc opened the doors of federal district courts in Texas, Mississippi and Louisiana to constitutional challenges to agency administrative law judges (ALJs) who enjoy multiple layers of protection from removal. This means that persons administratively charged by the SEC will no longer have to first endure years of pointless administrative proceedings before judges they claim are unconstitutional. By contrast, in six other circuits (Second, Fourth, Seventh, Eleventh, D.C. and Ninth), administrative agencies such as the SEC and FTC can instigate unconstitutional proceedings and evade judicial review by an Article III court for years on end. Defendants are thereby forced to settle or bankrupted before ever receiving meaningful judicial review.Cochran is not only a groundbreaking course-correction vindicating Americans' access to Article III courts for redress of their constitutional rights, but it creates a circuit split that may well prompt Supreme Court review. The Fifth Circuit, by a 9-7 vote (Haynes, Jones, Smith, Elrod, Willett, Duncan, Engelhardt, Oldham and Wilson) held that § 78y of the Exchange Act neither explicitly nor implicitly stripped jurisdiction from federal courts to hear this challenge.Judge Oldham, joined by Judges Smith, Willett, Duncan, Engelhardt and Wilson, concurred separately in a remarkable opinion that set forth the origins of the administrative state in § 78y's transfer of power “far away from the three branches of government the Founders worked so hard to create, separate and balance … [a]nd … as far away from democracy and universal suffrage as possible.” They said that critical disjuncture has allowed “administrative agencies to operate in a separate, anti-constitutional, and anti-democratic space—free from pesky things like law and an increasingly diverse electorate.”Please join Peggy Little, Senior Litigation Counsel of the New Civil Liberties Alliance (NCLA), who argued the en banc, and Gregory Garre, former U.S. Solicitor General and now partner at Latham & Watkins, who worked with another NCLA client in 2020 on a petition for certiorari to the Supreme Court on this point, for a discussion of this landmark decision and the concurrence's open engagement with administrative power. Peggy and Greg will discuss how this structural constitutional question was litigated in district courts in California, Texas and the Fifth, Ninth and Eleventh Circuits, what the Fifth Circuit got right that so many other circuits got wrong, and how this separation of powers question might reach the Supreme Court in the near future. Featuring: --Peggy Little, Senior Litigation Counsel, New Civil Liberties Alliance --Gregory Garre, Partner, Latham & Watkins

Katie Larkin-Wong is an Associate General Counsel in the Competition and Regulatory Team for Meta, the parent company of Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, and Reality Labs.  Before joining Meta, Katie spent nearly a decade at Latham & Watkins. She has also held internships at The State of Illinois - Department of Child and Family Services and the US District Court, where she provided support for various legal cases.  Throughout her entire career, Katie has been a champion for diversity and inclusion. She was on the board of directors at Ms. JD, was appointed to the American Bar Association's Commission on Women in the Profession, and was on the board and Chair of Women's Recruitment for The Associates Committee. Katie is now a voice for many underrepresented lawyers, promoting the advancement of women and minorities in the legal industry. In this episode… Diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts have been a growing topic as people realize the urgency for change. So how can you play an active role in this change and help the legal industry develop? Katie Larkin-Wong, who has been working diligently to promote the advancement of minority groups in the legal space, knows precisely how you can move the needle. Whether you're a senior partner, a young lawyer, or anyone in between, Katie says listening to the community and hearing their needs is vital to drive change. The systemic issues may be significant, but as long as you focus on small steps, you'll make an impact and help push the industry forward.  On this episode of The Lawyer's Edge Podcast, Elise Holtzman converses with Katie Larkin-Wong, Associate General Counsel in the Competition and Regulatory Team for Meta. Together, they talk about tips for promoting the advancement of women — and other minorities — in law. Katie emphasizes the importance of building a strong community, creating space for underrepresented voices, and issuing an invitation to get a range of people involved in change.

HealthIMPACT Live Presents: Personalizing Digital Health Through Adaptive Patient-Focused Digital Front Doors Original Published Date: November 11, 2021YouTube Video:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UZfTgzobYHMAs the pandemic shifted the focus from in-person care to telehealth and virtual medicine, more patients have relied on virtual technologies to access both healthcare and their health data. Health systems and their providers are continuing to find ways to connect with patients to create digital front doors, through telehealth platforms and otherwise, and innovative companies are leveraging artificial intelligence and machine learning (AI/ML) to assist providers with scaling the clinical workflow, from inferring patient needs to rationalizing a plan of care. Health systems are using robotics and AI/ML technologies to assist in patient care, including the utilization of conversational AI to interview the patient as wells as recommending a care plan to the physician. Regulators are focused on patient-directed data sharing and the interoperability of electronic medical systems to promote care coordination, and health systems are partnering with digital health companies to transform the delivery of care. Heather Deixler, Latham & Watkins, ModeratorJason Wells, Chief Strategy, Consumer & Innovation Officer, Adventist HealthMatt Fisher, General Counsel, CariumLeard Mita, AVP, Physician Contracts & Amb Finance Operations, NorthBay HealthcareMark Hanson, CEO, Decoded Health

(Advert) Interested in learning more about the University of Law, who are the sponsors of this podcast episode? Click here to view the courses on offer (https://bit.ly/3h7RGMq)   In this episode, Camilla Uppal is joined by Varsha Kanitkar, future trainee solicitor at Clifford Chance. Varsha secured two training contract offers from top firms Clifford Chance and Latham & Watkins in 2020, so we invited Varsha on the show to talk about her top tips for applying for training contracts, preparing for interviews and developing commercial awareness. Varsha also discusses her experiences as an international student. For those making training contract or vacation scheme applications, this is not one to be missed! If you are looking for some non-law related books to enjoy over the holidays, check out Varsha's recommendations which she shares with us in this episode: - On Earth We're Briefly Gorgeous, by Ocean Vuong - Sterling Karat Gold, by Elizabeth Waidner   Don't forget to subscribe to ensure that you never miss an episode, and please share this episode with others who might find it useful! Hosted by Camilla Uppal, Produced by Nathan Gore

