Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Planning for the Crisis That Will Strike Your Law Firm
Negative law firm headlines often originate with some form of attorney misconduct, which affects the reputation of the law firm just as much as the bar license of the individual. However, law firm incidents come in all shapes and sizes. Natural disasters, legal malpractice claims, public conflict of interest controversies, negative revenue reports, firm-wide layoffs, the departure of a practice group and attorney-rainmakers with large books of business, and cybersecurity data breaches, are just some of the other scenarios that often necessitate crisis planning and management for law firms.
In business — as in life — reputation is everything. It only takes one misstep to cause irreparable damage to a law firm and its attorneys. As we get into 2019, it is imperative for law firms to plan for the effective management of myriad incidents that may have an adverse impact on the business of law and the reputation of the firm.
The moment an incident occurs is when an organization's leaders understand the value of its once stellar reputation. There have been many damning headlines in recent years. Consider:
- Baker Donelson and Butler Snow were accused of involvement in the Lamar Adams Ponzi Scheme.
- A Marquette University's professor is under investigation for an inappropriate relationship with a student.
- Dewey & LeBoeuf filed for bankruptcy.
- Foley & Lardner was hit by a cybersecurity incident.
- Latham & Watkins' former chair got caught up in a sexual misconduct scandal.
- David Boies' attempted to conceal allegations against Harvey Weinstein.
- An Eversheds Sutherland partner was found dead hours after allegations of inappropriate behavior were made against him.
- An ex-Skadden partner was disbarred over a child pornography conviction.
- A former New York prosecutor was sentenced to jail time for forging judges' signatures on phony wiretap orders.
- The Washington Bar Association president resigned amid anticipation of criminal charges.
And, the list goes on.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
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
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?