Employees often seek to use an employer’s handbook, code of conduct, or policies as the basis for a breach of contract claim, writes John J. Buckley in a blog on the site of Norris McLaughlin & Marcus.

He describes a recent case in which a company was sued after an employee discovered he had been the victim of identify theft. It was suspected that the compromise came after another employee gave away some of the de-commissioned company computers.

The plaintiff claimed that the company breached its contract to secure the personal information that he submitted in his job application. But the federal district court. The court found that no contractual promise was made in the company’s policies because those policies “existed for the purpose of protecting the company from harm,” not to benefit employees.

Read the article.

Join Our LinkedIn Group

By Stephen F. Pinson
Scott & Scott LLP

Image by Pictures of Money

One of the most overlooked sections in a technology-related contract is the insurance section. Whether that contract involves IT services, development, Software as a Service or Cloud Services, the insurance section is just as important as the other risk-allocating provisions contained in the contract. Yet, in most of the contracts in the industry, the original contract is silent on insurance and there is no insurance provision drafted. This leaves a business customer vulnerable to risks that are not covered by insurance. This discussion will help identify what provisions are actually needed in a contract to properly allocate the risks.

The following is a brief list of insurance provisions that parties should include in technology contracts for the different types of claims scenarios between contracting parties. This list describes how each provision works within the contract and what should be negotiated (this is not an exhaustive list). Parties should negotiate individual and aggregate limits for the types of risks involved.

1. Commercial General Liability – This type of insurance, commonly known as GL, is the most basic form of business liability insurance. This type of insurance protects a business against claims due to injuries, accidents, and negligence. It can protect a business from costs related to bodily injury, property damage, medical expenses, legal costs, judgments, and personal injury claims such as libel and slander. GL is a staple requirement for both the service provider and the business customer, but it will not protect against all risks or threats. To protect a service provider or business customer from more specific types of emerging threats, each party may need to purchase additional liability policies.

2. Professional Liability Insurance, Errors and Omissions – This is also known as E&O insurance and will cover a service provider if it fails to perform according to the requirements in the contract. This coverage will help offset the costs associated with customer claims when the provider’s mistake causes a customer loss. Customers may want to insist on E&O coverage to help bridge the gap between coverage offered by GL or other policies.

3. Automobile Liability – If a service provider will use an automobile in any phase of the work performed for the business, the business should require evidence of automobile insurance. In some cases, the service provider will own no automobiles and therefore may not purchase automobile liability coverage; however, the business customer should require evidence of coverage for exposure related to non-owned and hired automobiles. This coverage protects the service provider and business customer in claims arising from the use of personal or rented vehicles by the service provider’s employees or principals. If dealing with a sole proprietor, proof of personal auto coverage should be required.

4. Workers’ Compensation – If an employee experiences a job-related illness or injury, this policy can help pay for medical expenses and lost income. If a service provider plans to do work onsite at the business customer’s location, the business customer should require evidence of worker’s compensation insurance. In some states, worker’s compensations can be waived by following certain statutory protocols. The agreement should contain a provision that ensures the business customer will have no liability for the service provider’s employees or independent contractors, even if the service provider opted out of workers’ compensation. Additionally, if a service provider has no employees, then Workers’ Compensation is not generally required by the State.

5. Employer’s Liability Insurance – Employer’s liability coverage, known as EPLI, is designed to cover claims like harassment, wrongful termination, and other claims that that are not covered by workers compensation or by a GL insurance policy. The primary goal for requiring this type of insurance is that a business customer will want likely claims the services provider may incur to be covered by insurance. Having uncovered risks may make the service provider less able to continuously provide services in the event of a claim by an employee.

6. Cyber Liability – Cyber liability includes numerous subsets of insurance coverage, and customers should carefully examine the particular coverage because it varies greatly among providers. Cyber Liability coverage should include both first-party liability coverage and third-party liability coverage.

• First-party liability coverage applies to direct costs for responding to a claim incident, such as: (1) notifying clients that their information was compromised or exposed, (2) purchasing credit monitoring services for customers affected by the breach or hacking incident, (3) launching a public relations campaign to restore the reputation of the company affected by the breach, (4) compensating the business for income that it isn’t able to earn while it deals with the fallout of the data breach, and (5) paying a cyber-extortionist who holds data hostage or threatens an attack.
• Third-party liability insurance covers the people and service provider responsible for the systems that allowed a data breach to occur. It offers protection for the service provider and independent contractors who were responsible for the safe storage of the data. The following is a list of coverage types that should be included in some form or another as coverage for a service provider or business customer when they are seeking coverage for the different types of claims scenarios.

