For the fifth consecutive year, Texas Lawyer has named Androvett Legal Media and Marketing the best public relations firm for the legal community in 2016.

The company has offices in Dallas and Houston.

On its website, the company says it works  exclusively with law firms and the media.

“We help law firms better market their services through public relations and advertising while supporting their attorneys and clients in their interactions with the media. We also assist reporters and editors by providing important background information and arranging timely interviews with legal experts on a wide range of subjects,” it says.

Read about the award.

Join Our LinkedIn Group

Law firm partners have figured out how to increase profits per partner in the face of a declining demand. Firms, on the other hand, have an unsustainable model that remains largely intact even as clients are seeking options, writes Mark A. Cohen for Forbes.

He sees the explosive growth of in-house legal departments as possibly the biggest impact of the fiscal crisis.

“It’s easy to dismiss ‘insourcing’  legal work as labor arbitrage. But the more fundamental reason for in-house growth is law firms’ inability to deliver legal expertise and value — as well as to integrate technology and process in delivery. The value deficiency is linked to the traditional firm model and culture,” he writes.

He lists some of the reasons corporate legal departments now comprise about 45 percent of total legal spend.

Read the Forbes article.

Legal profession guru Brad Hildebrandt, CEO at Hildebrandt Consulting, says law firm associates shouldn’t be overly worried by their firms’ lackluster revenue growth in 2016, even though revenue growth could stay modest in 2017.

Hildebrandt shared his thoughts with Bloomberg Law following the release of a report from in Citi Private Bank Law Firm Group and Hildebrandt Consulting, which analyzed a Citi survey of about 200 U.S. law firms about their revenue growth and demand this year.

“With capital markets starting to pick up, and a change in the presidential administration, ‘depending how it all sets up,’ there could be a flood of initial public offerings and transactions that spur an increase in demand for law firms’ services,” writes Bloomberg’s Gabe Friedman.

Read the Bloomberg article.

Join Our LinkedIn Group

Image by C_osett

General Motors Co. said late Tuesday it has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to reverse a 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decision that has opened GM to potentially billions of dollars in lawsuits related to pre-bankruptcy claims over defective ignition switches, reports The Detroit News.

Reporter Melissa Burden explains that GM was protected from some liabilities prior to its bankruptcy restructuring, but that protection did not extend to post-restructuring after 2009.

“A number of injury, wrongful death and economic loss lawsuits have been filed against GM over its faulty ignition switches and recall of nearly 2.6 million older vehicles in 2014,” she writes. “GM has admitted it knew of the defect for years but did not recall the cars for more than a decade and has paid fines to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and the Department of Justice.”

Read the Detroit News article.

A lawyer for former National Football League players seeking damages and medical treatment for brain injuries suffered while playing football says the U.S. Supreme Court’s rejection of a legal challenge to a $1 billion settlement from the NFL means players can get the help they need, according to a post on the website of Androvett Legal Media & Marketing.

Matthew Matheny, a lawyer with Provost Umphrey LLP in Beaumont, who represented some of the players said:

“We are very pleased that today the United States Supreme Court rejected the appeals of a very few objectors to the NFL concussion settlement. The court’s decision should allow the settlement to become final and effective, meaning that thousands of former players will soon have the opportunity to receive the medical screening, diagnosis and treatment – as well as the compensation – they deserve. We expect the details of the baseline assessment and compensation programs to be forthcoming.”

The law firm Greensfelder, Hemker & Gale, P.C. announces that attorney Todd S. Parkhurst has joined the firm as of counsel and a member of the Intellectual Property Practice Group in Chicago.

Most recently a partner with Hughes Socol Piers Resnick & Dym, Ltd., in Chicago, Parkhurst has more than 40 years of experience in litigation, transactions and counseling in patent, trademark, copyright and trade secret law. Previously, he created and led the intellectual property practices in Chicago at the law firms Jenner & Block, Schiff Hardin and Holland & Knight LLP.