Movers, Shakers, & Rainmakers is back for season two! We all know how crazy the lateral market was in 2021, but will it continue into 2022? Our hosts give their predictions on this and other big questions facing Biglaw in the new year. Also, Zach discusses Ropes & Gray recently opening an office in Los Angeles, while David breaks down the hiring of two former federal prosecutors by Latham & Watkins. We are very excited for this new season, when we will bring on guests from Lateral Link and other industry leaders to bring a new perspective into the world of Biglaw. Be sure to like and subscribe today!

Co-hosts Bill Mariano and Rob Hellewell start the show with Sightings of Radical Brilliance. In this episode, they review a recent New York Times article by Cade Metz that explores how new organizations are using AI to find bias in AI.Next, they bring on Harsha Kurpad of Latham Watkins who answers the following questions around staying ahead of AI innovation in legal technology: What are some current barriers to adopting AI?How do you stay apprised of new AI technology, tools, and solutions?What are new data challenges that are leading to a greater adoption of AI or requiring the use of more sophisticated tools?How are government entities like the FTC and DOJ changing how AI is being used and what is required during investigations?What are some best practices for training algorithms and staying on top of new approaches to training?What are some of the risks in not adopting AI or not staying apprised of changes to the tools, platforms, and how it's being used.Our co-hosts wrap up the episode with a few key takeaways. If you enjoyed the show, learn more about our speakers and subscribe on the podcast homepage, rate us on Apple and Stitcher, and join in the conversation on Twitter.Related LinksWhite Paper: The Challenge with Big DataBlog Post: What Attorneys Should Know About Advanced AI in eDiscovery: A Brief DiscussionPodcast: AI and Analytics for Corporations: Common Use CasesBlog Post: What is the Future of TAR in eDiscovery? (Spoiler Alert – It Involves Advanced AI and Expert Services)About Law & CandorLaw & Candor is a podcast wholly devoted to pursuing the legal technology revolution. Co-hosts Bill Mariano and Rob Hellewell explore the impacts and possibilities that new technology is creating by streamlining workflows for ediscovery, compliance, and information governance. To learn more about the show and our speakers, visit the podcast homepage.

Join Em Stroud and her clown Barbara as they chat all things Be The First with Caroline Flanagan.  What does it mean to Be the First?  How can you Be the First?  What is the mindset required to Be The First?  How is Barbara the first in her world?  How has Caroline found the courage to be the First and much much more Follow Caroline: www.carolineflanagan.com Twitter : @flan_caroline Linkedin: Caroline Flanagan Instagram: caroline_flanagan_ About Caroline: Caroline is an inspirational keynote speaker, transformational coach, two times author and host of the Caroline Flanagan Podcast. Caroline works with international law firms, banks and global organizations to increase the number of women and people of color in leadership. Caroline's mission is to empower minority individuals to defy the odds, triumph over adversity and to win battles they think they cannot win. She is a recognised expert on Imposter Syndrome and work life balance. Caroline has worked with some of the most recognised law firms and organisations in the world, included Latham & Watkins, Kirkland and Ellis, Weil Gotshal and Manges; Morgan Stanley, Google, Accenture and Shell. Caroline is also the author of BabyProof YourCareer: The Secret to Balancing Work and Family So You Can Enjoy It All. Her second book-Be The First: People of Colour, Imposter Syndrome and the Struggle to Succeed in a White World, is published on 26 February, 2021

China has launched a national carbon emissions trading system for the first time, with trading set to begin imminently. Multinationals can expect to be significantly affected by the compliance requirements laid out by the new market, while also standing to profit from the new investment opportunities it presents. Nancy Sun and Andrew Westgate discuss what carbon trading is, how it works, how China's emissions trading scheme (ETS) compares with other ETSs around the world, and what the opportunities and challenges are for MNCs in China. Find the full in-depth analysis article on this topic here. Nancy Sun is a senior partner at Dentons in Shanghai, where she advises major foreign and Chinese energy companies on environmental and general corporate matters. Andrew Westgate is an associate at Latham and Watkins in New York who advises major energy and industrial companies on a range of environmental matters, including environmental credits and carbon neutrality. The China Law Podcast is a weekly podcast exploring China's business and financial sectors from a legal perspective. Get in touch at vchow@alm.com with any feedback and ideas for future episodes. Episode Outline 01:24 How China's national ETS works 02:43 Comparison with EU and California ETSs 07:23 MNC concerns over carbon trading enforcement 08:22 Foreign investor participation and challenges 10:06 Transportation not covered under national ETS 13:10 Scrutiny of supply chains and price modeling 18:00 Voluntary carbon offsets in China 20:17 Standardizing different pilot scheme rules 21:07 EU carbon leakage tax proposal Related Content China Carbon Trading: EU, Pilot Schemes Hint at What's to Come Rules for the Administration of the Trading of Carbon Emissions Rights (Trial Implementation) In the News: Carbon Trading Rules; Crypto Ban Expansion; and Mobile App Privacy

In today’s episode of Help Choose Home, we’re joined by Edo Banach , JD, President and CEO of the National Hospice and Palliative Care Organization . He has worked as the Senior Advisor and Deputy Director of the Medicare-Medicaid Coordination Office at the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services and Associate General Counsel at the Visiting Nurse Service of New York. Edo has also served as the Medicare Rights Center’s General Counsel, and has practiced health law at the firms of Latham & Watkins and Gallagher, Evelius and Jones, and clerked for U.S. Judge John T. Nixon of the Federal District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee. In this episode we discuss: The history of the hospice benefit and why there’s still plenty of room for hospice reform The importance of standardized, high-quality community-based palliative care. Strategies for raising consumer awareness about legislative issues related to hospice and palliative care, and tips for talking to loved ones about them. Be sure to check out Help Choose Home Season 4, Episode 2 show notes and our full library of podcasts dedicated to helping families learn more about professional home care options.

