Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Disconnect Between In-House and Outside Counsel
Disconnect between in-house and outside counsel is a continuation of the discussion of client expectations and the disconnect that often occurs. And although the outside attorneys should be pursuing how inside-counsel actually think, inside counsel should make an effort to impart this information without waiting to be asked. In fact, I've heard GC's say that if their retained law firms don't care enough or aren't smart enough to ask, they won't volunteer. So what is so important for in-house counsel to communicate?1. What are the commitments you expect the seller/firm to make? Knowledge results in then decisively making those commitments by the firms, or else do not waste your time with a client who wants too much for too little.2. What are your expectations as a buyer interms of rate structure? This knowledge will help the law firms tell the difference between rate-shoppers and, on the other hand, identify in-house lawyers who don't feel secure in a safety bu unless they're certain that your top-end partners will be immersed in the work.3. What are the expectations about winning versus settling? This will help law firms differentiate between in-house counsel that want a firm that actually strategizes or a firm that dutifully files briefs and hopefully wins in court?4. Does the buyer have needs arrayed across a broad spectrum of potential legal services? This knowledge means knowing when a cross-sell will be welcome and when it won't.Ask questions, offer information, make it work for both of you.More on other disconnects next time.
Disconnect between in-house and outside counsel is a continuation of the discussion of client expectations and the disconnect that often occurs. And although the outside attorneys should be pursuing how inside-counsel actually think, inside counsel should make an effort to impart this information without waiting to be asked. In fact, I've heard GC's say that if their retained law firms don't care enough or aren't smart enough to ask, they won't volunteer. So what is so important for in-house counsel to communicate?1. What are the commitments you expect the seller/firm to make? Knowledge results in then decisively making those commitments by the firms, or else do not waste your time with a client who wants too much for too little.2. What are your expectations as a buyer interms of rate structure? This knowledge will help the law firms tell the difference between rate-shoppers and, on the other hand, identify in-house lawyers who don't feel secure in a safety bu unless they're certain that your top-end partners will be immersed in the work.3. What are the expectations about winning versus settling? This will help law firms differentiate between in-house counsel that want a firm that actually strategizes or a firm that dutifully files briefs and hopefully wins in court?4. Does the buyer have needs arrayed across a broad spectrum of potential legal services? This knowledge means knowing when a cross-sell will be welcome and when it won't.Ask questions, offer information, make it work for both of you.More on other disconnects next time.
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
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.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
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.
The Article 8 Opt In
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.
Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?