Parental alienation is a vindictive tactic aimed at punishing a spouse, writes Keith Nelson in an article for the Orsinger, Nelson, Downing & Anderson blog.

He points out that the subject recently surfaced after the news that a judge warned Angelina Jolie to allow Brad Pitt to spend more time with their children or risk losing full custody of them.

His article discusses how to prove parental alienation court, and the effects of parental alienation.

“Let there be no question: Parental alienation, once confirmed by experienced and trained professionals, is undeniably a form of child abuse that no child should endure,” Nelson writes.

Read the article.

The National Association of Corporate Directors has published an article titled “Proxy Season Survival Tip: Make Board Composition a Priority” and made it available for downloading.

It’s from the latest edition of NACD Directorship Magazine.

During proxy season, directors may feel as though they’re navigating a minefield of activist issues. Major institutional investors are also taking activist stances, especially in the area of board composition.

This puts boards under pressure to comply with investors’ guidelines. But how? It isn’t possible for boards to track and address many thousands of investor issues.

This article explains how boards can avert activist demands–by knowing what their shareholders are thinking and staying ahead of possible grievances. Directors can make needed changes in the boardroom by

• increasing board diversity with both female and minority members;
• strengthening risk oversight with tools and resources provided by NACD; and
• updating governance guidelines in light of those proposed by investors.

Download the article.

Conga and Gartner are offering Gartner’s Fast-Track to Creating a Contract life Cycle Management Shortlist With These 3 Steps to help companies kick-start the contract lifecycle management evaluation process by identifying what exactly is important to the organization and which tools can support the abundant needs of all stakeholders.

“The business landscape has becoming increasingly fast-paced and competitive,” Conga says on its site. “Having visibility into contract status while collaborating with stakeholders throughout your entire enterprise is imperative for success. From creation all the way through negotiation and execution, gain insight into your business with the addition of a contract lifecycle management (CLM) solution.”

The CLM market has become increasingly crowded, so finding a solution that supports the volume needs of enterprise contracts can be challenging.

Download the guide.

LawGeex will present a live webinar titled “How Contract Review Automation Helps Mitigate Risk to Your Organization,” on Wednesday, July 18, 2018, at 2 p.m. EDT.

The 60-minute event will cover how to:

• Automate contract review
• Enable company-wide compliance with corporate policy
• Mitigate an organization’s contracting risk using AI
• Free up a legal team’s time for more strategic work

Register for the webinar.

The playbook for moving between in-house and Biglaw is well known and pretty straightforward, points out Above the Law.

“But if you are working in-house and want to move to an in-house role in another company, well, the playbook is not as clear and the path is a little more obscure. Even though you may be more marketable given your previous in-house experience, the application process can be a challenge,” writes columnist Stephen R. Williams, in-house counsel with a multi-facility hospital network.

He offers a sampling of some of the most common interview questions and some possible honest answers, which could run afoul of attorney-client privilege.

Read the Above the Law column.

Government Executive reports that a former top legal adviser to the Immigration and Customs Enforcement bureau was sentenced to 48 months in prison for wire fraud and identity theft affecting aliens, the Justice Department announced on Thursday.

Reporter Charles S. Clark writes that “Raphael Sanchez, 44, of the ICE Office of Principal Legal Advisor based in the Pacific Northwest, had pleaded guilty in February to running a scheme to defraud aliens in various stages of immigration removal by using their personally identifiable information to open lines of credit and personal loans in their names. He would then manipulate their credit bureau files, transfer funds to himself and purchase goods for himself using credit cards issued in their names, [the Department of] Justice said.”

Sanchez admitted to using the agency’s computer database as well as paper files to steal the personal information.

Read the Government Executive article.

The Texas Supreme Court has held that an offset well clause in an oil and gas lease did not require the lessee to drill wells calculated to protect against drainage, reports Gray Reed & McGraw in its Energy & the Law blog.