Josh Friedlander is the Chief Human Resources Officer for Latham & Watkins, LLP. In addition to leading the global Human Resources function, Josh is an active member of the Firm’s Diversity, Security and Legal Professional and Paralegal Committees and the Firm’s EEO Review Board. Josh is also a part of World 50, a private community for C-level executives at globally respected organizations to discover better ideas, share valuable experiences and build relationships that make a lasting impact. Prior to joining Latham, Josh was the Managing Director of Human Resources responsible for Marsh Inc.’s US and Canada Division. During his tenure at Marsh, Josh was also responsible for Human Resources for the Global Infrastructure and the Consumer line of business as well as Consulting Services Group of MMC’s Kroll Inc. and Marsh Risk Consulting. The Global Infrastructure included IT, Operations, Finance, Compliance, Strategic Planning, Operational Risk, Corporate Communications and CSStars, LLC. The Consumer line of business included Marsh’s Affinity, Private Client Services, Executive Benefits, and Private Client Life Insurance businesses. Josh joined Marsh as the Manager of Corporate Staffing function and was responsible for staffing permanent and temporary positions at all levels within the organization and the development of national staffing and background verification policies and processes. Before joining Marsh, Josh was with Online Benefits, Inc., a benefits communication company. As the Vice President of Human Resources and Relationship Management, he was responsible for the management of Human Resources and the supervision of the group that established and maintained relations with distribution partners and clients. Prior to his work at Online Benefits, Josh held various domestic and international positions in Human Resources with brandwise LLC, GE Capital, and Exxon. Josh earned a Masters Degree in Labor and Industrial Relations from the University of Minnesota and a Bachelor of Science in Industrial and Labor Relations from Cornell University. In addition, Josh has a General Course Certificate from the London School of Economics and Political Science.

"The federal regulations when you're raising money from passive investors is that you're also selling a security as well as buying a piece of real property." -Peter Fischer   Today I am interviewing a long time associate and friend of the FIBI network Peter Fishcer who is a real estate attorney and investor, and a partner at Sklar Kirsh. His practice revolves around most facades of the real estate industry such as development, fund formation, equity investments, joint ventures, acquisitions, syndications and more. When he first moved to LA, Peter became friends with Jeremy Roll who at the time was hosting roundtables before the FIBI network truly kicked off. Peter has also presented at multiple FIBI meetings in Southern California.  Peter Fischer: Now an experienced commercial real estate attorney, began his career in New York as a project and bank finance attorney with Sherman & Sterling before moving to Latham & Watkins. After relocating to California, Peter worked with borrowers and sponsors for Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP. After that he practiced with Loeb & Loeb LLP in that firm’s entertainment finance department. As an experienced commercial attorney he now has partnered with Sklar Kirsh.    TOPICS COVERED IN THE EPISODE: Why did Peter go to Japan before deciding to go to law school  How Peter met and became associated with FIBI Founder Jeremy Roll Shepard Mullen  The development of LA live  Why Peter became eager to become and entrepreneur  What is a boutique firm  Why stocks are arbitrary  Hunter Thompson Why Peter chooses to not invest in stocks Why most of his clients no longer invest in CA CA is a tenant favorable state What are the landlord and tenant laws in CA Red tape and taxes in CA  What are the complexities of funds  What is the difference between a joint venture and a fund structure  Why you should always research your sponsor  Invest in the team and the papers  Listen now on Spotify or Apple iTunes or watch on Youtube to find out how Peter found his Real Estate Breakthrough! The Real Estate Breakthrough Show with Christina Suter is where we talk about the reality of real estate, the mindset you need and the tips and tricks to get you moving forward in investing. Join us every week and learn everything you need to know to invest in real estate education and create real wealth for a lifetime.   Find out more about Peter here:  Website Sklarkirsh.com Email pfischer@sklarkirsh.com Phone 310.845.6416 

The Cannabis Business with Author Charlie Alovisetti today on NCIA's Cannabis Industry Voice only on Cannabis Radio. Charlie is a partner at Vicente Sederberg and chair of the firm's Corporate Department. He is recognized by Chambers & Partners as one of the top cannabis lawyers in the United States and is the co-author of The Business of Cannabis: Understanding Law, Finance, and Governance in America’s Newest Industry (Routledge, 2020). Prior to joining VS, Charlie worked as an associate in the New York offices of Latham & Watkins and Goodwin, where he represented public companies and private equity sponsors and their portfolio companies in a range of corporate transactions. For companies trying to raise money for their businesses, either startup or bigger expansions, with this federal confusion, we talk about how that impacts the process of raising money in a technically illegal industry. We dive into if there is risk in putting yourself out there that you’re in this industry trying to raise money.

Latham & Watkins litigation chair Michele Johnson shares her predictions for 2021 and discusses what courtroom technology changes may stick around beyond the pandemic.    

