Podcasts about litigation

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-opperman-report--1198501/support.

Episode 253 :     Intro:       Welcome to the newest episode of Pi Perspectives. On today's episode, Matt welcomes Judie Saunders from Ask, LLP. Judie has made a career out of representing individuals that have been a victim of sex crimes. There is some real synergy between an investigator and a sexual assault attorney. This conversation brings attention to sex traffic and assault awareness month. Please welcome Judie Saunders and your host, NY Private eye, Matt Spaier  Links:      Matt's email: MatthewS@Satellitepi.com   Linkedin: Matthew Spaier       www.investigators-toolbox.com   Judie on Linkedin: Judie Suanders https://askllp.com/attorneys/judie-a-saunders/
 PI-Perspectives Youtube link:  https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCYB3MaUg8k5w3k7UuvT6s0g Sponsors:     https://piinstitute.com/ https://researchfpr.com/ https://orep.org/ PI Survey https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/YDCSVWS FBI Tip Line https://tips.fbi.gov/home https://www.fbi.gov/contact-us/field-offices/newyork/about - (212) 384-1000

The evidence is mounting that ICE is not only unbothered by moral boundaries, but immigration and customs enforcement agents acting on behalf of President Trump believe they are not constrained by constitutional red lines, either. According to a super-secret internal memo flagged in a whistleblower complaint this week, the Fourth Amendment simply doesn't apply to ICE. That sense of impunity is also clear in a growing chamber of horrors from their enforcement operations; from masked agents taking a child in a blue bunny hat, to the shooting of Renee Good. Worryingly, this sweeping concept of immunity is kind of true—though maybe not for the reason you think. This week on Amicus, Dahlia Lithwick talks with Alex Reinert, the Max Freund Professor of Litigation & Advocacy at Cardozo School of Law. He is also the director of the Center for Rights and Justice and Co-Director of the Floersheimer Center for Constitutional Democracy. Alex explains the origins of qualified immunity—a legal theory that allows law enforcement officers to be free from consequences for their actions—why ICE's lawlessness is not a new phenomenon (even if it is a phenomenon in hyperdrive under Trump), and what we can do about the obvious problem of maximal impunity for the people who have the most power to inflict harm.Want more Amicus? Join Slate Plus to unlock weekly bonus episodes with exclusive legal analysis. Plus, you'll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. You can subscribe directly from the Amicus show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Or, visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The evidence is mounting that ICE is not only unbothered by moral boundaries, but immigration and customs enforcement agents acting on behalf of President Trump believe they are not constrained by constitutional red lines, either. According to a super-secret internal memo flagged in a whistleblower complaint this week, the Fourth Amendment simply doesn't apply to ICE. That sense of impunity is also clear in a growing chamber of horrors from their enforcement operations; from masked agents taking a child in a blue bunny hat, to the shooting of Renee Good. Worryingly, this sweeping concept of immunity is kind of true—though maybe not for the reason you think. This week on Amicus, Dahlia Lithwick talks with Alex Reinert, the Max Freund Professor of Litigation & Advocacy at Cardozo School of Law. He is also the director of the Center for Rights and Justice and Co-Director of the Floersheimer Center for Constitutional Democracy. Alex explains the origins of qualified immunity—a legal theory that allows law enforcement officers to be free from consequences for their actions—why ICE's lawlessness is not a new phenomenon (even if it is a phenomenon in hyperdrive under Trump), and what we can do about the obvious problem of maximal impunity for the people who have the most power to inflict harm.Want more Amicus? Join Slate Plus to unlock weekly bonus episodes with exclusive legal analysis. Plus, you'll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. You can subscribe directly from the Amicus show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Or, visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The evidence is mounting that ICE is not only unbothered by moral boundaries, but immigration and customs enforcement agents acting on behalf of President Trump believe they are not constrained by constitutional red lines, either. According to a super-secret internal memo flagged in a whistleblower complaint this week, the Fourth Amendment simply doesn't apply to ICE. That sense of impunity is also clear in a growing chamber of horrors from their enforcement operations; from masked agents taking a child in a blue bunny hat, to the shooting of Renee Good. Worryingly, this sweeping concept of immunity is kind of true—though maybe not for the reason you think. This week on Amicus, Dahlia Lithwick talks with Alex Reinert, the Max Freund Professor of Litigation & Advocacy at Cardozo School of Law. He is also the director of the Center for Rights and Justice and Co-Director of the Floersheimer Center for Constitutional Democracy. Alex explains the origins of qualified immunity—a legal theory that allows law enforcement officers to be free from consequences for their actions—why ICE's lawlessness is not a new phenomenon (even if it is a phenomenon in hyperdrive under Trump), and what we can do about the obvious problem of maximal impunity for the people who have the most power to inflict harm.Want more Amicus? Join Slate Plus to unlock weekly bonus episodes with exclusive legal analysis. Plus, you'll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. You can subscribe directly from the Amicus show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Or, visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

I stumbled on this old interview and it brought me to tears. It was a 2020 spontaneous interview of me by Peirce Redmond Porkins Policy Radio. You can hear behind the scenes info about Steven Hoffenbergs plan to use legal Judo to get US Virgin Islands to go after Epsteins Estate. This was BEFORE USVI went after the Trust over the tax fraud and started all the litigation. It confirms what I've always hinted that it was Steven Hoffenberg that initiated all that litigation. You can also hear and feel my personal excitement because Hoffenberg was retaining me to help with the VI and I had hopes we could get a piece of the $600 million. Everything you hear in this interview was before the news reports, before Virgin Islands started suing Epstein before the settlements, before the tax settlement. We were discussing the fact that the DNA research stuff was a scam and a fraud while people today still think it's real. So first I made a commentary then I play the Redmond interview from 2020.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-opperman-report--1198501/support.

In a bid for government transparency, the Goldwater Institute is now asking the federal court judge to allow Maricopa taxpayers to see how their money is being spent. We talked to the VP of their litigation team about the case. 

In this episode, host Gary interviews Ariana Tadler, a renowned lawyer and leader, about finding fulfillment and balance in the legal profession. Ariana shares insights from her 33-year career, discussing leadership, the impact of technology, and the importance of rituals for well-being. She emphasizes compassion, candor, and adaptability, especially for younger lawyers navigating blurred work-life boundaries. The conversation highlights practical strategies for managing stress, setting boundaries, and leading with empathy. Ariana and Gary encourage legal professionals to align their careers with personal values, prioritize presence, and pursue joy and purpose both in and out of the office.Ariana is the founding partner of Tadler Law LLP, a WBENC-certified, women-owned boutique law firm and Of Counsel to Kaplan, Fox & Kilsheimer LLP. With 33 years' experience advocating for consumers, employees, investors, and businesses through negotiation, arbitration, and litigation, Ariana is one of our nation's leading women lawyers. Ranked by Chambers and Partners, Ariana is also a global ”STAR” in e-Discovery (the use of data for litigation) – she is the first woman to receive this distinction and one of only three people ever to have achieved this distinction.Beyond the courtroom, Ariana is the founder of Ariana Speaks LLC, a thought leadership platform where she shares her voice as an author, entrepreneur, emcee, and keynote speaker. Drawing from decades of real-world experience, she speaks powerfully on leadership, resilience, innovation, and what it takes to thrive in today's fast-moving world.Her message resonates deeply with Millennials, Gen Z, and women of all ages—those seeking to confidently and joyfully design a life that is both highly effective and deeply fulfilling. A proud member of National Speakers Association's New York City Chapter, Ariana speaks nationwide about resilience and grit; and work-life integration, built on her curated formula for living a happy, highly effective life. Her mission? To empower and mentor the next generation of leaders—giving them tools not just to succeed, but to lead boldly and live fully.Optimizing Life & Career Choices (00:02:12)Launching a Boutique Firm: Lessons in Leadership (00:05:13) E-Discovery and Star Distinction Explained (00:07:37) The Human Edge in a Tech-Driven Legal World (00:09:29) Listening as a Core Legal Skill (00:11:43) Risk, Litigation, and Core Values (00:13:54) Leading with Candor & Difficult Conversations (00:15:09) Learning from Junior Team Members (00:17:40) Flex and Pivot: Adapting to Change in Law (00:19:16) Gen Z, Millennials, and Evolving Legal Culture (00:21:57) Boundaries, Joy, and Work-Life Balance (00:23:49) Rituals for Happiness and Success (00:24:49) Presence and Avoiding Burnout (00:26:55) Personal Story: The Cost of Not Being Present (00:27:35) Non-Negotiable Rituals for Wellbeing (00:29:39) Transition Rituals and Sleep (00:34:00) Ariana Speaks: Mentoring and Impact (00:35:35) The Power of Coaching and Mentorship (00:38:22) Empowering the Next Generation (00:41:44)You can find The Free Lawyer Assessment here- https://www.garymiles.net/the-free-lawyer-assessmentWould you like to learn what it looks like to become a truly Free Lawyer? You can schedule a complimentary call here: https://calendly.com/garymiles-successcoach/one-one-discovery-callWould you like to learn more about Breaking Free or order your copy? https://www.garymiles.net/break-free