Regardless of whether the coverage is first-party or third-party, the contracting parties should examine whether they require the following categories of coverage:

• Network Security and Privacy Liability – This coverage protects the service provider against losses for the failure to protect a customer’s personally identifiable information (SSN, credit card numbers, medical information, passwords, etc.) via theft, unauthorized access, viruses, or denial of service attack.
• Media Communications Liability / Reputation or Brand Protection – This coverage protects against allegations of defamation/libel/slander, invasion or violation of privacy, plagiarism/piracy, copyright/trademark infringement, and other wrongful media communication acts that can hurt a service provider or business customer that is associated with media communications in electronic, print, digital, or broadcast form.
• Data Breach – Data breaches come in many shapes and sizes, but many kinds of cyber incidents, including: malware attacks, malfunctions, insider data breaches, data theft by employees, ransomware, or employee mistakes. Data Breach Insurance may cover these breaches as well as when a hacker targets your service provider or a business customer.
• Data Loss / Interruption of Computer Operations – This type of insurance covers incidents where there is data loss or interruption of computer operations from an inadequate backup or an insured loss, e.g., a disaster that destroys the computer system or virus. This type of coverage can also reimburse losses related to lost income that a service provider or business customer incurs ancillary to a data loss.
• Regulatory Response – Regulatory response insurance protects against fines and defense costs arising from proceedings brought by any regulatory body against either the service provider or those individuals performing regulatory functions within the business customer’s firm when an incident occurs.
• Regulator Defense/Penalties – This insurance covers defense expenses and regulatory fines and penalties imposed by a regulatory agency in connection with a data breach.
• Systems Damage – This insurance covers computer systems that are damaged in retrieving, restoring or replacing any computer programs or other data media.
• Threats or Extortion – This insurance covers incidents where threats or extortion from a hacking attack or virus on a computer system.

7. Umbrella Liability Insurance – Umbrella coverage provides extra liability protection to help protect a service provider or business customer in the event that a loss exceeds the limits of the other policies. There are three basic reasons to maintain an umbrella policy: (1) professional liability insurance can be quickly exhausted by legal defense fees, (2) there are significant business assets to protect, and (3) there are risks of legal claims due to the nature of the products or services provided. This type of insurance is used in situations where “excess liability” kicks in after your commercial general liability coverage has been exhausted. Without this policy in place, a service provider or business customer would be responsible for the additional out of pocket amounts (which can reach into the millions of dollars). Unless that money has been stashed away for such an incident, a lawsuit would have major financial repercussions, without the extra protection of a business umbrella policy.

8. Self-Insured – Some service providers are so well established that they elect to provide self-insurance against many of the risks identified above and to the extent they have third-party insurance, they do not make the third-party coverage available to the customers. In a situation where a service provider will not include insurance language because it is self-insured, the business customer should include language adjusting the limitations of liability sections and indemnification provisions to adequately provide protection in the event of a loss.

Parties to a technology contract should include a provision requiring the other party to provide evidence of the insurance contained in the contract.

Given the regulatory and privacy risks, it is increasingly important to seek advice from experienced counsel when negotiating a technology contract to make sure the risks are adequately assessed and each party’s interests are protected.

Akerman LLP has announced that Christian George has been appointed office managing partner of the Jacksonville office, and Irene Bassel Frick has been appointed office managing partner of the Tampa office.

“Christian and Irene are outstanding stewards of Akerman, who are helping us advance the needs of our clients and achieve impact in the community,” said Andrew Smulian, Akerman Chairman and CEO. “They are valuable additions to our management team and we look forward to their many contributions.”

In a release, the firm said:

George is a partner in Akerman’s Litigation Practice Group and most recently served as the local practice group leader for the Jacksonville office. He is a member of the Board of Governors of the Jacksonville Bar Association and is the president-elect of the Young Lawyers Division of The Florida Bar. George represents businesses and individuals in a broad range of commercial litigation issues, with an emphasis on counseling clients in the financial services sector. His work is recognized by Benchmark Litigation, Jacksonville Business Journal, and other publications.

Frick also is a partner in Akerman’s Litigation Practice Group and is a member of the firm’s Client Experience Team. She previously served as a member of the firm’s Associate Professional Evaluation Committee. In the community, Frick is a founder and member of the Bay Area Legal Services Pearl Society and previously served as the president of the Hillsborough Association for Women Lawyers. She represents businesses, financial institutions and insurers in a variety of business disputes, with an emphasis on class action defense and ERISA litigation. She is recognized for her work by the Florida Association for Women Lawyers as well as The Best Lawyers in America and other publications.