According to authors Charles Sartain and Chance Decker: “The Court purported to limit its holding to these facts, but the opinion could have far-reaching consequences. Wells drilled in the most active plays in Texas today are by and large horizontal, tight-shale wells. The opinion indicates the historical understanding of an ‘offset well’ is antiquated in this context.”

Four dissenting justices believed the majority disregarded the well-established meaning of “offset well” used in the oilfield for decades.

Read the article.

On construction projects, owners and developers often are familiar with standard contract language and provisions, but the industry is continually evolving, according to a paper published by Zetlin & De Chiara LLP.

The paper discusses 10 key contract provisions and tips to help parties avoid pitfalls.

Those areas include scope of work, compliance with schedule, meeting the owner’s target for the budget, contingency, changes in the work, indemnification, insurance, dispute resolution, general conditions, and subcontract issues.

Read the article.

A post on the Morgan Lewis Tech & Sourcing blog reviews issues related to the defense and indemnification aspects inn contracts impacting intellectual property ownership.

Authors Peter M. Watt-Morse and Michael R. Pfeuffer write that “an IP indemnity clause typically includes the obligation to defend against third party IP claims. However, the potential costs and risks associated with this obligation can be impacted by the language of the provision.”

“Like any indemnitee, the user will want indemnification for IP infringement to be as broad as possible, including any losses, costs, damages or expenses whatsoever sustained by virtue of the third-party claim,” the explain.

Read the article.

Law firms have made massive investments in content, mostly aimed at deepening their engagement with in-house counsel. But, for the most part, their efforts are falling short, according to a recent survey by strategic communications firm Greentarget and consulting firm Zeughauser Group.

Only about half of in-house attorneys consider law-firm content “good to excellent,” the same as in 2017, and up only slightly since 2015, according to the 2018 State of Digital & Content Marketing Survey, released by Greentarget and Zeughauser Group.

But the survey also provides clear guidance on how firms can make inroads with their most important readers. For our seventh annual survey we asked in-house counsel not only about their content consumption habits, but also what content they value most, where they get it, and how often they go there. The survey found that:

• In-house counsel want content that helps them do their jobs. More than three-quarters of our respondents say they most value utility in the content they consume – ahead of timeliness (58 percent), reliable sources (56 percent) and compelling headlines (51 percent).
• And they want it in the form of articles, alerts and newsletters, respectively. Those are respondents’ most preferred content vehicles.
• Email works – when it’s good. Forty percent of in-house counsel say they get information from email notifications every day – but only 25 percent say they find them valuable. That’s a huge opportunity to reach clients and prospects, and to stand out from the noise, by creating email alerts that deliver on the qualities in-house lawyers are looking for.
• Traditional media most trusted. Fifty-four percent of respondents go to traditional media (e.g., The Wall Street Journal) on a daily basis for legal, business and industry news and information, and 45 percent find such sources very valuable – far above any other source.
• Brevity matters. Nearly a third of in-house counsel value shorter content, while only 5 percent value longer pieces. They also want email alerts to be brief. And they only rank in-depth as a key attribute for a single content category – research reports.
• Podcasts show promise. More than a quarter of respondents put podcasts among their preferred content vehicles – ahead of video and perhaps surprising for a relatively new medium. Audio content gives consumers hands- and eyes-free information for their commutes or during workouts. And podcasts are the only medium where respondents say they consider entertainment value – an opportunity to rise above the noise for firms that are willing to break from the industry’s staid conventions.
• On social media, more noise than signal. About a third of in-house counsel look at social media every day, but only 11 percent find anything of value there. By contrast, less than a quarter view industry association publications and websites every day, but 43 percent find those valuable.

“This is the age of information overload,” said John Corey, founding partner of Greentarget. “In-house counsel want content that’s useful, timely, well-sourced and provides lively engagement starting from the subject line. If they want to elevate the conversation, firms have to quickly and efficiently tell in-house counsel what they have to say, why it matters and what law departments should do about it.”