Professor Kim Scheppele has spent much of her career watching democracies rise and fall. She went to Hungary in the early 1990s expecting to study democratic optimism after the fall of the Berlin Wall. Instead, decades later, she found herself documenting how constitutional democracy can be dismantled from the inside out.That experience frames a wide-ranging conversation on the latest episode of Stanford Legal, where host Professor Pam Karlan speaks with Scheppele, the Lawrence S. Rockefeller Professor of Sociology and International Affairs at Princeton and a visiting professor at Stanford Law School, about how democracies crumble, and why the United States is not exempt.Drawing on years of on-the-ground research in Hungary, Russia, and other countries, Scheppele explains a central shift in democratic collapse: it no longer arrives through overt rupture, but through elections followed by legal and constitutional maneuvering. Leaders campaign as democrats, win office, and then use technical changes to the law, including court rules, budgetary controls, and civil-service structures, to weaken checks and rig the system in their favor.The discussion turns to the United States, examining how party polarization, shifting institutional loyalties, and expanding claims of executive power have made familiar safeguards less reliable than many assumed.Links:Kim Scheppele >>> Stanford Law pageConnect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>>  Twitter/XPam Karlan >>> Stanford Law School PageDiego Zambrano >>> Stanford Law School PageStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford Lawyer Magazine >>> Twitter/X (00:00:00)  Learning in Wartime: A scholar's antidote to the “cataract of nonsense”(00:08:17) Patterns abroad and at home—are U.S. checks in danger?(00:15:04) Naming the playbook(00:32:07) More litigation—access, risk, and the pace of change(00:32:39) Restoring democracy through law Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

November 2026 is closer than it may seem, with candidates already campaigning for the midterms. But are enough Americans paying attention to current action in the courts that could affect the process – and the result? You need a lawyer to sort out all-important voting rights battles. Elisabeth Frost, the Litigation chair of the Elias Law Group, is in the middle of many of these battles. With Marc Elias as chair, the firm's stated mission is to help Democrats win, citizens vote, and progressives make change. On Equal Time, Frost answers the question: How is that going? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Päivi Räsänen, a Finnish parliamentarian, has been criminally prosecuted for expressing her Christian beliefs on marriage and sexuality in a 2019 tweet. Following multiple police interrogations, in April 2021, she was charged with “hate speech” under the War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity section of the Finnish Criminal Code, alongside Lutheran bishop Juhana Pohjola. Despite two unanimous acquittals, Räsänen now faces the seventh year of legal proceedings. The landmark case was heard at the Finnish Supreme Court on 30 October 2025, following the State prosecutor’s appeal. The prosecution is seeking tens of thousands of euros in fines and is demanding that Räsänen publications be censored.Featuring:Lorcán Price, Legal Counsel, Alliance Defending Freedom International (Counsel for Päivi Räsänen)(Moderator) Karen J. Lugo, Founder, Libertas-West Project

November 2026 is closer than it may seem, with candidates already campaigning for the midterms. But are enough Americans paying attention to current action in the courts that could affect the process – and the result? You need a lawyer to sort out all-important voting rights battles. Elisabeth Frost, the Litigation chair of the Elias Law Group, is in the middle of many of these battles. With Marc Elias as chair, the firm's stated mission is to help Democrats win, citizens vote, and progressives make change. On Equal Time, Frost answers the question: How is that going?  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this episode, Stephen Seckler speaks with Oran Kaufman, a mediator with an extensive background in family law. They discuss Oran's journey from litigation to mediation, the skills required to be a mediator, and how mediation has changed over the last 30 years. Oran shares insights on the differences between mediation and litigation, the importance of listening, and the challenges of building a mediation practice. The conversation also touches on collaborative law, alternative legal careers, and the impact of technology on mediation. Takeaways Mediation requires a different skill set than litigation. Listening is a crucial skill for both mediators and lawyers. Transitioning from litigation to mediation can lower work related stress. Collaborative law offers an alternative to traditional litigation. Silence can be a powerful tool in mediation. There are several challenges in building a mediation practice that differ from building a law practice. Technology has expanded the reach of mediation services. Timeline 00:00 Introduction and Background 03:17 Oran Kaufman's Journey into Family Mediation 05:45 Transitioning from Litigation to Mediation 08:47 The Nature of Family Mediation 11:38 Skills and Challenges of Mediation 13:58 Building a Mediation Practice 16:21 Collaborative Law and Mediation 18:50 Qualities of a Good Mediator 21:44 Exploring Alternative Legal Careers 24:29 The Evolution of Mediation

Tobacco surcharges have long been a common cost containment wellness tool for self-funded plans, but recent lawsuits are putting them under the microscope. In this episode, attorneys Kelly Dempsey and Naga Vivekanandan break down how tobacco surcharges work, why they are treated differently under federal law, and what recent court decisions mean for employers navigating wellness program risk.

Quebec's commercial real estate market has changed fast, and the old "local only" playbook does not hold up anymore. Louis Bergeron, partner at HPDG, joins Axel Monsaingeon to unpack what appraisers are seeing before the headlines: how developers now chase opportunities across the province, why 2024 felt frozen, and what shifted in 2025 to bring buyers and sellers closer together. Louis also shares the real story behind PDG's roots coming out of Desjardins, how the firm grew through acquisitions and mergers, and why a merger has to be "1 + 1 = 3" or it is not worth doing. They dig into PDG's full-service model from valuation and property management to tax appeals, litigation support, and expropriation tied to major projects like the REM and the Blue Line extension. Louis closes with what PDG is building for 2026, including a refreshed brand and a bigger push to share market insights, plus why comparing cap rates is often harder than people think.   Topics & Timestamps

On this Ropes & Gray podcast, partners Bil Davison and Adam Dobson are joined by counsel Kevin White to discuss recent high-profile litigation involving Energy & Minerals Group's (EMG's) single asset continuation vehicle transaction. The conversation explores how this litigation highlights the complexities and conflicts of interest inherent in GP-led continuation vehicle deals, focusing on the importance of transparency, parity of information, and robust LPAC involvement. The team analyzes the implications of this litigation for fund managers, buyers, and investors, highlighting best practices for communication and process integrity. Listeners will gain valuable insights into navigating the evolving landscape of continuation vehicles and the lessons learned from the EMG case.

Top 8 Alternative Investments for 2026 with Patrick Grimes - #260 In this episode of the Real Estate Reserve Podcast, hosts Jason Balin (Hard Money Bankers) and Ian Horowitz (Equity Warehouse) sit down with Patrick Grimes, founder of Passive Investing Mastery, to break down the Top 8 Alternative Investments for 2026 and how investors can build true financial security through diversification. Patrick shares his journey from a high-paid engineering career into alternative investing, including lessons learned from market cycles, leverage, and early real estate mistakes. The conversation dives deep into non-correlated asset classes and why building a "family office" mindset matters more than ever heading into 2026. Topics covered include: What alternative investments really are (beyond stocks & traditional real estate) The difference between financial independence vs. financial security Why diversification across uncorrelated asset classes matters Passive vs. active investing—and when to take chips off the table Litigation funding explained (mass torts vs. class actions) Medical receivables & recession-resistant industries Oil & gas investing risks, rewards, and long-term outlook AI disruption and which industries may (or may not) survive it Common investor traps: guru programs, DIY investing, and over-concentration How to evaluate operators, partners, and deal flow in alternative assets Patrick also shares resources for investors looking to explore alternative investments responsibly, including litigation finance, medical funding, energy, and more.

In this episode of Jane's LME Addiction, our head of LME coverage Jane Komsky brings in Josh Brody and Kenneth Reinker from Cleary Gottlieb to discuss the Optimum Communications fka Altice USA antitrust litigation related to cooperation agreements. They provide an overview of the litigation and discuss the likelihood of success, the pitfalls of certain arguments, and whether this litigation is likely to impact how co-ops are formed.Find all our coverage on co-ops and LMEs at 9fin.com.Have any feedback on the podcast? Send us a note at podcast@9fin.com — thanks for listening!

In this episode, Chase Cannon and Suzanne Spradley discuss a recent wave of litigation centered on ERISA's fiduciary obligations for health and welfare plan sponsors. Suzanne begins with an explanation of the lawsuits and how the voluntary benefit plan exception from ERISA is core to the lawsuit allegations. Suzanne and Chase continue with a close look at the exception and the criteria employers should consider to meet the exception. The two close with a discussion on employer takeaways for ERISA fiduciary and voluntary plan exception purposes.