A securities lawsuit filed against Chipotle has taken place and representing them is attorney Andrew Clubok from Latham & Watkins, who walks us through the latest with that case. Sources: US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit decision in Ong v. Chipotle Law Street article by Kevin Boyle ‘2nd Circuit Affirms Dismissal of Fraud Case Against Chipotle’ Chipotle Wikipedia Page

A securities lawsuit filed against Chipotle has taken place and representing them is attorney Andrew Clubok from Latham & Watkins, who walks us through the latest with that case. Sources: US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit decision in Ong v. Chipotle Law Street article by Kevin Boyle ‘2nd Circuit Affirms Dismissal of Fraud Case Against Chipotle’ Chipotle Wikipedia Page

In the last few weeks, we've seen numerous events with implications for how to think about the twin challenges of developing the energy resources we need while also protecting our public lands, curbing climate change, and protecting the environment. There have been setbacks for three major U.S. pipeline projects, all rooted in flaws that courts found in environmental review processes; a new announcement by  President Trump about a “top to bottom overhaul” of the nation’s environmental review process, a cornerstone of the landmark environmental law President Nixon signed half a century ago; and ambitious new plans announced by Vice President Biden to dramatically increase clean energy investments.  In this edition of Columbia Energy Exchange, host Jason Bordoff is joined by David J. Hayes to discuss what all these changes might mean for energy infrastructure projects on federal lands moving forward, along with other issues like what’s next for clean energy and climate policy, how states are responding to the Trump administration’s recent environmental rollbacks, and much more.  David J. Hayes is an environmental, energy and natural resources lawyer who leads the State Energy and Impact Center at the NYU School of Law, which supports state attorneys general in their advocacy for clean energy, climate and environmental laws and policies. David previously served as the Deputy Secretary at the U.S. Department of the Interior for President Barack Obama and Bill Clinton. He’s also been a visiting lecturer at Stanford Law School, is a member of the board of the Coalition for Green Capital, and is founder of the U.S. Wildlife Trafficking Alliance. Earlier in his career, he worked in private law practice as global chair of the Environment, Land and Resources Department at Latham & Watkins. 

Recent police killings of Black men and women has spurred a dialogue on racial injustice in the legal profession and a push for greater inclusion. On this episode, Grace Speights and Tara Elliott join The National Law Journal Editor in Chief Lisa Helem for a candid conversation. Speights, who leads the labor and employment practice at Morgan Lewis & Bockius, and Elliott, an intellectual property litigator at Latham & Watkins, discuss the weighty conversations they’re having at their firms, what changes they hope to see, and how their roles as mothers has shaped each of their perspectives on racial justice.  

In Mozilla v. FCC, the D.C. Circuit upheld the Federal Communications Commission’s 2018 Restoring Internet Freedom Order in which the current Commission rejected the Obama Administration’s 'net neutrality' efforts to impose legacy common carrier regulation on the Internet and returned broadband Internet access service to a “light touch” regulatory regime under Title I of the Communications Act. Mozilla was not a complete victory for the Commission, however. Not only did the D.C. Circuit reverse the FCC’s broad efforts to preempt categorically state efforts to regulate the Internet, but the court remanded several issues to the Commission for further explanation, including how reclassification affects access to pole attachments, how reclassification affects the ability to include broadband in the FCC’s Lifeline program, and how reclassification affects public safety. Last March, the Commission issued a public notice to refresh the record in this case, and the comment period is on-going. Please join our panel of experts to discuss the legal issues at bar and how the FCC should respond to the court.Featuring: -- Matthew Brill, Partner, Latham & Watkins, LLP-- Kristine (Fargotstein) Hackman, Vice President, Policy & Advocacy at USTelecom – The Broadband Association-- Russell Hanser, Partner, Wilkinson Barker Knauer, LLP-- Moderator: Lawrence J. Spiwak, President, Phoenix Center for Advanced Legal & Economic Public Policy Studies

In Mozilla v. FCC, the D.C. Circuit upheld the Federal Communications Commission’s 2018 Restoring Internet Freedom Order in which the current Commission rejected the Obama Administration’s 'net neutrality' efforts to impose legacy common carrier regulation on the Internet and returned broadband Internet access service to a “light touch” regulatory regime under Title I of the Communications Act. Mozilla was not a complete victory for the Commission, however. Not only did the D.C. Circuit reverse the FCC’s broad efforts to preempt categorically state efforts to regulate the Internet, but the court remanded several issues to the Commission for further explanation, including how reclassification affects access to pole attachments, how reclassification affects the ability to include broadband in the FCC’s Lifeline program, and how reclassification affects public safety. Last March, the Commission issued a public notice to refresh the record in this case, and the comment period is on-going. Please join our panel of experts to discuss the legal issues at bar and how the FCC should respond to the court.Featuring: -- Matthew Brill, Partner, Latham & Watkins, LLP-- Kristine (Fargotstein) Hackman, Vice President, Policy & Advocacy at USTelecom – The Broadband Association-- Russell Hanser, Partner, Wilkinson Barker Knauer, LLP-- Moderator: Lawrence J. Spiwak, President, Phoenix Center for Advanced Legal & Economic Public Policy Studies

Technology is becoming more and more integral to the practice of law, but is the profession preparing its lawyers for this shift? At Inspire.Legal 2.0, Dan Linna spoke with un-panelists Laura Safdie, John Scrudato, Andrea Alliston, and Jeff Carr about their session on how a greater focus on experiential learning will better prepare law students and practitioners for the tech-driven future. Laura Safdie is COO and general counsel at Casetext. John Scrudato is an innovation and technology solutions attorney at Latham & Watkins in New York City. Andrea Alliston is a partner at Stikeman Elliot LLP, where she is responsible for knowledge management, innovation, and education. Jeff Carr was formerly general counsel at Univar.

