Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The ranks of law firm partnerships include tens of thousands of “baby-boomer” partners (BBPs), born between 1945 and 1955. These attorneys are now ages 50-60. Surprisingly, little has been written about the expectations and needs of BBPs or the expectations, needs and strategies (if any exist) of their law firms and fellow partners as to BBPs. (Your author falls into both camps: he is age 55 and is actively involved in the administration of a large multi-state law firm.) Moreover, law firm partners both younger and older than their BBPs may be substantially affected by their law firm's strategies for and treatment of the baby-boomer generation.
This two-part article illustrates the expectations, intentions – and tensions – of baby-boomers and their firms, respectively, by using two models. Of course, there can be as many variants as there are BBPs, with numerous potential responses to each unique situation.
Let's begin with Model 1, which involves Partner A, a full-share BBP equity partner who is a classic business generator with a substantial clientele in X, a modest or mid-sized law firm. “A” is a litigation lawyer, experienced and respected by A's colleagues and the community. Over the years, A's friends have become A's clients and A's clients have become A's friends; other than business-generating and business-related activities (many of which A enjoys), A has few hobbies or diversions. A is 58, and has given little thought to retirement. Indeed, A resists even thinking about transitioning clients and retirement for the foreseeable future.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?