Episode InfoAdam Masarek is a lawyer, epidemiologist (MPH), and the Legal Marketing Manager for Lex Machina®, the LexisNexis® Legal Analytics® platform. He is dedicated to empowering legal and insurance professionals with data-informed strategies to enhance business development, litigation outcomes, and the rule of law. Episode Overview: In this episode, we sit down with Adam Masarek, leader of content marketing and thought leadership at Lex Machina, to delve into the evolving landscape of litigation within the insurance industry. Masarek, whose background in epidemiology and extensive experience with legal data analysis provides a unique perspective, discusses how Lex Machina leverages data to understand litigation trends and inform decision-making. Lex Machina's Role in Litigation Analysis: Masarek explains his role at Lex Machina, emphasizing their unique approach of combining legal data with deep analysis of recent trends. This includes their popular litigation report series, which explores trends in areas like insurance coverage and sports litigation. Epidemiology and Legal Data: The conversation draws an intriguing parallel between epidemiology and legal data analysis. Masarek highlights how understanding patterns and trends in litigation is akin to understanding disease outbreaks, requiring a data-driven approach to identify causes and potential solutions. The Impact of Legal Data on Practice: The discussion explores how legal analytics are transforming legal practice. While predicting specific outcomes remains challenging due to variables like jury composition and human elements, data-driven insights allow for more precise and confident decision-making. This includes strategic choices about filing locations, potential case values, and overall legal strategy. "Social Inflation" and Its Drivers: A significant portion of the conversation focuses on "social inflation," the phenomenon of awards and settlements outpacing general economic inflation. Masarek and the interviewer discuss potential culprits, including increased attorney advertising, the rise of litigation funding, and a more adversarial stance by insurers leading to more trial-bound cases. Historical Context of Litigation Concerns: The episode touches upon the long-standing nature of concerns about a "lawsuit crisis," noting that such discussions have occurred for centuries. However, recent data from platforms like Lex Machina are providing empirical evidence for some of these trends, particularly concerning jury verdicts. Specific Litigation Trends: "Reptile Theory": The discussion touches on the "reptile theory," a plaintiff tactic emphasizing jurors as community protectors who should punish defendants. Practice Area Variations: It's noted that surges in litigation costs and complexity vary by practice area. Patent litigation and trade secret disputes have seen significant increases, while environmental claims and commercial contracts have not shown the same growth. Increased Filings: There's a noted increase in filings for tort claims, slip-and-falls, and automobile collisions in both federal and state courts. Insurance Coverage Lawsuits: A sharp rise in coverage disputes related to commercial liability policies is highlighted, with record numbers of lawsuits filed in recent years. This trend is also observed in homeowners' coverage cases, particularly those related to hurricanes. Workers' Compensation: The increasing representation in workers' compensation claims is discussed, with a significant portion of claims now coming in with an attorney already attached, making early, non-adversarial resolution more challenging. The Role of Attorney Advertising and Litigation Funding: The pervasive nature of attorney advertising across various platforms (billboards, social media) is examined, with the observation that it's a uniquely American phenomenon. Litigation funding is also identified as a growing factor influencing the legal landscape. The Future of Litigation: Masarek expresses that the current trajectory suggests that increased litigation filings are likely here to stay, indicating a "new normal." Factors like shifting labor markets, economic inflationary pressures, ubiquitous attorney advertising, and the continued growth of litigation funding contribute to this outlook. While acknowledging the potential for policy responses, the current data points towards a sustained trend. Lex Machina's Goal: The ultimate aim of Lex Machina is to empower lawyers, adjusters, and other legal professionals with data for informed decision-making, leveling the playing field for smaller entities against larger corporations. They aim to reduce the "waste of resources" often associated with trials by facilitating more efficient and data-informed negotiations. Emerging Challenges: New complexities, such as the use of artificial intelligence by insureds and cybersecurity risks, are presenting novel situations with limited precedent, potentially leading to increased litigation. This episode is brought to you by The Future of Insurance book series (future-of-insurance.com) from Bryan Falchuk. Follow the podcast at future-of-insurance.com/podcast for more details and other episodes. Music courtesy of Hyperbeat Music, available to stream or download on Spotify, Apple Music, and Amazon Music and more.

Episode 96 On December 31, 1986, just hours before Puerto Rico would ring in the New Year, flames tore through the luxurious Dupont Plaza Hotel and Casino in San Juan. What began as a labor dispute escalated into one of the deadliest hotel fires in U.S. history, killing 97 people and injuring more than 140. In the aftermath, investigators would uncover arson, negligence, ignored safety recommendations, a chaotic evacuation, and a legal battle that reshaped fire codes across the hospitality industry. In this episode, we examine: The labor tensions and strike that set the stage for disaster The timeline of the fire and how it spread so rapidly How smoke and toxic gases became the primary killers Failures in life safety systems, egress, and emergency planning The investigation that quickly identified arson Criminal charges against arsonists Massive civil litigation and code reforms that followed Lessons learned in the context of other hotel/casino fires of the era The Crime to Burn Patreon - The Cult of Steve - is LIVE NOW! Go join and get all the unhinged you can handle. Click here to be sanctified.  Inner Sanctum Acknowledgments: Eternal gratitude to our Inner Sanctum patrons, Melanie Curtis, Jenny Mercer and Laura Pisciotta, for helping us bring light to the stories others would rather leave in the ashes. Listener discretion is advised. Background music by Not Notoriously Coordinated  Get your Crime to Burn Merch! https://crimetoburn.myspreadshop.com Please follow us on Instagram, X, Facebook, TikTok and Youtube for the latest news on this case. You can email us at crimetoburn@gmail.com We welcome any constructive feedback and would greatly appreciate a 5 star rating and review.  If you need a way to keep your canine contained, you can also support the show by purchasing a Pawious wireless dog fence using our affiliate link and use the code "crimetoburn" at checkout to receive 10% off. Pawious, because our dog Winston needed a radius, not a rap sheet.  Sources:  Video & Documentary Sources Dupont Plaza Hotel Arson Investigation. Señor Onion's Archives. YouTube, April 13, 2021. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9JyUjUoX_so Dupont Plaza Hotel Arson of 1986. Señor Onion's Archives. YouTube, October 21, 2024. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tJsFLgxuDJ8 Government / Technical / Legal Reports Nelson, Harold E. “An Engineering Analysis of the Early Stages of Fire Development — The Fire at the Dupont Plaza Hotel and Casino — December 31, 1986.” NBSIR 87-3560, National Bureau of Standards, Center for Fire Research, U.S. Department of Commerce, April 1987. Levy, Harold M. “The Dupont Plaza Hotel Fire Litigation: A Case Study in Cooperative Defense.” Alternatives to the High Cost of Litigation, Vol. 7, No. 12, December 1989, pp. 215–233. José Francisco Rivera-Lopez, Plaintiff, Appellant, v. United States of America, Defendant, Appellee. U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, 4 F.3d 982, September 15, 1993. https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F3/4/982/525384/ (Note: First Circuit Local Rule 36.2(b)6 — Unpublished opinions may be cited only in related cases.) News & Contemporary Coverage (1987) “Teamsters Dispute with Dupont Plaza Dates Back Four Months.” UPI Archives, January 13, 1987. https://www.upi.com/Archives/1987/01/13/Teamsters-dispute-with-Dupont-Plaza-dates-back-four-months/7070215305413/ Brossy, Julie. “A Dupont Plaza Bar Boy Was Charged Today With…” UPI Archives, January 14, 1987. https://www.upi.com/Archives/1987/01/14/A-Dupont-Plaza-bar-boy-was-charged-today-with/8362537598800/ Hernandez, Moises. “Suspect in Hotel Fire Was Honored for Saving ‘Many Lives.'” UPI Archives, January 14, 1987. https://www.upi.com/Archives/1987/01/14/Suspect-in-hotel-fire-was-honored-for-saving-many-lives/2708537598800/ Gaulin, Edward J. “Defendants Plead Guilty in Dupont Plaza Hotel Fire.” UPI Archives, April 24, 1987. https://www.upi.com/Archives/1987/04/24/Defendants-plead-guilty-in-Dupont-Plaza-Hotel-fire/8801546235200/ Wilentz, Amy. “A New Year We'll Never Forget.” TIME, January 12, 1987. https://time.com/archive/6708028/a-new-year-well-never-forget/ Features, Retrospectives & Later Reporting Tepfer, Daniel. “A Vacation in Paradise Turns into Fiery Hell.” CTPost, Updated December 30, 2011. https://www.ctpost.com/news/article/a-vacation-in-paradise-turns-into-fiery-hell-2432149.php Reference / Encyclopedia & Summary Sources Dewey, Joseph. “Dupont Plaza Hotel Fire.” EBSCO Knowledge Advantage Research Starters, 2022. https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/law/dupont-plaza-hotel-fire “Dupont Plaza Hotel Arson.” Grokipedia. https://grokipedia.com/page/Dupont_Plaza_Hotel_arson