The 2018 report went further than in past years, identifying which content types were most preferred by in-house counsel – and what attributes are most valued regarding those content types. Respondents’ top three content types are articles, alerts and newsletters – and in each case, they want that content to be relevant and timely. For articles and newsletters, respondents want content to be educational – and they prefer that alerts be brief.

“Drilling down to this level of detail about what is and isn’t working when it comes to law firm-generated content is important – and consequential,” said Mary K. Young, a partner with Zeughauser Group. “Firms can take this information and the related guidance and find ways to stand out and build their brands with in-house counsel, who are, of course, key decision makers within their organizations.”

In a blog post, Amy Boardman Hunt of Muse Communications explains some of the main concepts of content marketing and how it can be a potent tool for solos and small law firms with limited marketing budgets.

“The essence of content marketing is that you’re promoting your subject matter expertise (whether it’s labor law, family law, or any other practice area) by providing consistent, relevant content of interest to your clients and prospective clients,” she explains.

For law firms, content marketing is primarily about two things:

• Building a reputation as a source of genuine value in your practice area; and
• Staying top-of-mind among your clients, prospective clients and referral sources.

Read the article.

FisherBroyles, LLP has added Gregory R. Lunt, John K. Shimmick and Mark A. Thomas as partners in the firm’s Intellectual Property Practice Group. Lunt, Shimmick and Thomas are based in the firm’s Salt Lake City; Palo Alto, Calif; and Washington, D.C., offices, respectively.

“We are pleased to have Greg, John and Mark join our team of experienced intellectual property attorneys who make up one of the top IP law groups in the nation,” said T.J. DoVale, managing partner of the FisherBroyles Intellectual Property Practice Group. “Greg, John and Mark bring to FisherBroyles extensive experience in patent preparation and prosecution, as well as engineering backgrounds that will greatly benefit our clients.”

Lunt, Shimmick and Thomas are the latest additions to the firm’s growing IP practice, which recently added five other partners to the firm’s offices in Atlanta, Denver, Los Angeles and Washington.

“I am excited to join FisherBroyles and its deep bench of IP partners who thrive serving clients through the firm’s innovative distributed partnership model,” Lunt said.

Shimmick said, “It is a privilege to join the robust team of partners and IP attorneys at FisherBroyles, and I am excited to collaborate with the firm’s many IP professional with many years of experience.”

Thomas added, “I believe my patent prosecution background is a great match for FisherBroyles’ forward-thinking approach to delivering high-level service and value to clients in diverse industries.”

Lunt focuses on patent preparation and prosecution, specifically in the fields of software, computing, and electrical devices. He has more than a decade of experience assisting clients in strategic patent planning, IP portfolio valuation, infringement opinions, licensing and appeals. Also a member of the FisherBroyles Technology Practice Group, Lunt helps organizations strategically grow and develop their national and international patent portfolios. Specifically, he has served as an IP consultant with a New York City-based startup incubator.

Most recently, Lunt was a shareholder and patent attorney at Workman Nydegger in Salt Lake City. Previously, he worked as a software engineer at Novell, Inc., developing and testing software for application provisioning and database management.

Lunt received his J.D. from Creighton School of Law and his Bachelor of Science in Electrical Engineering Technology from Brigham Young University.

Shimmick focuses his practice on patent prosecution and counseling. In addition to protecting intellectual property rights, he has experience with investor due diligence and financing. As a patent attorney, Shimmick has worked extensively in the medical device sector as well as other technical fields, including software, optical systems, mechanical devices, laser ablation systems, telemetry, semiconductor manufacturing, and test equipment. Shimmick most recently was a patent attorney at Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati. Previously, he also practiced as a solo attorney and with the firms Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP and Townsend, Townsend & Crew, LLP.

Before entering the legal profession, Shimmick worked for more than a decade in the medical device industry, holding positions in engineering and management, and is the named inventor on over 30 medical device patents.