“Todd is a great addition to our Chicago office and Greensfelder’s team of highly skilled intellectual property attorneys,” said David B. Goodman, Managing Officer of Greensfelder’s Chicago office. “Todd not only brings decades of experience in litigation, transactions and counseling, but he also has a proven track record of leadership that will help us continue to grow our Chicago office and enhance our services to clients throughout the Midwest and the nation.”

In a news release, the firm said:

Parkhurst has handled IP litigation involving computer software, video games, hand and machine tools, electronic lighting controls and numerous other devices. His copyright infringement litigation experience includes games, books, financial transactions software and illegal movie downloads.

Parkhurst has registered hundreds of trademarks and prepared numerous use and infringement opinions. He is experienced in opposition, cancellation and concurrent-use proceedings and has represented publishing companies in all phases of copyright and related matters. He also has extensive experience prosecuting patent applications and handling all subsequent solicitation activity in diverse technology areas, including all corresponding foreign patent prosecution. He is familiar with European Patent Convention and Patent Cooperation Treaty prosecution and has authored numerous infringement opinions.

Parkhurst’s counseling and transactions work has included complex license negotiations and preparation of patent, trade secret and know-how, trademark, and other licenses and agreements. He also has negotiated and prepared intellectual property transfers in a number of corporate acquisitions, mergers and divestitures.

Parkhurst earned his law degree from the University of Pennsylvania and he holds a Bachelor of Science from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

Practical Law’s Mel Gates and Zach Ratzman on Thursday, January 12, 2017, at 1:00 p.m. Eastern will present a free, 75-minute webinar that will explain recent data breach trends affecting state and local governments and provide tips on how to prepare for and help prevent a data breach or other cyber event . . . before it happens.

Topics will include:

• Why state and local governments should be thinking about data breaches and other cyber events.
• Federal and state laws concerning personal information, data security, and breach notification.
• What reasonable security measures are and how they can impact a government entity’s regulatory and litigation exposure.
• The basics on today’s cyber threats with recent case studies of data breaches that have affected state and local governments.
• Recommendations on how government lawyers can play a key role in protecting their organizations.

A short Q&A will follow.

Presenters:

Mel Gates, Senior Legal Editor, Privacy & Data Security, Practical Law
Melodi (Mel) Gates, CIPP/US joined Practical Law from Squire Patton Boggs (US) LLP, where she was a senior associate focusing on cybersecurity and privacy issues, including in the health information technology field. Prior to practicing law, Mel worked for over twenty years in the telecommunications industry, last serving as chief information security officer (CISO) for a large network provider. She is also an appointed member of the Department of Homeland Security’s Data Privacy and Integrity Advisory Committee (DPIAC).

Zach Ratzman, Director of Public Sector, Practical Law
Zach Ratzman joined Practical Law from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s Office of the General Counsel in Washington, DC, where he advised senior DHS leadership on privacy, information sharing, and congressional oversight matters. Before that, Zach worked for nearly a decade at several major New York City law firms, where his practice focused on securities and accounting fraud litigation. Before entering private practice, he clerked for the late Honorable Harold Baer, Jr. in the Southern District of New York. Zach is the Director of Practical Law’s Public Sector Service.

Register for the webinar.

By Robert J. Scott
Scott & Scott LLP

It has been said that software is the new oil. It fuels the information revolution. And in this metaphor, software audits are the meters that measure the flow—and extract maximum revenue for software makers. The auditors arrive on your company doorstep to “true up” your license and make sure you’re paying for all the software your employees are using. They probe and flag noncompliance.

Gartner Research Group has estimated that 68% of organizations will have their software assets audited in the next 12 months. This is up from 63% in 2013 and continues the upward trend of the recent past. In fact, every major software maker has embraced a strategy of revenue enhancement via software licensing audits, including IBM, Microsoft and Oracle.