Practicing somatic awareness can help you manage your day, work, and  life differently. In this podcast, the speakers dove into what somatic awareness is, provided practices to deepen your overall somatic awareness, and practiced several brief exercises.    Moderator: Helen Stocklin-Enright, Legal Project Manager, Perkins Coie Speaker: Ruth Hauswirth, Special Counsel and Head of Litigation and eDiscovery Services, Cooley 

In Defending Education v. Olentangy Local School District Board of Education, Defending Education brought a suit challenging Olentangy Local School District policies related to student speech. These policies, among other things, barred students from using pronouns that match a person's biological sex if that individual identified with different pronouns. Defending Education challenged the policies, contending they both impermissibly prohibited speech, by not allowing students who believed sex is immutable & therefore personal pronouns cannot be chosen to express that belief as they wished, and compelled speech by forcing students to use pronouns for others that express a perspective with which the students did not agree. The case was filed in the southern district of Ohio, which ruled in favor of the school district, and the Sixth Circuit initially affirmed that decision. The case was then reheard en banc by a 17-judge panel, and on November 6, 2025, the court reversed the judgment 10-7, holding that the policies did violate the First Amendment rights of the affected students. Join us for a litigation update on this important case. Featuring:Mathew Hoffmann, Legal Counsel, Alliance Defending Freedom(Moderator) Krista Baughman, Founder and Managing Attorney, Baughman Law PC

Jen is a family law attorney, mediator and intuitive spiritual guide who has spent nearly two decades helping people awaken through one of life's most intense initiations... divorce. As founder of Solace Divorce Mediation, it is her mission to transform the outdated matrix of litigation, a system rooted in fear, separation and control, into a sacred space for 5D healing and ascension. In our show, we get into detail about our uggg legal system, mediation versus litigation, how to have a conscious and mindful divorce, the programming or concept of marriage and what happens to the children of a 3D divorce. This podcast is relevant to everyone as she is changing one of the biggest systems... "justice" and law. And as we know, all of our corrupt systems from medicine to banking, are changing, and Jen is on the forefront. As well as the fact that everyone is impacted in some way by divorce.She leads the "Just Be Practice" with a wonderful breathwork exercise.References:Jacques Theron's Website: https://jacquestheron.comJen's Links:Solace Divorce Mediation Website: https://solacedivorce.comSolace University: https://solaceuniversity.com*Host Eden Koz is a soul realignment specialist utilizing psychological empathy, intuition, psychic ability, mediumship, meditation, mindset shift, Reiki, dimensional and galactic healing, to name a few. She also performs spiritual Co#id Vac+ Healing as well as remote & face-to-face sessions with individuals and groups. **Additionally, in spreading the word... If you are questioning your Gold IRA because of potential scams (see EP188) or want to invest in a precious metals company with integrity...email: info@milesfranklin.com and put "Eden" in the subject line (they know me personally, so the best of attention and heart will come your way.)Miles Franklin website: https://milesfranklin.com Contact info for Eden Koz / Just Be®, LLC:Website: EdenJustBe.com Socials: TikTok, FB, FB (Just Be), X, Insta, LinkedInJust Be~Spiritual BOOM Podcast - Video Directories: BitChute, Rumble, ...

Employers shouldn't overly rely on reports that the EEOC is no longer interested in disparate impact: private lawsuits and other entities bringing such claims, both in the traditional discrimination and the emerging "illegal DEI" contexts, still pose legal risks. In this episode, our attorneys discuss disparate impact versus treatment, "job-relatedness" defenses, the role of statistics and the value of privileged disparate impact analyses, and the need for ongoing employer vigilance given the potential financial and reputational harms associated with disparate impact claims.  

In 2025, a record $60 billion was invested in building AI data centers around the world, many of them in the US and Canada. Proposals for data centers are popping up across Wisconsin, in Mount Pleasant, Menominee, Beaver Dam, Dane County and beyond. These “hyperscale” complexes use anywhere between 5-50 megawatts of power and take up hundreds of acres of land. To talk about the growing opposition to AI data centers across the nation, host Douglas Haynes is joined by three guests: Michael Greif of Midwest Environmental Advocates, Mitch Jones of Food & Water Watch, and Ed Morganroth, Jr. of the group, No Data Center DeForest. People are increasingly concerned about data centers’ energy and water consumption, land use, noise pollution, and e-waste as well as the societal impacts of AI products like deep fakes. To educate legislators about the growing opposition, Food & Water Watch organized a letter to Congress calling for the halt of construction of data centers. Jones says that the fight is happening in every state and their letter creates a national umbrella for these groups to unify their message. So far over 250 organizations have signed on.  Many are concerned that the financial benefits of these data centers are flowing to Silicon Valley and out of local communities. And the public is largely being kept in the dark about how much electricity and water these data centers would eat up. This fall, Midwest Environmental Advocates took legal action to get the city of Racine to respond to Milwaukee Riverkeepers’s record recquest for the projected water consumption of a Mount Pleasant data center.  They were at first told that water use is a “trade secret.” To date, the public doesn't know how much electricity will be used at the data center that Alliant Energy and Meta are building in Beaver Dam. Morganroth says that at a time when Wisconsin is losing agricultural land, his group would rather see new housing and job-creating business in his community rather than a data center. Our guests also talk about the active role that electric companies are playing in the construction of data centers, the tax breaks that these companies are getting from the state of Wisconsin, and the AI bubble.  Michael Greif is a Legal Fellow at Midwest Environmental Advocates, where his work has focused on legal pathways to safeguard Wisconsin's air, water, and climate, including advocating for public disclosure of the water and energy use of hyperscale data centers. Michael is a graduate of the University of California, Berkeley School of Law and lives in Madison. Mitch Jones is the Managing Director of Policy and Litigation at Food & Water Watch. He has worked on federal policy for over 20 years. He leads the organization's work on federal and state policy as well as their sibling organization’s political program. Ed Morganroth, Jr. is a resident of DeForest, WI and member of the No Data Center DeForest group. Featured image: aerial view of the Google Data Center in Council Bluffs, IA via Wikimedia Commons (CC BY 2.0). Did you enjoy this story? Your funding makes great, local journalism like this possible. Donate hereThe post Who Bears the True Cost of So-Called Artificial Intelligence? appeared first on WORT-FM 89.9.

Yacht crew contracts, flag state jurisdiction, and maritime law directly affect the safety, rights, and legal exposure of both seafarers and yacht owners. In this episode of Maritime Legal, host Jessica Galea, Partner at Dingli & Dingli Law Firm, is joined by Dr. Lorna Mifsud Cachia, Managing Partner and Head of Litigation, and Dr. Marcus Degiorgio, Associate in the Litigation Department, to explain how employment contracts operate as binding legal instruments under maritime law and why mistakes at the signing stage often lead to serious disputes later. The discussion focuses on one of the most common legal risks in yachting: unclear or multiple employment agreements. The speakers break down how dual contracts, unclear employer identity, and poor execution can expose both crew and yacht owners to civil disputes, regulatory breaches, and criminal liability. This episode also explores how flag state jurisdiction applies when incidents occur onboard yachts, including in foreign territorial waters, and why registering under a reputable flag state such as Malta provides legal oversight, reporting mechanisms, and enforceable protections for all parties involved. Topics covered include crew contract validity, flag state enforcement, harassment and misconduct onboard, criminal jurisdiction at sea, and the importance of transparency, good faith, and legal clarity in yacht operations. This episode is essential listening for yacht crew, yacht owners, managers, captains, and maritime professionals seeking to understand their legal rights and obligations before signing an employment contract. This episode of Maritime Legal is proudly supported by the Malta Ship Registry. https://maltashipregistry.gov.mt Recorded on location at Marina di Valletta, Malta.  https://marinadivalletta.com Learn more about Dingli & Dingli Law Firm:  https://www.dingli.com.mt

In Episode 84, Andrew talks with Amanda Mason, founder of the Solagree, about the innovative new approach to divorce that replaces courtroom battles with cooperation, predictability, and peace of mind. Amanda—an experienced family law attorney and creator of this groundbreaking process—shares how Solagree blends mediation, arbitration, and flat-fee transparency to help couples resolve their differences without ever stepping foot in court. Thanks for listening! We'd be very grateful if you'd subscribe to the podcast and give us 5 stars! Please visit Transcend Retirement or Wiser Divorce Solutions. Follow Andrew on LinkedIn too!