Join Our LinkedIn Group

Sidley Austin LLP announced that Richard Alonso has joined the firm as a partner in its Washington, D.C. office. He will be a member of the firm’s Environmental practice.

Alonso has dealt with the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) regulatory process and has experience with environmental compliance and enforcement issues, including federal and state enforcement defense strategies, the firm said in a news release.

The release continues:

Prior to building a private practice, Alonso served as chief of the Stationary Source Enforcement Branch at the EPA’s Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance. He had earlier served at the EPA in the Water Enforcement Division. During his tenure with the EPA, he had responsibility for enforcing the Clean Air Act (CAA), Clean Water Act and Safe Drinking Water Act. He managed and negotiated CAA enforcement cases, including New Source Review (NSR) cases, with power plants and manufacturing facilities and was instrumental in developing CAA policies and regulations. Alonso also held key roles in cases relating to defeat devices and engine certification requirements under the CAA’s Title II mobile source program. He is known as a national authority on EPA automotive and fuel regulatory programs, including the Renewable Fuels Standard program.

“Rich’s firsthand experience in both private practice and the public sector will make him a valuable asset for our clients looking for advice in addressing their complex environmental challenges at both the federal and state levels,” said David Buente, co-leader of Sidley’s Environmental practice. “We are delighted to welcome Rich to our outstanding team of lawyers dedicated to assisting clients with every aspect of environmental law.”

Alonso represents clients including large trade associations, manufacturers and energy companies in environmental compliance and enforcement matters before both state and federal agencies. He focuses his practice on CAA issues, including NSR applicability and permitting, EPA rulemaking efforts, legal challenges to EPA actions, and CAA enforcement defense and compliance counseling. Mr. Alonso’s CAA experience includes the development of State and Federal Implementation Plans, permitting programs, and policies applicable to stationary sources, fuel regulations, automotive engine certifications and regulation of ozone depleting substances. He has tackled cutting-edge environmental issues for a variety of industrial sectors, including the implementation of climate change regulations, permitting of greenhouse gas emissions, and regulation of methane emissions from oil and gas operations.

Join Our LinkedIn Group

Miller & Chevalier has announced that William P. Barry joined the firm as a member in the Litigation department.

In a news release, the firm said Barry advises clients on securities enforcement and white collar defense matters, with a particular emphasis on representing boards, senior executives, and companies in matters related to Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), anti-money laundering, accounting, and related issues.

The release continues:

Prior to joining Miller & Chevalier, Barry served as a partner at Richards Kibbe & Orbe LLP, counselling public companies, investors, investment and retail banks, and non-U.S. companies seeking investments from U.S. entities.

“I’m pleased to join a firm with experts in a variety of disciplines necessary to cross-border business in today’s marketplace, who advise and protect companies, boards, and individuals in critical junctures,” Barry said. “The goal is to serve your clients best when they need you the most, and I can’t think of a better place to do that than at a firm with nearly a century of tradition, history, and stability whose lawyers operate on the cutting edge of emerging market trends.”

“I’ve known Will personally and professionally for over 25 years,” said Mark Rochon, Chair of Miller & Chevalier’s Litigation practice. “I’ve always been impressed with his judgment, calm assessment of complicated issues, and ability to work well with everyone. He is a dynamic addition to Miller & Chevalier.”

Barry’s move comes on the heels of another key litigation addition, as civil and criminal attorney Preston L. Pugh joined the firm in April.

Barry’s influence expands far beyond his work in the Washington, DC area; he has advised clients with interests around the world, including Brazil, Canada, China, India, Russia, and Switzerland. He was selected by Benchmark Litigation as a National Star for White Collar Crime and Securities Litigation in 2017 and has been recommended by The Legal 500 United States in White Collar Criminal Defense four years running.

“We are very pleased to welcome Will to Miller & Chevalier,” said Anthony F. Shelley, Chair of the firm’s Executive Committee. “His securities enforcement and white collar experience will be a valuable asset to our growing Litigation department.”

A frequent author and speaker on corruption topics, Barry is a member of the American Bar Association’s International Anti-Money Laundering Committee and International Anti-Corruption Committee. He is also the chairman of Olney Boys & Girls Club (OBGC), a non-profit organization that currently serves close to 6,000 children and their families in Maryland. Over the course of its nearly 50-year history, OBGC has provided more than 45,000 children with safe after-school sports programs emphasizing both physical and emotional development.