Shimmick received his J.D. from Santa Clara University School of Law. He also holds a Master of Science from the University of Texas at Austin and a Bachelor of Science from the University of California, Davis.

Thomas is a member of the FisherBroyles Fintech and Blockchain, Internet & eCommerce, and Technology practice groups, in addition to Intellectual Property. He has more than 20 years of experience in patent application preparation and prosecution, licensing and litigation support. His experience spans a wide array of technologies within the software, digital device, telecommunications, semiconductor device fabrication, electro-mechanical and medical device arts. He has prepared and prosecuted numerous patent applications for AT&T Wireless, SAP SE, Hewlett-Packard, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Corp.

Recently, Thomas was assistant general counsel for Intellectual Property and Transactions for TeleTech Holdings, Inc. where he was responsible for the $1.5 billion public company’s intellectual property matters. Previously, he was a patent attorney for US West, Inc., managing patent prosecution and the full range of IP activities for its divisions including Advanced Technologies, Wireless and Information Technologies. He also formerly worked as a senior hardware engineer responsible for the design and integration of key architectural components in multiple mainframe-class computers.

Thomas received his J.D. (cum laude) from The John Marshall Law School and his Bachelor of Science in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science from Carnegie Mellon University.

Quarles & Brady LLP announced that Samantha C. Skenandore has joined the firm’s Real Estate Practice Group, as ofcCounsel, Tribal Law in its Madison office.

In a release, the firm said Skenandore focuses her practice on both federal Indian law and tribal law, advising tribal and corporate clients in tribal governance, governmental affairs, corporate transactions, real estate, labor issues and litigation. Her multijurisdictional experience with tribal law includes representation of corporate entities, both tribal and nontribal, in matters involving financing, minority or women-owned certification, labor relations, complex commercial real estate matters and government relations. Her experience extends to successfully representing clients before members of Congress, congressional committees and agencies through federal lobbying services. Skenandore, also a member of the Arizona Bar, will split her time between the Madison and Tucson offices.

“Samantha’s extensive knowledge and experience will be a real asset for Quarles & Brady and the clients we serve,” said Kevin Delorey, national chair of the Real Estate Practice Group. “She is a great addition to our practice and we are excited to have her join our team.”

A member of the Ho-Chunk Nation, Skenandore previously served as a Tribal Attorney for the Ho-Chunk Nation Department of Justice, where she presided more than 150 employment grievances as chair of the administrative grievance review board, secured tribal land acquisitions and fee to trust conversions. Additionally, she clerked for the United States Department of Justice, Indian Resources Section and for the State of Colorado Division of Administrative Hearings in Denver, Colorado.

Skenandore earned her law degree from the University of Denver Sturm College of Law and her bachelor’s degree from the University of Wisconsin-Madison.

Bloomberg Law reports that O’Melveny & Myers has won the “best law firm to work for” in Vault’s 2019 annual quality of life rankings.

Vault polled about 20,000 associates to rate peer firms and their own experiences, writes Bloomberg reporter Elizabeth Olson. They were asked about satisfaction and firm culture, as well as compensation, hours and informal training and mentoring.

Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson held onto its No. 2 ranking in the poll.

Associates described O’Melveny as having a “laid back culture” and “super interesting work,” according to comments.

Read the Bloomberg article.

The Port of Seattle will pay half-a-million dollars to its longtime chief lawyer to leave the agency after investigating a workplace complaint lodged against him, according to The Seattle Times.

Craig Watson had been with the Port for 28 years, serving as general counsel for the past 13 years.

The Port commission voted unanimously to fire him and give him $500,000 as part of a settlement agreement to avoid a potential legal battle over his employment status, reports Mike Rosenberg.

The Port’s executive director wrote in a memo to commissioners that an investigation had been launched after “a recent internal workplace complaint about Craig Watson.” The findings showed “the incident was insufficient to support” the firing, but the executive director and the commissioners “have lost trust and confidence” in Watson’s ability carry out his duties and responsibilities, the director wrote.