In a bold legal challenge that could redefine animal protection law, PETA is taking on the Maine Lobster Festival for steaming 16,000 lobsters alive on public parkland. The case hinges on Maine’s unique animal cruelty statute that protects “every living sentient creature” – a definition that evolves with scientific understanding. PETA’s Director of Litigation, Asher Smith, explains their creative approach using…

In a bold legal challenge that could redefine animal protection law, PETA is taking on the Maine Lobster Festival for steaming 16,000 lobsters alive on public parkland. The case hinges on Maine’s unique animal cruelty statute that protects “every living sentient creature” – a definition that evolves with scientific understanding. PETA’s Director of Litigation, Asher Smith, explains their creative approach using…

(0:00) Intro(1:31) About the podcast sponsor: The American College of Governance Counsel.(2:18) Start of interview. *Reference to prior episodes with David (E24 from Nov 2020 and E159 from Dec 2024)(3:22) 2025 highlights from the American College of Governance Counsel(4:55) The Rome Conference on AI, Ethics, and the Future of Corporate Governance(6:52) The Dual-Class Share Debate (reference to his paper Performance Leads Governance)(12:06) Emerging Governance Structures in AI companies, including Public Benefit Corporations (PBCs) "mission driven"(23:02) The AI Bubble Debate ("from a technology standpoint, I don't think we're in a bubble. From a valuation standpoint, we may be very well in a bubble.") Reference to my article on AI Washing Goes Criminal.(27:00) Big Tech vs. Little Tech Dynamics "We're going to have, at some point, a shakeout. It's impossible for all of these companies to be successful."(29:55) The Shift to Private Markets(34:15) Delaware's Governance Challenges (*reference to E194 on Silicon Valley 150 Report) "Since TripAdvisor, about 50 companies have left Delaware."(39:45) AI and Cybersecurity in the Boardroom(40:42) On Mandatory Arbitration(42:03) Biggest winner in business in 2025: Tech broadly, Silicon Valley particular.(43:40) Biggest loser in business in 2025: Delaware(45:15) Biggest business surprise in 2025(47:19) Best corporate governance trend from 2025: Renewed and strong focus on ethics.(50:00) Worst corporate governance trend from 2025: Partisanship(50:58) What's the biggest corporate governance trend to watch out for in 2026: the role of politics in the boardroom(51:35) One piece of advice for directors heading into 2026: the role of AI in the boardroom and in the companyDavid Berger is a partner at Wilson Sonsini and the President of the American College of Governance Counsel. You can follow Evan on social media at:X: @evanepsteinLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/epsteinevan/ Substack: https://evanepstein.substack.com/__To support this podcast you can join as a subscriber of the Boardroom Governance Newsletter at 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

In this episode of Litigation Nation, co-hosts Danessa Watkins and Jack Sanker dive into two significant legal topics currently shaping the landscape of litigation in the U.S. Jack discusses the Trump administration's reversal of affirmative action programs, diving into the history of affirmative action and DEI programs in the U.S and breaking down the legal implications of their prohibition for the public and private sectors.  Next, Danessa revisits Florida's ban on social media for children under 14 years of age (previously discussed in Episode 46).  Social media industry groups have challenged the law, claiming it is in violation of the First Amendment. Danessa explores this lawsuit and the national conversation surrounding the legal, psychological, and data-privacy implications of social media age-verification laws.  Join us as we discuss the complexities of critical topics and encourage our listeners to stay informed about how these issues may affect their rights and responsibilities in litigation. Don't forget to subscribe to Litigation Nation for more updates on legal news and analysis!

In this episode of "People Not Titles," host Steve Kaempf interviews Salvador Cicero, a Chicago-based attorney and entrepreneur. Sal shares his journey from diplomatic legal work for the Mexican government to founding his own law firm, focusing on real estate and serving diverse communities. He discusses navigating discrimination, advocating for clients' best interests, and the importance of empathy in legal practice. Sal also reflects on balancing professional growth with personal fulfillment, emphasizing integrity, collaboration, and providing holistic support for clients facing complex real estate and immigration challenges. The episode highlights Sal's commitment to community and client-centered service.Introduction and Guest Welcome (00:00:00)Salvador's Journey into Real Estate Law (00:01:14)Diplomatic Career and First Real Estate Transaction (00:01:31)Work with President Fox and Human Trafficking (00:02:11)Transition Back to Chicago and Private Practice (00:03:05)Building a Client Base and Early Real Estate Cases (00:04:01)Learning Real Estate and Franchise Law (00:04:51)International and Immigrant Clientele (00:06:54)Continued International Legal Work (00:07:46)Impact of Human Trafficking Work on Perspective (00:09:06)Handling Stressful Transactions and Divorce Cases (00:10:30)Personal Practices for Centering and Gratitude (00:11:41)Lessons from Human Trafficking Applied to Law (00:12:51)Philosophy of Legal Practice and Client Advocacy (00:13:33)Litigation and Dealing with Unethical Parties (00:15:27)Relationships with Realtors and Community Organizations (00:17:07)Serving the Latino Community and Homeownership Trends (00:19:00)Protecting Clients in Unconventional Ownership Situations (00:20:08)Tax and Legal Strategies for International Buyers (00:21:13)Holistic Legal Services and Firm Structure (00:23:07)Navigating Discrimination in Real Estate Transactions (00:26:01)Advocacy and Standing Up for Clients' Rights (00:30:18)Keeping Deals Alive and Client-Centered Negotiation (00:34:48)Litigation, Evictions, and Realistic Client Counseling (00:37:43)Vision for the Future of Cicero Law Group (00:41:22)Choosing Independence Over Big Law (00:42:12)Family Influence and Personal Motivation (00:45:41)Firm's Mission and Service Orientation (00:48:12)Closing Remarks and Podcast Outro (00:49:12)Full episodes available at www.peoplenottitles.comPeople, Not Titles podcast is hosted by Steve Kaempf and is dedicated to lifting up professionals in the real estate and business community. Our inspiration is to highlight success principles of our colleagues.Our Success Series covers principles of success to help your thrive!www.peoplenottitles.comIG - https://www.instagram.com/peoplenotti...FB - https://www.facebook.com/peoplenottitlesTwitter - https://twitter.com/sjkaempfSpotify - https://open.spotify.com/show/1uu5kTv...

A leader who built his career on high-stakes investigations shares how those experiences now shape the culture, standards, and direction of a top litigation firm. Matthew L. Schwartz, Chair of Boies Schiller Flexner LLP, joins Chris Batz and Howard Rosenberg to talk about what it takes to lead a litigation-first firm without losing the sharpness that defines its work. He reflects on a decade in the Southern District of New York, where cases tied to General Motors, the U.S. Department of the Treasury, and the fallout from Bernie Madoff shaped his views on judgment, clarity, and what clients actually want from their lawyers. Matthew explains why the firm gives young lawyers real responsibility early on and why senior lawyers thrive with the autonomy to build their practices without heavy bureaucracy. He also digs into the decisions that matter most right now: where to grow, how to align with client needs, and what pressures like AI, rising litigation costs, and outside capital mean for a disputes-only practice. The conversation circles back to a central question for any leader in high-stakes litigation: how do you build a firm where people think boldly, act with integrity, and stay committed to excellence when the pressure is highest? Matthew makes the case that culture, mentorship, and trust still carry the most weight.   Episode Breakdown: 00:00 Matthew L. Schwartz's Path From Federal Prosecutor to Firm Chair 06:05 Lessons From High-Profile Cases and Complex Investigations 12:02 How Boies Schiller Flexner LLP Develops and Retains Top Legal Talent 15:01 AI, Technology, and the Future of Litigation 18:03 Private Equity and the Changing Law Firm Model 24:04 Mentorship and Developing the Next Generation of Trial Lawyers 29:45 Personal Insights and Matthew's Outlook on the Future of Law Connect with Matthew L. Schwartz: Connect with Matt on LinkedIn Matt's Web Bio    Connect with Howard Rosenberg: Connect with Howard on LinkedIn Howard's Company Web Profile   Connect with Chris Batz: Connect with Chris on LinkedIn  Follow Columbus Street on LinkedIn Columbus Street Website  Podcast production and show notes provided by HiveCast.fm

Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. and Steve Wood, Ph.D. answer another batch of podcast viewer and listener questions: • When is the right time to conduct a focus group—should I wait until discovery is complete? • Can I test my opening statement in front of staff members or family? • Why is it important to test opening statements with mock jurors? • Should a consultant or moderator sit inside the jury deliberation room during a mock trial? • What are the most common trial mistakes defense attorneys make in opening statements, voir dire, and cross-examination?