Barry earned a B.A. from Wesleyan University in 1991 and a J.D. from George Washington University Law School in 1995.

Join Our LinkedIn Group

Commercial litigator Peter J. Most has joined Arent Fox LLP as a partner in the firm’s Los Angeles office. Most joins the firm’s Complex Litigation group and will focus his practice on securities litigation, real estate, commercial fraud, and professional liability.

“We are happy to welcome Peter to the firm,” said Los Angeles Managing Partner Aaron H. Jacoby. “Peter’s success rate in high-stakes securities litigation, as well as other significant financial and real estate disputes, is a great addition to our deep bench of litigators in Los Angeles and across the firm.”

A release from the firm says:

Previously a principal at McKool Smith, Most has experience representing large US financial institutions in connection with their purchases of nearly $1 billion of Parmalat-related securities. Additionally, Most has represented US financial institutions in litigation against Wall Street banks in connection with the purchase of more than $1 billion of Enron and Enron-related securities. He has also represented a large international bank in a $500 million fraud action against another international bank related to the sale of Enron-related derivative securities and structure financings. Each of the matters resolved favorably for Mr. Most’s clients.

Most is the latest addition to Arent Fox’s Complex Litigation practice, which has added highly-regarded commercial litigator, John S. Purcell in Los Angeles and Brian P. Maschler in San Francisco.

In addition to large financial institutions, Mr. Most has represented lenders and borrowers, investment companies, local governments, and real estate developers, among others, in their complex disputes.

Most‘s six-year tenure on the United States District Court Merit Selection Panel for Magistrate Judges recently ended and he currently serves on the Los Angeles County Bar Association’s Judicial Appointments Committee. In addition, Mr. Most serves the Los Angeles Superior Court as both Judge Pro Tern and Mediator. He earned his bachelor’s degree, manga cum laude, from the University of California, Santa Barbara, and his law degree from George Washington University National Law Center.

Join Our LinkedIn Group

Bloomberg BNA, PKF O’Connor Davies LLP, Prairie Capital Advisors, and Sadis & Goldberg LLP will present an exclusive live event on using employee stock ownership plans (ESOPs) to support growth and ownership transition strategies.

The event will be Thursday, June 1, 2017, 3-5:15 p.m., with a reception to follow. The location will be at Bloomberg LP, 120 Park Ave., New York, NY 10017.

On its website, Bloomberg says this program will explore all of the ways in which a business can utilize ESOPs to create favorable conditions for financing, allow for acquisitions, attract top talent, and generate wealth for both owners and employees.

ESOPs are commonly used by an owner seeking to retire, however, in today’s business market of successful start-ups, there’s an opportunity to consider them earlier in the lifecycle of the company. ESOPs, when done properly, may position the company for financing, allow for acquisitions, help attract and retain top talent in a competitive environment, and create wealth for owners and employees.

Register for the event.

Two verdicts won by East Texas law firm Ward, Smith & Hill are among the list of top 100 verdicts from 2016 as compiled by The National Law Journal.

In one of the cases, firm founder Johnny Ward helped VirnetX win a $302 million patent verdict against Apple Inc. After one week of trial, the jury awarded the amount based on Apple’s infringement of four of VirnetX’s internet security patents. The $302 million verdict was the ninth largest verdict overall in the U.S., and fourth largest IP verdict in 2016.

And in the other case, name partner Wes Hill successfully convinced a jury that Apple Inc. willfully infringed on a patent owned by Cellular Communications Equipment resulting in an award of $22 million for past damages. The seven-day trial revealed how Apple knowingly infringed the patent in its iPhones and iPads.

Read about the verdicts.

Image by NY Photographic

The U.S. House of Representatives voted to pass a bill that Republicans have promoted since the Newt Gingrich era, one that would allow private-sector employees to exchange overtime pay for “compensatory time” off, electing to accrue extra hours off rather than extra pay in their wallets, The Washington Post reports. The bill passed 229 to 197, largely along party lines.

“Under the proposed changes, eligible employees — if their employer decides to offer the option — would be able to voluntarily choose to receive comp time they can bank and use at a future date in lieu of immediate overtime pay in their paychecks,” reporter Jena McGregor explains. “If they change their minds and want the pay after all, employees would have the option of ‘cashing out,’ with the employer required to pay the overtime within 30 days.

Some opponents of the legislation say they worry that employers will feel pressured to choose comp time.

Read the Washington Post article.