Software audits are usually not a pleasant experience. The scripts that auditors use to discover illicit use of software (intentional or not) can themselves create problems in your IT infrastructure, consume valuable staff resources and money, and negatively impact your bottom line. Software publishers don’t typically telegraph their audits, which means an audit can trigger large unbudgeted payments for penalties and other hard and soft costs that impact financial performance. Following each unsuccessful audit, there’s a greater chance your company will be audited again and every audit is time-consuming, stressful and potentially damaging to your bottom line.

So what can be done?

First, companies can push back on software audits. Most businesses have more room to negotiate an audit than they realize. Second, you should have audit response policies in place to ensure that audits are dealt with in a systematic way rather than the typical “reactive mode.” Lastly, you should start thinking and treating your software licenses like fixed-assets that are carefully tracked and managed in your financial reports, which should lead to better outcomes.

More than six decades ago, business got on board the computer revolution. Now every company is racing into “digital transformation.” Technology is ubiquitous and software keeps it all running, across the globe. So it’s no wonder software audits have become so common-place for enterprises big and small. They are now a part of life, which means that now is the time for your business to put in place management practices to alleviate the stress and financial burden of software audits. Scott & Scott has defended over 500 software audits over the last ten years. If you are interested in benefiting from this experience, reach out to us and learn how we help client’s manage the risk of software audits.

Exterro has published a white paper titled “Top 10 E-Discovery Cases of 2016,” which reviews the top e-discovery cases of 2016 and their implications for practitioners.

It’s been a year since the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure were amended. That’s why reviewing some of the most defining cases in e-discovery during 2016 is vital when it comes to understanding how courts define these new amendments, according to the company.

This white paper discusses:

• The top 10 most viewed or downloaded cases in 2016 from Exterro’s E-Discovery Case Law Library
• Simplified case briefs with the key case takeaways and issues
• Expert analysis and resources to help solve or prevent the same mistakes made in these cases

Download the white paper.

In-house counsel and company executives who can make decisions need to attend hearings to see what they’re getting for their legal fees, patent judges said conference sponsored by University of California Berkeley Center for Law & Technology and Stanford Law School.

In its report on the conference, Bloomberg Law quotes Judge James Donato, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California: “I am amazed that you all don’t show up with more regularity, particularly when you’re looking at a summary judgment motion or have a Markman” hearing on claims construction “or some other significant proceeding where you have spent in all likelihood six figures in legal fees and costs to get that thing ready for me to decide.”

Judge Ron Clark, chief judge for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, requires the general counsel or a corporate-level decision maker to attend hearings either in person or via phone to understand what’s happening and what the court demands, according to the Bloomberg report.

Read the Bloomberg article.

RSA has witnessed a huge uptick in targeted phishing email attacks in recent months, the company reports on its website.

“In Q2 alone, RSA identified more than 515,000 phishing attacks in the global market — a 115% rise over Q1 2016 and a remarkable 308% increase over the same time period last year,” writes Heidi Bleau. “The U.S. continued to be the most attacked country, with 48% of global phishing volume, as well as the top hosting country, hosting 60% of all global phishing attacks.  The total cost to global organizations from phishing: $9.1 billion.”

RSA describes a new fraud tutorial, called “Jungle Money,” found in an underground forum. The tutorial tells fraudsters how to create a network of private e-Wallet accounts that are converted through online store merchant services and funneled into a business class e-Wallet account. Following the instructions, a scammer can be protected from discovery by making it difficult to tie the different accounts to one another.

“The scheme includes creating a number of shell accounts via Virtual Credit Cards (VCC), as well as multiple shell e-Wallet accounts, and using them to ‘juggle’ funds between the accounts by charging one account against another for a purchase or service. They then quickly request a chargeback from one of the accounts, thereby receiving a full refund and quickly cashing out the funds,” according to the report.

Read the article and download the report.

A lawsuit that accused a Fort Worth lawyer of cheating another lawyer out of his share of legal fees in the $51 million Chesapeake Energy settlement has been dismissed, reports The Fort Worth Star-Telegram.