In the civil lawsuit between the U.S. Virgin Islands and the Epstein estate, the presiding judge ordered a 90-day pause in proceedings to allow for settlement discussions and procedural recalibration amid rapidly evolving circumstances. The stay temporarily halted discovery, motions, and court deadlines at a moment when the case was intensifying, with the USVI seeking expansive records and the estate pushing back on scope and burden. The pause was framed as a practical cooling-off period, giving both sides space to negotiate while the court assessed how overlapping lawsuits, asset distribution, and jurisdictional issues might affect the trajectory of the case.The effect of the pause, however, was controversial. Critics argued that the delay disproportionately benefited the estate by slowing momentum, limiting immediate access to documents, and allowing assets to continue flowing out through legal fees and administrative costs. For the USVI, which had positioned its lawsuit as a vehicle for uncovering how Epstein's operation functioned on the islands, the stay curtailed pressure at a critical juncture. While officially neutral, the 90-day pause became another flashpoint in the broader fight over whether the Epstein estate would be compelled toward transparency or permitted to manage the clock as effectively in death as Epstein had in life.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

On April 1, 2025, the Texas Association of Money Services Businesses filed suit in the Western District of Texas challenging a Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) order that lowered the cash-transaction reporting threshold from $10,000 to $200 for money-services businesses in certain Texas border ZIP codes, arguing the rule violated the Administrative Procedure Act and constitutional protections.Should the government be allowed to surveil your financial transactions? Where is the line drawn between protecting privacy and conducting legal investigations? What happens when regulators set standards that can't be met? Join us for a webinar examining Texas Association of Money Services Businesses v. Bondi. On this FedSoc forum, Robert Johnson and Nicholas Anthony will discuss the status of the case, its implications for the future, and the wider landscape of financial surveillance.Featuring:Nicholas Anthony, Policy Analyst, Center for Monetary and Financial Alternatives, Cato Institute(Moderator) Robert Johnson, Senior Attorney, Institute for Justice

-On Thursday evening, President Donald Trump signed an executive order calling for a single, nationwide regulatory framework governing artificial intelligence at the expense of the ability of different states to regulate the nascent technology. -Disney and OpenAI announced a three-year licensing agreement: Starting in 2026, ChatGPT and Sora can generate images and videos incorporating Disney IP, including more than 200 characters from the company's stable of Star Wars, Pixar and Marvel brands. -Amazon's plan to offer AI-generated recaps of Prime Video shows isn't off to a great start. The company's recap of the first season of Fallout features multiple errors, including basic facts about the plot of the show. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

John is joined by David Proman, Co-Founder and Managing Partner of Atlas Grove Partners and long-time Quinn Emanuel client.  They discuss David's extensive experience working with elite law firms, including Quinn Emanuel, on high stakes matters involving structured finance, digital assets, and complex bankruptcies.  At Atlas Grove and its subsidiary, GXD Labs, David has built an investment platform that identifies legal claims as investment opportunities.   One example of such an opportunity was David's early and aggressive pursuit of RMBS claims.  In 2010, David was at fund called Furry Partners that was the most activist fund manager in the RMBS space.  They pursued cases against the world's largest banks for breaches of warranties, which led to recovering almost $4 billion for Furry Partners' investors.  David worked with Quinn Emanuel partner Sasha Rand on many of these cases adding “we have great thanks and gratitude to Quinn Emanuel for working on this with us for over a decade against some of the world's most significant counterparties.” Another example was the Celsius bankruptcy.  Celsius was a crypto lending platform with 600,000 customers.  At its peak, it had almost $20 billion in liabilities.  Celsius's customers stored their Bitcoin, their Ethereum, or their digital tokens using deposits, similar to bank deposits.  When Bitcoin dropped dramatically in 2022, the company became insolvent and filed for bankruptcy.  Bankruptcy proceedings revealed numerous legal issues, including fraud. David's Blockchain Recovery Investment Consortium (BRIC) won the role of litigation administrator and crafted a plan focused on returning value to defrauded customers.  Working closely with Quinn Emanuel partner Ben Finestone, BRIC's strategy involved bringing claims against counterparties across the world who had harmed Celsius before it went bankrupt.  One of BRIC's biggest recoveries resulted from a $300 million settlement with Tether.  David credits Ben with bringing strong legal claims and strategies to defeat “issues that I don't think have ever been litigated before in crypto.” When working with law firms, success depends on aligning the incentives of the firm and the client, maintaining open communication, and active client involvement in developing legal strategies, especially in complex or novel sectors like cryptocurrencies.  Counsel should be both strategically creative and brutally honest about risks.  As David said, “that's part of the reason why I love you guys: because you always give me honest feedback.”  David also believes that fee structures should prioritize results over billable hours.  After the case, all parties should reflect on both wins and losses to continuously improve decision-making.   Finally, David and John discuss the evolving legal risk in AI infrastructure, where opaque contracts and fast-changing technology may spark future waves of litigation.Podcast Link: Law-disrupted.fmHost: John B. Quinn Producer: Alexis HydeMusic and Editing by: Alexander Rossi

This Day in Legal History: Madoff ArrestedOn December 11, 2008, Bernard L. Madoff was arrested by federal agents and charged with securities fraud, marking the start of one of the most consequential white-collar crime cases in American legal history. Madoff, a former NASDAQ chairman and respected figure in the investment world, confessed to running a Ponzi scheme that defrauded thousands of investors—individuals, charities, and institutional clients—out of an estimated $65 billion. The legal scheme unraveled when Madoff admitted to his sons that the business was “one big lie,” prompting them to alert authorities. Prosecutors swiftly brought charges under multiple statutes, including securities fraud under 15 U.S.C. § 78j(b), mail fraud, wire fraud, money laundering, perjury, and false statements.The Department of Justice pursued criminal charges while the SEC, heavily criticized for prior inaction, launched civil enforcement actions under the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Madoff waived indictment and pleaded guilty on March 12, 2009, to 11 felony counts without a plea deal. He was sentenced to 150 years in federal prison—the statutory maximum—and ordered to forfeit $170.8 billion, reflecting the full scope of the fraud. The case catalyzed intense scrutiny of the SEC's oversight failures and led to internal reforms within the agency, including new whistleblower protections and enhanced enforcement procedures.In the bankruptcy proceedings under SIPA (Securities Investor Protection Act), trustee Irving Picard was appointed to recover funds for victims, using clawback lawsuits under fraudulent transfer laws to retrieve ill-gotten gains from those who had profited—wittingly or not. The legal theories underpinning those suits, including the application of actual and constructive fraud standards, sparked complex litigation that continues to shape bankruptcy and securities jurisprudence. Madoff's arrest also prompted Congress to review gaps in financial regulation, laying groundwork for reforms later codified in the Dodd-Frank Act of 2010.Jury selection began in the federal trial of Milwaukee County Judge Hannah Dugan, who is accused of helping a Mexican migrant avoid arrest by U.S. immigration agents. The case, brought by the Trump administration's Justice Department, charges Dugan with concealing a person from arrest and obstructing federal proceedings, alleging she deliberately diverted Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents and allowed the migrant, Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, to exit through a non-public courthouse door following a domestic violence hearing.Federal prosecutors argue that Dugan acted corruptly, citing her visible anger upon learning that ICE agents were present and her claim that a judicial warrant was required for the arrest—an assertion prosecutors say was false. Flores-Ruiz was ultimately arrested outside the courthouse after a brief chase.Dugan's defense contends that she was navigating unclear rules around courthouse immigration enforcement and had sought guidance from court leadership days earlier. Her legal team maintains she was not trying to obstruct justice but rather to understand what rules applied.The case illustrates the broader tension between local judicial discretion and federal immigration enforcement under Trump's expanded deportation policies, which have included more aggressive operations in local courthouses. Critics argue such tactics deter immigrants from accessing courts and undermine public confidence in the legal system.Dugan, a judge since 2016 and formerly head of Catholic Charities in Milwaukee, has been suspended from the bench pending the outcome of the trial. Her prosecution echoes an earlier Trump-era case against a Massachusetts judge accused of similar conduct—charges that were later dropped during the Biden administration.Wisconsin judge on trial as Trump administration targets immigration enforcement resistance | ReutersThe Center for Biological Diversity filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Interior Department to block its decision to feature President Donald Trump's image on the 2026 America the Beautiful national parks annual pass. The group argues the move violates the Federal Lands Recreational Enhancement Act of 2004, which requires the pass to display the winning photograph from a public contest depicting natural scenery or wildlife in a national park or forest.This year's winning photo—a landscape of Glacier National Park—was allegedly discarded in favor of a close-up image of Trump, posed beside George Washington, without any new contest or congressional approval. The lawsuit calls the switch an unlawful act of self-promotion and criticizes it as an attempt to turn a public symbol into a personal branding tool.Adding to the controversy, the lawsuit claims that the Glacier photo was demoted to a new $250 pass for foreign visitors, part of Trump's newly introduced “America-first” admissions system. The updated pricing structure and design were part of a broader Interior Department announcement touting “modernization” of park access.The lawsuit also highlights changes to the free admission calendar, noting that Trump's birthday (June 14) was added as a holiday, while existing free days honoring Martin Luther King Jr. and Juneteenth were eliminated. These shifts coincide with Trump's efforts to slash the national parks budget and workforce while raising fees for international visitors.Lawsuit seeks to keep Trump's face off of national parks annual pass | ReutersIn a piece for Forbes this week I unpacked the misleading claim that Social Security is no longer taxed under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA). Despite bold headlines and political messaging to the contrary, Social Security remains taxable, just as it has been since 1983. What the bill actually includes is an expanded senior-specific deduction—$6,000 for individuals and $12,000 for couples—that may reduce taxable income, but doesn't isolate or exempt Social Security from taxation in any way.The structure of Social Security taxation—where up to 85% of benefits can be taxed for higher-income seniors—remains untouched. What changed is that some seniors, depending on income and deductions, might now end up paying less tax, including on Social Security, not because the income is tax-exempt, but because the overall taxable income has been reduced. This is a fungible deduction, applicable to any income source, not a targeted policy shift.The White House's messaging reframes a broad-based, temporary deduction as a specific, permanent tax relief for seniors, creating confusion. While some retirees may see a tax reduction, the underlying rules that govern when and how Social Security is taxed have not changed, and inflation-adjusted thresholds that pull more seniors into taxability remain. The deduction itself expires in 2028, unlike other OBBBA provisions that benefit wealthier taxpayers and corporations.The element worth highlighting is the difference between a deduction and an exemption, and how political messaging often blurs this. Deductions reduce taxable income; exemptions remove specific income from taxation entirely. In this case, branding a general deduction as a Social Security exemption is both legally inaccurate and politically strategic—obscuring the truth behind a familiar and emotionally charged issue.The Truth About ‘No Tax On Social Security'The estate of an 83-year-old woman filed a lawsuit against OpenAI and Microsoft, alleging that their chatbot, ChatGPT, played a central role in a tragic murder-suicide in Connecticut. The suit claims that Stein-Erik Soelberg, a 56-year-old man experiencing delusions, had been interacting for months with GPT-4o, which allegedly validated and intensified his paranoid beliefs, ultimately leading him to kill his mother, Suzanne Adams, before taking his own life.The complaint, filed in California Superior Court, accuses OpenAI and Microsoft of product liability, negligence, and wrongful death, arguing that the chatbot systematically encouraged Soelberg's psychosis—affirming fantasies about divine missions, assassination attempts, and even identifying his mother as an operative. The plaintiffs argue that Microsoft shares liability because it benefited directly from the deployment of GPT-4o and played a role in bringing the model to market.This is the first known lawsuit to link ChatGPT to a homicide, though it follows a growing number of legal actions that claim the AI system has fostered delusions and contributed to suicides. OpenAI denies wrongdoing, emphasizing efforts to improve mental health safeguards and noting that newer models have significantly reduced inappropriate responses in emotionally sensitive conversations.The suit also names OpenAI CEO Sam Altman as a defendant and cites Soelberg's social media posts as evidence of his deteriorating mental state and dependence on the chatbot. The plaintiffs seek monetary damages and a court order to compel OpenAI to implement stronger safety measures. The law firm behind the case, Edelson PC, is also representing a similar lawsuit involving a California teenager's suicide allegedly linked to ChatGPT.OpenAI, Microsoft Sued Over Murder-Suicide Blamed on ChatGPT 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