Join Our LinkedIn Group

The top lawyer at Fox News finds herself the subject of speculation about whether she may be following the company’s former president out the door in the wake of complaints of sexual harassment or racial discrimination at the network.

Financial Times reports that Dianne Brandi, executive vice president of legal and business affairs, is named in three lawsuits that the network is contesting.

In one of the suits, Andrea Tantaros, a Fox News host, filed a suit against the company and Brandi, alleging that Brandi failed to investigate allegations of misconduct. Fox News and Brandi have denied the allegations in all the suits.

The Washington Post reports that Brandi was one of the senior executives “who engaged in a concerted effort to silence Tantaros by threats, humiliation, and retaliation.”

Hollywood Reporter has a story saying that Brandi is particularly vulnerable if more heads roll at Fox News.

Read The Washington Post article.

Read the Financial Times article.

Join Our LinkedIn Group

Bloomberg is reporting that Kimberly-Clark Corp. sued its spinoff Halyard Health Inc., claiming it wrongfully refused to pick up the entire tab for a $454 million verdict against the companies over the safety of some of their surgical gowns.

The plaintiff claims Halyard agreed to indemnify Kimberly-Clark for all costs tied to a lawsuit that accused the companies of misleading consumers about the safety of their MicroCool surgical gowns.

In its suit, Kimberly-Clark claims that Halyard must pay its $350 million punitive-damages portion of the jury verdict in the class-action case, reports Jef Feeley.

Halyard Health, which makes surgical masks, gloves and pain-pump accessories, filed its own suit in California, claiming it’s not obligated to cover litigation costs.

Read the Bloomberg article.

Join Our LinkedIn Group

The U.S. Justice Department has accused UnitedHealth Group Inc. of obtaining inflated payments from the government based on inaccurate information about the health status of patients enrolled in its largest Medicare Advantage Plan, Reuters is reporting.

The accusation against the company is the latest, following separate lawsuits in two separate whistleblower lawsuits against the country’s largest health insurer.

“Medicare Advantage, an alternative to the standard fee-for-service Medicare in which private insurers manage health benefits, is the fastest growing form of government healthcare, with enrollment of 18 million people last year,” writes reporter Nate Raymond.

A UnitedHealth spokesman said the company rejects the claims and will contest them vigorously.

Read the Reuters article.

Join Our LinkedIn Group

Blank Rome LLP announces that Elizabeth E. Klingensmith has joined the firm as a partner in the Corporate Litigation group and member of the Energy industry team. She is based in the firm’s Houston office and joins Blank Rome from Haynes and Boone, LLP.

Klingensmith is the latest addition to the firm’s Houston office, which has experienced steady growth since opening six years ago.

In a news release, the firm said:

Blank Rome launched its Houston presence when it combined with Abrams, Scott & Bickley in June 2011, adding leading litigation attorneys with significant energy industry experience. The firm continued its growth in Houston with the addition of the maritime lawyers of Bell, Ryniker & Letourneau, P.C., in August 2013. Two years later, Blank Rome added 23 attorneys and additional staff from the intellectual property law firm of Wong, Cabello, Lutsch, Rutherford & Brucculeri L.L.P. The Houston office continued to diversify in 2016, adding three attorneys in the labor & employment, real estate, and intellectual property and technology groups. The Firm also continues to expand its national energy team, most recently welcoming Partners Amy L. Barrette and Jeremy A. Mercer from Norton Rose Fulbright in its Pittsburgh office.

“We’re thrilled that Liz is joining us in Houston,” said Alan Hoffman, Blank Rome’s Chairman and Managing Partner. “Liz is a natural go-getter and our Houston office and energy industry team will provide her with the opportunity to further develop her already strong energy litigation practice. Liz is also passionate about engaging young and diverse professionals within the energy sector and we look forward to the mentorship she’ll provide for young attorneys at Blank Rome and beyond.”

Klingensmith’s primary focus is oil and gas litigation. She routinely represents large and small companies in disputes arising from oil and gas operations and transactions in Texas and North Dakota. She has also counseled oil and gas clients in Oklahoma and Louisiana on a pro hac vice basis. Whether in a small-town courtroom or before an arbitration panel comprised of industry experts, she comes prepared with an understanding of the law and facts, and a full appreciation of her clients’ business objectives. She capably simplifies complex issues into a persuasive story whether for judge, jury, or mediator.

“Liz is an all-around talented litigator with impressive experience in the oil and gas sector. There are natural synergies between the energy markets in Houston, Pittsburgh, and Philadelphia, particularly as it relates to Marcellus Shale work, and Liz will be a great asset to our teams and our clients in these regions,” said Barry Abrams, Administrative Partner of Blank Rome’s Houston office.

