Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Ask yourself whether the following scenario is fact or fiction in today's U.S. legal market. A large investment firm with $3 billion in assets acquires a U.S. plaintiffs' personal injury law firm after the law firm is listed on the U.S. Stock Exchange. Founded in 1935, the law firm specializes in workers' compensation claims, personal injury cases and class actions. The investment fund's acquisition of the law firm provides the law firm with "a stable capital base and a supportive operating environment," according to the law firm's press release. The fund "looks forward to working with [the law firm's] strong team of lawyers whom we are keen to retain, support and incentivize," according to the fund. The scenario is fact, not fiction. But it's a scenario that happened earlier this year in Australia with Australian law firm Slater Gordon, not in the United States. At least, not yet.
Surely, this nightmare scenario of hedge funds or other non-lawyer entities owning and controlling law firms could never happen in the United States. Don't be so sure. Powerful forces are now pushing regulators in the direction of non-lawyer ownership of law firms in the United States. Some of the forces are completely well-intentioned, but some of the forces are not so well-intentioned. The well-intentioned forces are motivated primarily by access to justice considerations. The not so well-intentioned forces are motivated primarily by crass financial considerations. The parties motivated by financial considerations include hedge funds, accounting firms, insurance companies and corporations seeking cheaper legal services, among others.
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
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.
This article explores legal developments over the past year that may impact compliance officer personal liability.