Read the Seattle Times article.

Vinson & Elkins partner Douglas E. McWilliams could face a felony charge after a boat he was operating on Lake Travis ran aground, injuring two colleagues who were taken to a hospital by helicopter.

The Austin American-Statesman reports that an investigator has accused McWilliams, a partner in the firm’s Houston office, of leaving the scene of the crash. The investigator said in an arrest affidavit that interviews led him to believe that McWilliams had been drinking prior to the crash.

McWilliams’ lawyer, however, countered with affidavits from fellow lawyers, including the firm’s chairman, saying that he was not drunk at any point that night, according to reporter Tony Plohetski.

Read the American-Statesman article.

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony M. Kennedy announced his plans to retire this summer after serving 30 years on the nation’s highest court. Widely known for his swing vote on a range of issues, Justice Kennedy will leave at the end of July.

Attorneys like Larry Vincent of Dallas-based Burns Charest, who once clerked for Justice Kennedy, provide their reactions in a post on the website of Androvett Legal Media & Marketing.

“It’s disappointing that he chose to retire at this time. I’ve always been proud of his opinions regarding individual liberty grounded in the Fifth and 14th amendments. Given what we know about the list of potential replacements already circulated by this administration, I think his legacy in those areas will be eradicated. I hope he doesn’t look back in a few years and regret his decision to leave the court at this juncture.

“I’ve spent much of my legal career, including my time here at Burns Charest, working to help people and companies recover for losses caused by negligence or the breach of a legal duty. Given the ideological shift at the court to restrict the ability of parties to use the courts to recover the amount they are due for the harm done to them, the loss of a compassionate conservative like Justice Kennedy is particularly frustrating.”

Philip Hilder, founder of Houston’s Hilder & Associates, P.C.: “Retirement of the swing justice will energize voters from all political stripes to come out this mid-term. Voters now realize the significance that a Supreme Court Justice has over their daily lives. Any nominee will need Senate confirmation and those elections this fall will be red hot battlegrounds unlike any in recent memory.”

Lara Hollingsworth, appellate lawyer and Of Counsel at Houston’s Rusty Hardin & Associates, LLP: “The court will never be the same. The era of moderate appointments has passed never to be seen again. The Merrick Garlands of the world don’t stand a chance. It’s a sad day for justice and our country.”

Chip Babcock of Jackson Walker: “Justice Kennedy will be recorded by history as one of the great justices of the United States Supreme Court. It was regular practice in close cases for entire briefs and oral arguments to be tailored just for him. He was that important. That cannot be said of many, if any, other members of the court in its history.”

A post on the Faegre Baker Daniels website asks the question: What does a contractor do when the owner stops making progress payments?

The contractor has two options: it can either continue to perform the work or cease the work, neither of which is a perfect solution.

“The owner’s failure to pay progress payments that are ‘clearly due and owing’ generally entitles the contractor to stop work until the progress payment is made. While this rule seems clear, it is not that simple,” according to the post.

The contractor should look to its contract with the owner to find answers to two questions: Does the contract require the contractor to take a certain action? And, is payment”clearly due and owning?”

Read the article.

Sidley Austin LLP announced that Jared Jensen has joined the firm as a partner in its global Private Equity practice. He will be based in the San Francisco office. Jensen was formerly a partner with Goodwin Procter LLP.

In a release, the firm said Jensen has experience advising private equity and venture capital firms, their sponsored companies, and other clients on public and private M&A, tender and exchange offers, recapitalizations, management buyouts, going-private transactions, carve-out transactions and minority growth investments. He represents clients in industries including software, information technology, financial services, life sciences, consumer products, education and business services. Jensen also provides guidance on public company acquisitions.

The firm said Jensen is the fifth partner addition to Sidley’s private equity group globally in the last 12 months and follows on the heels of expansions of the private equity practice in California in Sidley’s Palo Alto and Los Angeles offices, and globally in its London and Munich offices.