In addition to her energy-focused work, Klingensmith frequently handles commercial disputes in the construction, real estate, transportation, banking, and professional services industries. She has extensive experience with disputes that involve claims for breach of contract, fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, post-judgment enforcement, theft of trade secrets, breach of employment agreements, conversion, and declaratory judgment.

“I am very excited to join such a highly regarded and accomplished team of attorneys in Blank Rome’s Houston office,” said Ms. Klingensmith. “It was evident from my first meeting with Blank Rome just how much head and heart the Firm put into establishing and building the Houston office. I cannot wait to continue to build the Firm’s profile in Houston, and collaborate with the Firm’s deep bench of talent in other offices. I know this new chapter at Blank Rome will serve my clients well.”

Klingensmith serves as the Young Energy Professionals Committee Chair for the Institute for Energy Law, and is passionate about engaging the next generation of energy professionals. The YEP Committee held its first National Young Energy Professionals Law Conference in March 2017.

Klingensmith received her B.A. and B.M. from Rice University and her J.D. from the University of Houston Law Center.

Join Our LinkedIn Group

Veteran energy company in-house counsel Todd L. Grimmett has joined The Lanier Law Firm as a member of the commercial litigation team. His hiring bolsters the firm’s growing focus on lawsuits affecting the oil and gas industry, the firm said in a news release.

Grimmett most recently served as an in-house counsel for Oklahoma City-based Chesapeake Energy Corp., one of the nation’s largest natural gas producers. For the past six years, Grimmett represented Chesapeake in a number of civil litigation matters and provided legal counsel for the company’s upstream and midstream divisions. In addition, he directed responses to regulatory inquiries and investigations and was responsible for managing the company’s e-discovery department.

Before joining Chesapeake in 2011, he served as a trial lawyer with several Oklahoma-based law firms and tried cases in jurisdictions throughout the Southwest.

“Todd is an exceptional young lawyer with a deep understanding of the energy sector as well as a wealth of practical experience in the courtroom,” said Mark Lanier, who founded the firm nearly 25 years ago. “This combination of skills will be a great asset as we take on an increasing number of cases related to oil and gas disputes, as well as other civil ligation matters.”

In his new role, Grimmett is reunited with Regan E. Bradford, former Deputy General Counsel and Assistant Corporate Secretary for Chesapeake, who joined the Lanier Law Firm in 2016.

Grimmett earned his law degree in 2006 from the University of Oklahoma College of Law, and served as an intern in the office of the Oklahoma Attorney General while in law school. He received his undergraduate degree in business administration from Oklahoma State University in 2001.

The firm has offices in Houston, Los Angeles, and New York.

Join Our LinkedIn Group

Freeborn & Peters LLP announces that Chad J. Richman and Neal L. Wolf have joined the firm’s Chicago office as partners. Richman is a member of the firm’s Real Estate Practice Group and Wolf is a member of Freeborn’s Bankruptcy and Financial Restructuring Practice Group.

Richman has experience in a broad range of real estate, finance, transactional and general business matters. His real estate practice includes acquisitions and dispositions, development, leasing, fund formation, venture structuring, and complex financing involving all types of real estate uses. Mr. Richman also regularly represents publicly and privately held companies on a wide spectrum of structuring and operational issues.

Richman gained experience in transactional real estate while practicing at the global law firm of DLA Piper. Prior to practicing law, he participated in the development of a mixed-use property in downtown Chicago and also served as a judicial extern to the Honorable Ronald A. Guzman in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. Richman graduated from The John Marshall Law School ranked first in his law school class and received his Bachelor of Arts from Miami University.

Wolf focuses his practice in the areas of business reorganizations, workouts, debt restructuring and business bankruptcy, as well as business litigation. His diverse insolvency and bankruptcy practice experience has involved the representation of secured and unsecured creditors, creditors’ committees, debtors, trustees, liquidating trusts, lessors, and purchasers of stock or assets of insolvent entities. His business litigation experience has included the successful trial and arbitration of cases involving a broad spectrum of issues, including but not limited to the Uniform Commercial Code, “lender liability” law, fraudulent conveyance avoidance, preference avoidance, partnership disputes, state and federal securities law issues, business torts, and contract law.

In the course of his career, Wolf has appeared in the federal and state courts and regulatory agencies of more than 40 states and the Territory of Puerto Rico.