We've never lied to you on Drilled and we're not going to start now. It's bleak out there. But some efforts to fight back against obstruction are working and litigation is one of them. In this episode we talk to London School of Economics' Joana Setzer about how courts around the world are getting involved and what that means for companies that keep reminding us they're global. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Today on the show: Alvaro M. Huerta, Director of Litigation and Advocacy, for the Immigrant Defenders Law Center joins us, he has been named in Out magazines, 2025s most impactful and influential LGBTQ+ people. We hear from a Poet Laureate, Jose Cordon, a poem for what may ail us. We get updates about Bay area activism around protecting the communities from ICE. And A KISS IN at the border, Celebrating Queer Migrants and the Sexuality and Visibility of Queer People Living with HIV, we hear from a Senior Director at M*PACT The post Updates On Bay Area Activism Around Protecting Communities From ICE appeared first on KPFA.

I'm a paralegal professional with over 20 years of civil litigation experience that advocates for people's legal rights under the law as a consultant at Ms. Camay International. I'm a motivational speaker who presents webinars on financial estate literacy, body positivity and addressing bullying in the workplace.I'm the President of the National Workplace Bullying Coalition and the Vice-Chair of the Paralegal Division at the Nevada State Bar and have dedicated my life's work to my community as “The People's Advocate” passionate about making and difference and impacting the world.I founded my non-profit organization, Local Vegas Legal Support, Inc., to champion the legal support professional and bridge the gap between local Las Vegas youth and their access to a career in the legal field.Fun Facts About Me:✅ Crowned Miss Plus World Intercontinental Royal Ambassador✅ Presented with the Volunteer Service Award by President Barak Obama✅ Founding “Boss Lady” on “The Boss Ladies Breakroom” on YouTube✅ Rock fashion runways with my King around the country✅ Nick-named “class cheerleader” in Les Mills Body Pump✅ Raised in Italy and Greecehttps://www.mscamayinternational.com/attorneyshttps://www.linkedin.com/in/camaymcclure/ ***********Susanne Mueller / www.susannemueller.biz TEDX Talk, May 2022: Running and Life: 5KM Formula for YOUR Successhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oT_5Er1cLvY 700+ weekly blogs / 500+ podcasts / 1 Ironman Triathlon / 5 half ironman races / 26 marathon races / 4 books / 1 Mt. Kilimanjaro / 1 TEDx Talk

John is joined by Richard East and Karabeth Ovenden, partners in Quinn Emanuel's London Office. They discuss the unprecedented bankruptcy and restructuring of NMC, the largest healthcare provider in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Initially listed on the London Stock Exchange and heavily favored by the market, NMC collapsed precipitated by a report by short-seller Muddy Waters raising significant questions about the audited accounts of the company. Ultimately it was revealed that NMC had approximately $6.5 billion in debt, rather than the $2.5 billion that had been disclosed to the market. Over 100 creditors rushed to seize NMC's assets across the UAE. The absence of a comprehensive UAE bankruptcy framework posed an existential threat to the company, especially because the crisis occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic when NMC facilities were treating a significant portion of the country's COVID hospitalizations.To address this crisis, a team of QE insolvency litigators initiated administration proceedings first in the UK for NMC's parent company. However, this did not protect NMC's UAE-based operating entities. To protect those assets and preserve continuity of care, the QE team adopted the novel strategy of moving 36 NMC operating companies into the Abu Dhabi Global Market (ADGM), a common-law “free zone” jurisdiction within the UAE. This required a sovereign executive order to release existing asset attachments and allow for insolvency proceedings in the ADGM—an unprecedented step in UAE restructuring history.The move faced significant jurisdictional and legal resistance across the various Emirates. Recognition of the ADGM orders in onshore courts was difficult, requiring extensive legal argumentation and government coordination. Once inside the ADGM, the companies could proceed with a complex reorganization plan, culminating in a successful arrangement which obtained support from over 90% of the creditors. The team also navigated criminal investigations, litigated against dissenting creditors, and pursued claims against parties potentially complicit in the fraud. Podcast Link: Law-disrupted.fmHost: John B. Quinn Producer: Alexis HydeMusic and Editing by: Alexander Rossi