Technology is becoming more and more integral to the practice of law, but is the profession preparing its lawyers for this shift? At Inspire.Legal 2.0, Dan Linna spoke with un-panelists Laura Safdie, John Scrudato, Andrea Alliston, and Jeff Carr about their session on how a greater focus on experiential learning will better prepare law students and practitioners for the tech-driven future. Laura Safdie is COO and general counsel at Casetext. John Scrudato is an innovation and technology solutions attorney at Latham & Watkins in New York City. Andrea Alliston is a partner at Stikeman Elliot LLP, where she is responsible for knowledge management, innovation, and education. Jeff Carr was formerly general counsel at Univar.

ABOUT TECHGCWebsiteIn-House Career CenterLinkedInTwitterABOUT THE GUESTLee Cheng is an attorney and civil rights activist with a long history of achievement in business, law and public policy.  He is presently a Partner at Maschoff-Brennan, a leading technology-focused law firm with offices in Utah and California, and the co-Founder and President of Symmetry IP, an organization focused on fighting patent abuse.Lee is a two-time winner (2014 and 2016) of the National Law Journal's America's 50 Outstanding General Counsel, the inaugural recipient of the Champion of Equal Opportunity Education Rights Award of the Asian American Coalition for Education (2018), and has been given numerous other awards for innovation and excellence in the practice of law.  He has worked for well known international law firms like Latham & Watkins, and as a C-level executive in global, multibillion dollar companies like Newegg.com and Gibson Brands (the owner of Gibson Guitars).  While Chief Legal Officer of Newegg, he developed a reputation as one of the foremost opponents of abusive patent litigation, leading Newegg to victory against over 30 claimants and showing that resisting legal extortion could work both strategically and fiscally.Lee has been deeply involved in business and community groups, including the Board of Directors of the Atlantic Legal Foundation, the Board of Directors of Publius Lex, the Board of Industry Leaders of the Consumer Technology Association (the largest technology focused trade association in the world and the operator of the Consumer Electronics Show) and the Board of Trustees of the CTA Foundation.  In 1994, he co-founded and still serves as Secretary and as a Director of the Asian American Legal Foundation. He previously served on the Boards of the Association of Corporate Counsel-Southern California Chapter, the Harvard Club of San Francisco, the Lowell High School Alumni Association, the Organization of Chinese Americans-San Francisco Chapter, and AACE.He is a graduate of Harvard University (History of Science, magna cum laude) and UC Berkeley School of Law. Refer a Guest

Is Securitization About to Take Off in Europe? Rod Lockhart, LendInvest Jonathan Kramer, Zopa Lisa Macedo, Moody's Marion Delille, Crosslend Moderator: Jeremiah Wagner, Latham & Watkins

A small(ish) taste of the general types of regulatory issues that structuring a stablecoin in the U.S. could bring up.  I sat down with Steve Wink, Yvette Valdez and Christian McDermott from Latham & Watkins to discuss this from the commodities laws, securities laws and privacy law perspectives.     Not legal or professional advice.

Governments are catching on to the tremendous power and value of blockchain based technologies.  But in terms of embracing the potential of distributed ledger technologies, different jurisdictions move at vastly different pace.  Steve Wink, a partner from Latham Watkins, shares his unique perspective as counsel to various blockchain entrepreneurs across the globe.   Nothing in this episode, or any content in New Territories, should be construed as legal or professional advice. 

As a follow-up to Next Gen Leadership: Advancing Lawyers of Color’s interview with the Institute for Inclusion in the Legal Profession’s CEO Sandra Yamate on the launch of the Social Impact Incubator (SII), Natalie Runyon, Director for Enterprise Content at Thomson Reuters Legal Executive Institute, spoke with three SII members Katie Larkin-Wong, Associate at Latham & Watkins; Deanna Kwong, Senior IP Litigation Counsel at Hewlett Packard Enterprise; and Derek Ishikawa, Attorney at Hirschfeld Kraemer LLP. In this podcast, they discuss how Millennials think differently about diversity and inclusion and what they recommend to current leaders in the legal profession to expedite inclusion efforts. Moreover, they share why their number one recommendation to speeding up progress is breaking down silos.

This week, your hosts Steve Lowry and Yvonne Godfrey interview John Gomez of Gomez Trial Attorneys (https://www.thegomezfirm.com/)     Remember to rate and review GTP in iTunes: Click Here To Rate and Review     Case Details: Award-winning trial lawyer John Gomez of Gomez Trial Attorneys shares how he secured justice for a California couple whose lives changed forever after a slip-and-fall in an El Pollo Loco restaurant. Because WKS Restaurant Corporation refused to pay overtime for workers to clean the grills after closing, employees chose to violate company policy and began cleaning an hour before closing. The resulting slippery floors caused a customer to fall, tear his quadricep and suffer a traumatic brain injury that has left him with severe optical problems.      Click Here to Read/Download the Complete Trial Documents     Guest Bio:   John Gomez founded the firm alone in 2005. He acts today as President and Lead Trial Attorney. From humble beginnings, he attended three separate San Diego public high schools and Grossmont Junior College before graduating from the Nation's top-ranked law school, Yale University, in 1993. In between, John was named an Academic All American football player for the University of San Diego's Toreros. He clerked for a federal judge, worked for the international law firm of Latham & Watkins and served the United States as an Assistant United States Attorney until becoming a trial lawyer for people in 2000.   Since that time, he has established himself as one of California's most recognized and accomplished trial lawyers. Lawyers USA named him the national Lawyer of the Year in 2010. He has twice been named San Diego's Trial Lawyer of the Year. The Consumer Attorneys of San Diego have awarded him an unprecedented nine separate Outstanding Trial Lawyer Awards. He has been named a Top 100 California Attorney overall by the Los Angeles Daily Journal, a Top 10 San Diego attorney overall by San Diego Metropolitan Magazine, and has been voted by peers a top 10 San Diego Super Lawyer every year since 2012.  He was featured as the subject of the cover story in that 2012 publication.   Read full bio here     Show Sponsors     Legal Technology Services - LTSatlanta.com     Forge Consulting - ForgeConsulting.com     Harris, Lowry, and Manton - hlmlawfirm.com     Free Resources:   Stages Of A Jury Trial - Part 1 Stages Of A Jury Trial - Part 2