Most recently, Wolf was a partner at Tetzlaff Law Offices LLC in Chicago. He previously practiced at Much Shelist, P.C.; the former Dewey & LeBoeuf LLP; Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP and Winston & Strawn LLP.

Neal is a Fellow of the American College of Bankruptcy. He earned his J.D. from the University of Chicago Law School and his Bachelor of Arts (magna cum laude) from Princeton University.

Join Our LinkedIn Group

Hogan Lovells announced that Jason Hadges will join the firm’s Government Regulatory practice group as a partner in the Washington D.C. office, working in the firm’s Pharmaceuticals and Biotechnology Regulatory Practice.

“There are few attorneys with the substantial first-hand regulatory experience that Jason has gained throughout his career at DEA and FDA,” said Alice Valder Curran, Head of Hogan Lovells Government Regulatory Practice Group. “His deep knowledge and familiarity with the relevant laws, agency policies and precedents will offer our life sciences clients a particularly informed perspective on regulatory issues, especially with regard to enforcement actions.”

Hadges joins the firm after five years in the Office of Chief Counsel of the US Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), where he was a senior attorney in the Diversion and Regulatory Litigation Section. Before DEA, Hadges spent more than eight years at the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), as an Associate Chief Counsel in the Office of Chief Counsel, where he focused on criminal enforcement and counseling FDA’s Office of Criminal Investigations. During that period he also served as a Special Assistant US Attorney on a number of prosecutions. His legal career started as a criminal defense attorney in the US Navy Judge Advocate General’s Corps.

“Jason’s experience, coupled with his keen analytical skills and practical, results-oriented approach, will be a significant addition to our enforcement and compliance capabilities, especially with regard to controlled substances, but also pharmaceutical products more broadly,” said Philip Katz, chair of the firm’s Pharmaceuticals and Biotechnology Practice. “DEA and FDA compliance is a large and growing part of our work, both anticipatorily and in response to agency inspections and enforcement actions. Jason joins and further bolsters the strong team we have in place, and allows us to do even more for our clients around the globe.”

“I am looking forward to joining and collaborating with the Hogan Lovells lawyers, who are well known for providing smart, creative, and practical advice to the complex legal issues faced by their pharmaceutical and biotechnology clients,” said Hadges. “Our shared goal is to continue expanding the firm’s ability to provide knowledgeable counsel and advocacy to help clients successfully operate businesses in highly regulated environments, and I’m excited to get started.”

Hadges earned his J.D., summa cum laude, from The American University, Washington College of Law and a B.A. from Duke University.

Join Our LinkedIn Group

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP, announced that Kalidou Gadio has joined the firm’s Washington, D.C., office as a partner and co-chair of its Africa and Middle East/North Africa (MENA) practice. Gadio joins from the African Development Bank, where he served as general counsel.

The African Development Bank is a multilateral development finance institution established to contribute to the economic development and social progress of African countries. One of only five such organizations in the world, the bank invests billions of dollars annually in the continent. As general counsel, Gadio advised the bank’s board of governors through two capital replenishment cycles, including the organization’s largest general capital increase of $100 billion. He joined the bank in 1989, serving in various leadership positions until being named chief legal officer in 2008.

At Manatt, Gadio will advise companies and entrepreneurs on entering and navigating emerging markets, identifying opportunities and mitigating risks. He will also counsel foreign governments and development institutions on initiatives such as legislative reforms, financial policies and institutional strengthening.

“Kalidou has a very unique background, combining practical project finance and corporate experience with a sophisticated understanding of international law,” said William T. Quicksilver, Manatt’s chief executive officer and managing partner. “Having worked with government leaders and executives in Africa and from around the globe, he is finely attuned to opportunities in cross-border finance and investment. His credentials will resonate with clients doing business internationally, especially in Africa and the Middle East, and he is a significant addition to the firm.”

Gadio’s practice will also focus on advising government and private-sector clients on international project finance and public-private partnerships, including joint ventures, project structures, legal due diligence, risk allocation, financing arrangements (bank and bond), and relevant security packages and considerations. Gadio will also advise private equity funds as they continue to invest in Africa. He will work closely with Africa and MENA practice co-chair Douglas Boggs.

“Technology and innovation are driving tremendous growth in Africa and the Middle East, particularly in the areas of infrastructure and energy,” said Boggs, who also serves as Manatt’s Washington, D.C., office administrative partner. “And private-sector investment is a critical partner in that growth. The opportunities for Western businesses and investors are significant, but require a thorough understanding of the political and financial realities on the ground, as well as developed relationships with players at the highest levels. Having worked with Kalidou for many years at the African Development Bank, I can confidently say he has both. We are thrilled to welcome Kalidou to Manatt.”