“In recent years, Sidley has made a concerted effort to respond to client demand and robust market activity in the private equity arena, both regionally and globally,” said Sharon Flanagan, managing partner of the San Francisco office. “Jared’s addition demonstrates our commitment to delivering our clients premier service and well-connected counsel, particularly in the Bay Area’s booming tech sector.”

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP announced that partners Robert R. Marcus, C. Bailey King Jr., and J. Douglas Grimes, and associates Timothy P. Lendino and Bridget V. Warren have joined the firm’s Charlotte office.

All five attorneys join Bradley from Smith Moore Leatherwood LLP, where Marcus was the partner in charge of that firm’s Charlotte office and King led the office’s litigation practice.

“We are excited to have these five accomplished litigators join Bradley’s Charlotte office,” said Bradley Charlotte Office Managing Partner Christopher C. Lam. “This team of attorneys has extensive experience and a track record of success handling diverse and complex litigation cases in state and federal courts in North Carolina and other jurisdictions, including specifically the North Carolina Business Court. They have also demonstrated leadership in the profession and community and exemplify the best of what our firm values.”

“We welcome this skilled group of attorneys and know they will be an asset to Bradley’s nationally recognized litigation team. We are pleased that our Charlotte office continues to grow as part of the firm’s strategic expansion plan,” said Brian O’Dell, Bradley’s Litigation Practice Group leader.

In a release, the firm said Marcus has more than two decades of trial experience involving high-stakes, complex business disputes in state and federal courts in North Carolina and in the North Carolina Business Court. His cases have involved intellectual property, securities and financial disputes, insurance coverage matters, contract enforcement, and class actions and personal injury claims. Formerly the partner in charge of Smith Moore Leatherwood’s Charlotte office and chairman of the firm’s Management Committee, Marcus also frequently speaks and writes about business litigation issues.

Marcus received his J.D. with honors from Duke University School of Law and his Bachelor of Arts (cum laude) from Hamilton College.

Formerly the leader of Smith Moore Leatherwood’s Charlotte litigation practice, King represents businesses in matters that include trade secret misappropriation and intellectual property infringement disputes, securities and investment fraud claims, and other contractual and commercial disputes. He has litigated and tried complex bet-the-company cases and other matters in state and federal courts in North Carolina and other states. He also has handled significant matters in the North Carolina Business Court. King is the immediate past chair of the North Carolina Bar Association’s Antitrust and Complex Business Disputes Section.

King received his J.D. from the University of North Carolina School of Law and his Bachelor of Arts (summa cum laude) from Wofford College.

Grimes has 14 years of experience trying and litigating complex civil disputes. He focuses his litigation practice on intellectual property matters involving trademarks, copyrights, and trade secrets. He also litigates commercial matters, business torts and a variety of other civil disputes, including products liability, construction and personal injury claims. Grimes has tried bet-the-company and other high-stakes lawsuits in federal and state courts, including the North Carolina Business Court.

Grimes received his J.D. from Campbell University School of Law and his Bachelor of Science from the University of North Carolina at Wilmington.

Lendino represents clients in disputes involving contracts, business torts, LLCs and partnerships, unfair competition, securities, trade secrets, and class actions. He also represents life insurers and financial institutions in a wide array of matters, and has significant experience litigating before the North Carolina Business Court. He previously served as a clerk for the Honorable John R. Jolly, Jr. in the North Carolina Business Court.

Lendino received his J.D. (cum laude) from Campbell University School of Law, where he was an Editorial Board member of the Campbell Law Review, and his Bachelor of Arts from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

Warren concentrates on commercial litigation in areas that include intellectual property, commercial contracts, securities, and employment. She practices primarily in federal courts and the North Carolina Business Court. She also is active in pro bono activities, which include her volunteer work for Lawyer on the Line and the Council for Children’s Rights.

Warren received her J.D. with honors from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and her Bachelor of Arts from Emory University.