Lawyers in Big Law, small law, corporate legal departments and academia talk about the people who shaped their careers. You’ll hear about the advice that serves as a guidepost for Uber GC Tony West, the career curves that landed Noreen Krall her current job at Apple Inc., and the partner who gave star litigator Bill Lee his first assignment. Plus, Latham & Watkins partner Leslie Caldwell recalls what she learned from Special Counsel Bob Mueller, Orrick’s Josh Rosenkranz talks about the figure who guided him through a pivotal career decision, and 3M GC Ivan Fong shares his advice for building a portfolio of career mentors. Legal Speak is brought to you by Econ One, offering economic expertise, consulting and dispute resolution, and data analytics

Baker Hostetler lawyer Lynn Garson talks with Law.com columnist Patrick Krill about building a successful career while managing depression. In Part 2, LeeAnn Black of Latham & Watkins discusses what her firm is doing to dispel the stigma of mental health challenges. Legal Speak is brought to you by Econ One, offering economic expertise, consulting and dispute resolution, and data analytics.

Joshua M. Evans joins Dr. Gladden and Mark for a discussion about the kind of mindset you need for getting the most out of a full, long life. Evans brings his expertise with creating fulfillment in a business environment, applying it to finding meaning in life in general. They discuss the benefits of challenges and needing to adapt to change. If you want to learn things, you must actually be open to new ideas. Cross-generational communication is important, because we can draw lessons and vitality from people who aren’t our age. Relationships can be an incredible opportunity for growth and advancement. Special Guest: Joshua M. Evans is a #1 best-selling author in Leadership/Management Training, a TEDx Programmer, an organizational engagement specialist, international speaker, and the leading expert on company culture. Joshua has worked with 100's of companies like American Express, Hilton, Latham & Watkins, HP, ReMax, ConocoPhillips, Sheraton, Maersk International, Radisson, Fidelity National Title, DHL, Transamerica Life Insurance, and many others to assist them in creating the right company culture to improve employee engagement. He has also been invited to speak at many professional organizations including CHLA, GBTA, AIAP, PNEC, HFTP, GCS, SHRM, CABBI, FHCA, AAHAM and many others. Joshua truly believes that for any organization to succeed they need to realize that attitude is far more important than aptitude. With 10+ years of corporate experience, Joshua marries his expertise, knowledge, and passion to help people enjoy and engage in work again, traveling the country speaking and training audiences, as well as interacting with others in his online course. It has become Joshua's mission to provide people with the tools to re-engage and love the work that they do. He lives outside of Houston with his wife, two sons and their English setter. Joshua is on a mission to help people rediscover fulfillment, purpose, and meaning in their work. Order his book, Enthusiastic You. Visit his website https://joshuamevans.com/. Follow him on social media: Twitter: @EnthusiasticYou Facebook: @enthusiasticyou LinkedIn: Joshua Evans  

In this interview from the ABA Section of Antitrust Law Spring Meeting 2018, host Joseph Vardner talks to Lisa Phelan and Niall Lynch about the latest trends in criminal cartel enforcement including the reasons behind the lull in fines, changes in federal policy, and international antitrust cartel patterns. They also discuss the recent changes they’ve witnessed within the Department of Justice (DOJ) including lawyers finding evidence on social media, the targeting of no-poach agreements, and the DOJ pursuing damages in criminal matters. Lisa M. Phelan is chief of the Washington Criminal I Section (formerly National Criminal Enforcement Section) of the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice. Niall E. Lynch is a partner in the San Francisco office of Latham & Watkins and is the local co-chair of the firm's litigation and trial department.

Latham & Watkins, one of the most prestigious law firms in the world, saw chairman Bill Voge resign this week after revelations that he’d engaged in a pattern of reckless behavior. But how did the saga unfold, and how did it become public? This week we’re joined by senior reporter Sam Reisman, who broke the Voge story with his exclusive reporting. Also this week, we discuss a controversial copyright ruling over the song “Blurred Lines”; the legal blowback Facebook will face over the Cambridge Analytica scandal; and Lindsay Lohan’s new gig for a lawyer referral site.

The Center on Global Energy Policy hosted a discussion on the outlook for offshore energy production in a low oil price environment. Jason Bordoff, CGEP Founding Director, moderated the discussion and we were pleased to be joined by: Lars Christian Bacher, Executive Vice President, Development & Production International, Statoil Tommy Beaudreau, Partner, Environment, Land & Resources Department of Latham & Watkins and former Chief of Staff at the US Interior Department Antoine Halff, Senior Research Scholar, Center on Global Energy Policy Amy Jaffe, David M. Rubenstein Senior Fellow for Energy and the Environment at the Council on Foreign Relations Adrián Lajous, non-resident Fellow, Center on Global Energy Policy and former Director General of Pemex

I spoke with Alex Hamilton, the founder and CEO of Radiant Law, a UK-based law firm that helps clients with high volumes of commercial contracts by combining processes, technology, and human judgment. Alex was previously a partner and co-chair of the global technology transactions group at Latham & Watkins in London. We discussed the genesis of Radiant Law, how it differs from a traditional law firm, ways that the firm's team develops and deploys technology, its culture, and why the delivery of managed legal services has become so popular.