Gadio added, “Africa represents a new frontier for business and economic development. The continent is in the midst of an unprecedented transformation, with advances in the areas of policy, industry and infrastructure improving the quality of life for the people of Africa, which has been my life’s work. When I decided to return to private practice, it was important to me that it be at a nimble, forward-thinking firm that appreciated the big picture while executing the details flawlessly. In Manatt, I’ve found that, along with the entrepreneurial spirit and high-level experience in international project finance, technology and private equity that I was looking for. I’m energized by the possibilities and excited to begin working with clients.”

After earning undergraduate degrees from the University of Mohamed V and the Institut d’Etudes Judiciaires of Paris, France, Gadio received a post master degree from the Sorbonne, University of Paris II. He studied at the Paris Bar Training Center and earned his LL.M. from Harvard Law School.

Join Our LinkedIn Group

Valin L. Woodward has joined Langley & Banack, Inc. in its New Braunfels, Texas office. Woodward is a native of New Braunfels and an active member of the community.

The primary focus of Woodward’s practice is family law, including divorce, property divisions, child custody, child support, enforcement, modification, paternity, grandparent access, termination and adoptions, and pre- and post-marital agreements. She also assists clients with the preparation of wills, durable powers of attorney, medical powers of attorney and directives to physicians. Woodward has experience with the probate of wills and other heirship proceedings.

Woodward is a Fellow of the State Bar of Texas, and admitted to practice in United States District Court: Western, Southern, Eastern, and Northern Districts of Texas; U.S. Court of Appeals, 5th Circuit; U.S. Court of Appeals, 11th Circuit; and the Supreme Court of the United States.

Woodward holds a bachelor’s degree from The University of Texas at Austin where she graduated cum laude, and a Juris Doctorate from St. Mary’s University School of Law, graduating with honors.

Langley & Banack, Inc. is one of San Antonio’s largest locally owned and operated law firms, the firm said in a news release. The New Braunfels office currently is led by Justin Morley.

Join Our LinkedIn Group

Timothy J. Muris has joined Sidley Austin LLP as senior counsel in the firm’s Antitrust/Competition practice.

Muris, a former chairman of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), has experience inantitrust enforcement as well as in key consumer protection issues, including advertising, consumer finance and privacy regulation, the firm said in a release.

The release continues:

During his lengthy tenure with the FTC, Muris held multiple high-level posts and was the only person ever to direct both of the FTC’s enforcement bureaus. It was under his leadership that the FTC established the National Do Not Call Registry and brought numerous high-profile cases against firms for misusing government practices to raise prices. He also led the agency’s efforts to bring lawsuits against physicians for price-fixing and in challenging fraudulent and deceptive advertising and health claims to protect consumers. In addition, Muris is responsible for spearheading the FTC’s efforts to implement increased antitrust scrutiny of intellectual property issues and hospital mergers.

Muris has also spent a significant amount of time in private practice representing clients before the FTC, the U.S. Department of Justice and the European Commission as well as other domestic and international agencies. He regularly advises clients on antitrust issues in high-stakes mergers and acquisitions, as well as on important consumer protection issues pertaining to advertising, consumer finance and privacy. He serves as a George Mason University foundation professor at the Antonin Scalia Law School, a post he’s held since 1988.

“Tim is recognized as being among the best antitrust lawyers in the U.S. and we are delighted he chose to join Sidley,” said Mark Hopson, managing partner of Sidley’s Washington, D.C. office. “He’s earned the respect of both the business and government communities for his vast knowledge of antitrust and consumer protection practices. Having Tim on our team puts us in an enviable position and adds to our already considerable capabilities in helping clients navigate these challenging issues.”

Join Our LinkedIn Group

Sometimes a temporary restraining order, or TRO, can provide immediate relief from the court system when a party can show irreparable harm will be caused if someone is allowed to remain in control of assets that belong to the company, according to an article posted on the website of Mehendru P.C.

“It may be that a competitor has interfered with a business contract, an employee has stolen your trade secrets or breached a non-compete agreement, or a business partner has stolen from your company.  You have to go to court to protect the company though you’d rather not,” the post reads.

A judge can grant a TRO to stop an individual’s actions even without that person or his lawyer being in court. And a TRO provides immediate relief from the court system when a party can show irreparable harm will be caused if someone is allowed to remain in control of assets that belong to the company.

Read the article.

Join Our LinkedIn Group