Something New!  For HR teams who discuss this podcast in their team meetings, we've created a discussion starter PDF to help guide your conversation. Download it here https://goodmorninghr.com/EP229  In episode 229, Coffey talks with Frank Davis and John Surma about navigating OSHA inspections and preventing costly workplace safety violations.  They discuss how employers misunderstand OSHA obligations; when OSHA reporting and injury-logging rules apply; the most-cited OSHA violations; triggers that prompt an OSHA inspection; why it is illegal to for OSHA to schedule an inspection with an employer; the importance of carefully limiting the scope of the inspection; OSHA's interviews managers and employees—and the impact of each on the inspection's outcome; documentation requests and timelines; citation outcomes and settlement options; and proactive strategies to prepare for inspections and avoid penalties.  Good Morning, HR is brought to you by Imperative—Bulletproof Background Checks. For more information about our commitment to quality and excellent customer service, visit us at https://imperativeinfo.com.   If you are an HRCI or SHRM-certified professional, this episode of Good Morning, HR has been pre-approved for one hour of recertification credit. To obtain the recertification information for this episode, visit https://goodmorninghr.com.   About our Guest:  Frank Davis is Board Certified in labor and employment law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization. His clients know he is ready to use his knowledge to manage a crisis on a moment's notice. In fact, in the last year, he managed labor relations matters and workplace safety inspections and fatalities in over 35 different states.   Frank's experience managing crisis events makes him especially suited to counsel clients on strategies to avoid catastrophic litigation and other cost-savings efforts: - Evaluation of exposure to workplace health and safety hazards. - Preparation of workplace safety compliance strategies and policies. - Managing employee relations to avoid litigation and resist organizing drives by unions; and - Management of relations with unions to avoid frivolous grievances and exposure to contract liability.  Because of Frank's specialized skillset, his clients frequently retain him to handle a variety of sensitive matters: - Fatalities and other reportable injuries in the workplace; - Collective bargaining of labor contracts; - Labor arbitrations; - Union campaigns; - Contract litigation; and - Litigation before the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) and the Occupational Safety and Health (OSHA) Review Commission.  He also represents clients in whistleblower matters under a broad range of statutes, including the OSH Act, the Surface Transportation Assistance Act, and the Clean Air Act. Frank handles all phases of these complaints, from initial investigation to final litigation before administrative law judges and appeals to federal court.  John Surma is a lawyer with 30 plus years of experience dealing with OSHA, workplace health and safety issues, and counseling employers on those issues. He deals with a variety of state and federal agencies, has responded to over 400 fatalities and 2,000 OSHA inspections.  Frank Davis and John Surma can be reached at https://ogletree.com/people/frank-d-davis/ https://www.linkedin.com/in/john-surma-75980214  About Mike Coffey:  Mike Coffey is an entrepreneur, licensed private investigator, business strategist, HR consultant, and registered yoga teacher. In 1999, he founded Imperative, a background investigations and due diligence firm helping risk-averse clients make well-informed decisions about the people they involve in their business. Imperative delivers in-depth employment background investigations, know-your-customer and anti-money laundering compliance, and due diligence investigations to more than 300 risk-averse corporate clients across the US, and, through its PFC Caregiver & Household Screening brand, many more private estates, family offices, and personal service agencies. Imperative's Top Ten Red Flag Candidates, November 2025 Every month, Imperative reports hundreds of records to our clients.  While Imperative always encourages clients to review candidates' criminal history as but one factor in evaluating their fit for a role, these candidates' histories caught our attention this month. 1. Household Staff/Nanny Client Candidate: Prostitution Petit larceny 2. Nonprofit Client Candidate: Misuse of client funds by a lawyer (four counts) 3. Hospitality Client Candidate: Willful child cruelty (causing great bodily injury under the age of five years, victim was particularly vulnerable, or taking advantage of a position of trust to commit offense) Driving under the influence, 2 cases Reckless driving on a highway See the rest of the list here: https://www.imperativeinfo.com/blog/2025/12/03/top-ten-red-flag-candidates-november-2025/ Learning Objectives:  Identify when OSHA reporting and recording rules apply and what events trigger each requirement. Evaluate common OSHA violations to prioritize hazard prevention strategies. Prepare supervisors and frontline employees for OSHA interviews and onsite inspection protocols. Navigate the inspection, citation, and settlement processes to reduce organizational risk.  

PREVIEW — Jessica Melugin (Civitas Outlook) — The Flawed Logic of the FTC's Meta Lawsuit. Melugin argues that the Federal Trade Commission's failed antitrust litigation against Meta Platforms fundamentally abandoned the traditional "consumer welfare standard" governing antitrust jurisprudence, instead prioritizing protection of corporate competitors over demonstrable consumer harm. Melugin emphasizes that because Meta provides innovative digital platforms offering zero-cost access to billions of users, the FTC could not satisfy the burden of proving consumer detriment required to successfully prosecute monopoly charges under established antitrust legal doctrine. Melugincontends that the FTC's regulatory overreach reflects ideological hostility toward successful technology companies rather than coherent consumer protection theory, establishing precedent for prosecuting businesses solely for competitive dominance absent documented consumer injury. 1923 SCOTUS

Ben and Tom discuss Black Friday sales, central bank rate cuts, and slowing auto sales.Song: December - Collective SoulFor information on how to join the Zoom calls live each morning at 8:30 EST, visit:https://www.narwhal.com/blog/daily-market-briefingsPlease see disclosures:https://www.narwhal.com/disclosure

As new tools using generative AI promise to change the way we litigate and conduct discovery, what are the implications for day-to-day litigation workflows? On today's episode of LawNext, we feature a conversation with three guests about how law firms are navigating the urgency around gen AI adoption while staying grounded in practical realities. LawNext host Bob Ambrogi recorded this conversation at e-discovery company Everlaw's annual Summit in San Francisco, where gen AI was very much the talk of the  conference — from new product announcements to candid discussions about how law firms are actually putting these tools to work. His guests are:  Adam Borgman, senior associate in the labor and employment group at Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease.  Julie Brown, director of practice technology at Vorys.  Joshua Schnoll, Everlaw's chief marketing officer. They talk about how Vorys has taken a disciplined approach to mapping lawyers' workflows before plugging in AI, why understanding how your professionals currently work is the essential first step before adopting new technology, and how tools like Everlaw's newly released Deep Dive are helping attorneys find insights across millions of documents that they might never have discovered on their own – including, as you will hear, a rather unexpected story involving Tums. They also discuss the cost considerations around AI, the trust factor that still gives many lawyers pause, and what advice these experts have for firms that have not yet started experimenting with gen AI.    Thank You To Our Sponsors This episode of LawNext is generously made possible by our sponsors. We appreciate their support and hope you will check them out. Paradigm, home to the practice management platforms PracticePanther, Bill4Time, MerusCase and LollyLaw; the e-payments platform Headnote; and the legal accounting software TrustBooks. Briefpoint, eliminating routine discovery response and request drafting tasks so you can focus on drafting what matters (or just make it home for dinner). Eve, taking care of the tasks that slow you down so you can operate at your highest potential   If you enjoy listening to LawNext, please leave us a review wherever you listen to podcasts.  

In Episode 444 of the Immigration Lawyer's Toolbox Podcast, Ruby Powers returns with a powerhouse conversation on the future of immigration practice, legal tech, and law firm leadership. Fresh from high-level legal tech conferences, Ruby breaks down the trends shaping the profession—from AI tools and automation to alternative business structures, MSOs, and the rapid shift toward value-based billing. Together, we dive into office management, hiring challenges, practice innovation, workflow redesign, and how to future-proof your firm as tech evolves faster than ever. This episode is packed with real lessons, honest reflections, and actionable takeaways for any immigration lawyer looking to sharpen their operations and stay competitive in 2025 and beyond. Spotify | iTunes | YouTube Music | YouTube Timestamps: 00:00 – Opening 00:33 – Intro 01:52 – Catching Up With Ruby 02:08 – Inside the Legal Tech Fund Summit 07:57 – Flat Fees vs. Hourly Billing: Lessons From Experimenting 11:36 – Arizona's Legal Sandbox & Alternative Business Models 15:16 – Streamlining Your Firm for 2025: Tech + Ops Upgrades 23:30 – Mid-Episode Break 24:17 – Reading the Data: Who's Hiring Us? + Pulling Back on Video Content 27:42 – Practicing Immigration Law Under the Trump Administration 28:42 – Why Systems Matter: Evolving Your Immigration Practice 31:08 – Using Social Media Bots for Client Responses 33:46 – The Authenticity Problem: How AI Shapes Audience Perception 39:21 – The New Wave of Lawyering: Tech-Driven Legal Practice 41:46 – E-Books vs. Hardcovers: How Lawyers Learn Best 43:41 – Using NotebookLM for Training, Study, and Course Design 47:00 – Clearbrief: AI Tools for Litigation and Drafting 48:59 – Using AI as Your Advanced Legal Assistant 51:06 – Power Up Your Practice: Final Takeaways 51:38 – Closing Remarks Live Consular Processing training for lawyers Dec 18, 10:00–11:45 a.m. PT - NVC packets & DS-260 - Interview prep & follow-up - Timelines, fees, and real-world workflows Register here! Follow eimmigration by Cerenade: Facebook | Instagram | LinkedIn Start your Business Immigration Practice! (US LAWYERS ONLY - SCREENING REQUIRED): E-2 Course EB-1A Course Get the Toolbox Magazine!  Join our community (Lawyers Only) Get Started in Immigration Law! The Marriage/Family-Based Green Card course is for you Our Website: ImmigrationLawyersToolbox.com Not legal advice. Consult with an Attorney. Attorney Advertisement. #podcaster #Lawyer #ImmigrationLawyer #Interview #Immigration #ImmigrationAttorney #USImmigration #ImmigrationLaw #ImmigrationLawyersToolbox  

Are we being molded into servants for something we don't understand? God doesn't ask for silence, he asks for courage. Whispered in the routine was the forfeiting of our consent. Darkness wins thru exhaustion. Locke and Hobbs were on it. Rebelling against despair. The invisible agreement between power and the people. Obedience as virtue. We choose the chains we wear. Freedom requires maintenance. Do we owe those who no longer keep their promises? Democracy is staring at the corpse of it's promise. Who will speak the truth when it costs something? Evil always pushes back. Free the small voice buried beneath your fear. Who gets to define the truth? Demanding obedience without legitimacy. All three branches of our gov't have been corrupt. Awaken or withdrawal. BBC tactics and J6 evidence come together. Working for the people is a good model. Is it a collapse or correction? New evidence is incoming. The Judge is going to release Tina Peters. Standing for the truth when you are alone. Kash and his girlfriend get complicated. We face digital integration without consent. Love is the physics of the soul. Where are the ops called Antifa and the Proud Boys? What they are doing behind the scenes is very scary. Stay centered and be ready.