I spoke with Alex Hamilton, the founder and CEO of Radiant Law, a UK-based law firm that helps clients with high volumes of commercial contracts by combining processes, technology, and human judgment. Alex was previously a partner and co-chair of the global technology transactions group at Latham & Watkins in London. We discussed the genesis of Radiant Law, how it differs from a traditional law firm, ways that the firm’s team develops and deploys technology, its culture, and why the delivery of managed legal services has become so popular.

I spoke with Alex Hamilton, the founder and CEO of Radiant Law, a UK-based law firm that helps clients with high volumes of commercial contracts by combining processes, technology, and human judgment. Alex was previously a partner and co-chair of the global technology transactions group at Latham & Watkins in London. We discussed the genesis of Radiant Law, how it differs from a traditional law firm, ways that the firm’s team develops and deploys technology, its culture, and why the delivery of managed legal services has become so popular.

I spoke with Alex Hamilton, the founder and CEO of Radiant Law, a UK-based law firm that helps clients with high volumes of commercial contracts by combining processes, technology, and human judgment. Alex was previously a partner and co-chair of the global technology transactions group at Latham & Watkins in London. We discussed the genesis of Radiant Law, how it differs from a traditional law firm, ways that the firm’s team develops and deploys technology, its culture, and why the delivery of managed legal services has become so popular.

Some antitrust lawyers often say the federal government’s decisions about which mergers to challenge, which monopolists to rein in, and which price-fixers to send to jail are relatively consistent regardless of who occupies the White House. But has federal antitrust enforcement really been entirely apolitical, based on economics, and divorced from other issues such as trade, job creation, and national security? Should it be? A panel of distinguished practitioners and former top government officials from both parties discussed these issues in our Teleforum, which was especially timely given calls by Senate Democrats for increased antitrust enforcement as part of “A Better Deal” and the increasing use of competition law by foreign governments against U.S. companies. -- Featuring: Jon Leibowitz, Partner, Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP, and Former Chair, Federal Trade Commission; William E. Kovacic, Global Competition Professor of Law and Policy & Director, Competition Law Center, The George Washington University Law School, and Former Chair, Federal Trade Commission; Seth Bloom, President & Founder, Bloom Strategic Counsel PLLC, and Former General Counsel, U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee Antitrust Subcommittee; and Tad Lipsky, Former Senior Federal Trade Commission, U.S. Justice Department Antitrust Division Official, and Retired Partner, Latham & Watkins. Moderator: Richard M. Steuer, Senior Counsel, Mayer Brown LLP, and Former Chair, American Bar Association Antitrust Section.

On March 29, 2017, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Turner v. United States, which was consolidated with Overton v. United States. In 1984, the body of Catherine Fuller was discovered in an alley after she had been beaten and raped. Sufficient physical evidence to identify the perpetrators was not recovered, and the medical examiner could not determine the number of attackers involved. Thirteen teenagers were initially indicted for being involved in a group effort to originally rob and subsequently assault and kill her. Two of them, Harry Bennett and Calvin Alston, pled guilty and agreed to testify, but the details in their accounts differed. Turner and nine other defendants were found guilty by a jury, and their convictions were affirmed on direct appeal. Nearly 25 years later, Turner and several of the other original defendants moved to have their sentences vacated, claiming that they had not received fair trials because the government had withheld exculpatory evidence in violation of Brady v. Maryland. They also argued that newly discovered evidence, including the recantations of Bennett and Alston, established that they were actually innocent of the crime. The trial court denied the motion, and the District of Columbia Court of Appeals affirmed. The Court held that the defendants had not shown a reasonable probability that the outcome of their trials would have been different with the new evidence. -- The question now before the Supreme Court is whether the petitioners' convictions must be set aside under Brady v. Maryland. -- To discuss the case, we have Brian Lichter, who is Associate at Latham & Watkins.

As a millennial, Katie Larkin-Wong brings something different to the workplace. She's a litigation associate at Latham & Watkins, a law firm focused on white collar and antitrust matters. Katie joins Lee to talk about her progress in the industry and gives us some examples on how millennials shaking things up in the workplace. "One of the places millennials really have an advantage is diversity." - Katie Larkin-Wong

On February 27, the Supreme Court will hear oral argument in Packingham v. North Carolina. This First Amendment case deals with whether a state may bar citizens from accessing social media sites like Facebook and Twitter. A North Carolina state law makes it a felony for any person on the state's registry of former sex offenders to "access" a wide array of popular websites that enable communications among users if the site is known to allow minors to have accounts. The statute does not require the state to prove the defendant has actually had contact with a minor, intended to do so, or accessed a website for any illicit or improper purpose. In the trial court, the Defendant was convicted of violating the law for a Facebook post in which he celebrated the dismissal of a traffic ticket, declaring "God is Good!" Some contend that the law amounts to a sweeping, overbroad, and vague ban on protected speech untailored to any legitimate interest and is unjustified by any compelling need. -- Jonathan Sherman, Partner at Boies Schiller Flexner and Melissa Arbus Sherry, Partner at Latham & Watkins will provide a preview of this interesting case. -- Featuring: Jonathan Sherman, Partner at Boies Schiller Flexner and Melissa Arbus Sherry, Latham & Watkins.

On April 20, 2016, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Bernard v. Minnesota, which was consolidated with Birchfield v. North Dakota and Beylund v. Levi. -- In Bernard, William Robert Bernard, Jr., admitted he had been drinking, but he denied driving his truck and refused to perform a field sobriety test. He was arrested on suspicion of driving while impaired and taken to the police station, where he refused to consent to a chemical test in violation of Minnesota state law. Bernard was charged with two counts of first-degree test refusal pursuant to state law. In Birchfield, Danny Birchfield was arrested after failing field sobriety tests after he had driven his vehicle into a ditch, but he refused to consent to a chemical test, resulting in a misdemeanor charge. He moved to dismiss the charge and claimed that the state law in question violated his Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable search and seizure. In Beylund, Steve Beylund consented to a blood alcohol to test to confirm he was driving under the influence, but only after being informed it was a criminal offense to refuse a blood alcohol test in North Dakota. The test confirmed he was over the legal limit, and Beylund was charged with driving under the influence. -- The men in these cases challenged state statutes criminalizing refusal to submit to a chemical test, arguing among other things that the statutes violated the Fourth Amendment. The Supreme Court of Minnesota and the Supreme Court of North Dakota rejected their respective challenges. The question before the U.S. Supreme Court in these consolidated cases is whether, in the absence of a warrant, a state may make it a crime for a person to refuse to take a chemical test to detect the presence of alcohol in the person’s blood. -- To discuss the case, we have Jonathan Ellis, who is an Associate at Latham & Watkins.

Jennifer Barry is a partner in the San Diego office of Latham & Watkins and a member of the firm's Litigation & Trial Department. She represents clients in all aspects of general commercial litigation with a particular focus on intellectual property, including: Trademark and trade dress infringement litigation, counseling, prosecution and worldwide trademark portfolio management Trademark licensing counseling and litigation False advertising and unfair competition counseling and litigation Copyright counseling and litigation Trade secrets counseling and litigation Defamation and right of publicity counseling and litigation Ms. Barry offers clients extensive expertise in both procedural and substantive law, as she has successfully litigated before numerous federal and state courts as well as the Patent and Trademark Office's Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. Ms. Barry has specialized expertise in internet law and has successfully handled domain name portfolio management and recovery of domain names before the World Intellectual Property Organization, the National Arbitration Forum and the ADR.EU Center of the Czech Arbitration Court. She has also worked extensively on social networking and website/e-commerce issues and has been invited to speak on several panels in this area. Ms. Barry actively participates in the International Trademark Association (INTA), and has served on the Internet Committee/Online Trademark Use Subcommittee, including the Keywords and Web 2.0 Working Groups.  

I spoke with Mark Noel the Managing Director of Professional Services for Catalyst, a provider of litigation support software and services. Before joining Catalyst, Mark co-founded an e-discovery software start-up and was an intellectual property litigator with Latham & Watkins in Washington, DC. We discussed the evolution of technology-assisted review, how to properly define it, why continuous active learning and contextual diversity sampling are critical, and uses of this application beyond document review.

I spoke with Mark Noel the Managing Director of Professional Services for Catalyst, a provider of litigation support software and services. Before joining Catalyst, Mark co-founded an e-discovery software start-up and was an intellectual property litigator with Latham & Watkins in Washington, DC. We discussed the evolution of technology-assisted review, how to properly define it, why continuous active learning and contextual diversity sampling are critical, and uses of this application beyond document review.

I spoke with Mark Noel the Managing Director of Professional Services for Catalyst, a provider of litigation support software and services. Before joining Catalyst, Mark co-founded an e-discovery software start-up and was an intellectual property litigator with Latham & Watkins in Washington, DC. We discussed the evolution of technology-assisted review, how to properly define it, why continuous active learning and contextual diversity sampling are critical, and uses of this application beyond document review.

I spoke with Mark Noel the Managing Director of Professional Services for Catalyst, a provider of litigation support software and services. Before joining Catalyst, Mark co-founded an e-discovery software start-up and was an intellectual property litigator with Latham & Watkins in Washington, DC. We discussed the evolution of technology-assisted review, how to properly define it, why continuous active learning and contextual diversity sampling are critical, and uses of this application beyond document review.

I spoke with Mark Noel the Managing Director of Professional Services for Catalyst, a provider of litigation support software and services. Before joining Catalyst, Mark co-founded an e-discovery software start-up and was an intellectual property litigator with Latham & Watkins in Washington, DC. We discussed the evolution of technology-assisted review, how to properly define it, why continuous active learning and contextual diversity sampling are critical, and uses of this application beyond document review.

On This Episode : David Wurth & Scott Moore David Wurth is Founder / Publisher of C-Suite Quarterly (CSQ) and Founder / CEO of its parent company C-Suite Media Incorporated, a company dedicated to producing content for the C-Suite Executives business and lifestyle interests. He is responsible for all aspects of the publication as well as the media company's supportive divisions including custom publishing, digital media, events, memberships and creative services. Some of CSQ's notable partners have included Ernst & Young, Morgan Stanley, Wells Fargo Private Bank, Latham & Watkins, HUGO BOSS, NetJets, Burgess Yachts and The Peninsula Beverly Hills.As President, Broadcast, Scott Moore is responsible for overseeing the programming, production, regulatory, engineering and distribution of Rogers Media's suite of TV and radio assets, comprised of 12 conventional television stations, including City and OMNI Television, 12 specialty stations, including Sportsnet and FX Canada, and 55 AM and FM radio stations. An award-winning television producer and executive with more than 20 years of industry experience, Moore joined Rogers Media in 2010. Prior to this appointment, Moore was Executive Director of CBC Sports, General Manager of CBC's Media Sales & Marketing Department, and also served as Vice-President of CTV Sportsnet (now Sportsnet) from 1998 to 2003. Moore has also held senior production positions with TSN and CTV as Executive Producer, Olympic Coverage.