A state district judge in Fort Worth shut down the litigation against Dan McDonald in which attorney Jim Ward was seeking up to a third of the millions in legal fees stemming from the Chesapeake case.

“In May, McDonald announced the settlement of his massive lawsuit against Chesapeake, once the face of the Barnett Shale gas drilling boom. In about 400 lawsuits representing more than 13,000 clients, McDonald accused Chesapeake of deducting higher-than-necessary production costs from royalty checks,” writes reporter Max B. Baker.

Read the Star-Telegram article.

A unanimous panel of the Sixth Circuit recently rejected a manufacturer’s attempt to compel arbitration under an expired contract in Linglong Americas, Inc. v. Horizon Tire, Inc., reports Butler Snow LLP.

Erin Palmer Polly explains that the manufacturer and its distributor entered into a collaboration agreement that contained an arbitration clause.

“The agreement expired and was not renewed, but the manufacturer and its distributor continued to work together and continued to make various representations of continued involvement,” she writes. “Approximately three years after the agreement expired, the parties’ relationship deteriorated and resulted in a federal court lawsuit.  The manufacturer attempted to compel arbitration and pointed to the arbitration provision in the collaboration agreement.”

She points to two important lessons to be learned from the case.

Read the article.

The Arbitration Nation blog provides a good example of how drafting arbitration agreements can go wrong, pointing to the Tenth Circuit’s ruling in Ragab v. Howard, in which a majority of the panel concluded that because the parties had six differing arbitration agreements, they had never reached a meeting of the minds on arbitration and their dispute would stay in court.

“The parties had six agreements that governed their business relationship. Each agreement had an arbitration agreement,” writes Liz Kramer in the Stinson Leonard Street blog. “But, those arbitration agreements did not provide for the same set of rules to govern the arbitration, or the same method of choosing an arbitrator, or the same notice period before arbitration, or the same opportunity to recover attorneys’ fees.  Even so, when Mr. Ragab sued the defendants for misrepresentation and statutory violations, the defendants moved to compel arbitration.”

Read the article.

Rusty Hardin & Associates, LLP, has added two lawyers to its team at the same time it is being recognized for both civil and criminal legal expertise and accomplishments among the nation’s Best Law Firms by U.S. News & World Report and The Best Lawyers in America, the firm said in a news release.

 “This is a great time for the hard-working team at our firm. We’ve added two terrific lawyers and we’ve been acknowledged by a national group for both our criminal and civil work,” said founding partner Rusty Hardin.

Attorney Chelsea Dal Corso joins Rusty Hardin & Associates from Bracewell, LLP, where she worked in the financial restructuring group, representing debtors and creditors in complex Chapter 11 proceedings. She clerked for Judge Marvin Isgur, U.S. Bankruptcy Judge for the Southern District of Texas. She earned her law degree from the University of Southern California Gould School of Law.

Lawyer Naomi Howard joins the firm from the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, where she served as briefing attorney. She received her law degree at St. Mary’s University School of Law in San Antonio. Ms. Howard also spent time in Japan where she taught English and is one of few women to have trained as a sushi chef.

The firm is listed in the 2017 top tier of Houston metropolitan law firms for white-collar criminal defense and in the second tier for commercial litigation. It is extraordinary for a firm of only 14 lawyers to be honored in two such different categories. The Best Law Firms selection is based on a rigorous process that includes client and lawyer evaluations and peer review from other attorneys in the same practice areas.

Read more.

A series of security breaches that stuck prestigious law firms last year was more pervasive than reported and was carried out by people with ties to the Chinese government, according to evidence reported by Fortune.

In the cases studied by the magazine, hackers broke into BigLaw firm partners’ email accounts and passed messages from their victims’ in-boxes to outside servers.

“The evidence obtained by Fortune did not disclose a clear motive for the attack but did show the names of law firm partners targeted by the hackers,” writes reporter Jeff John Roberts. “The practice areas of those partners include mergers and acquisitions and intellectual property, suggesting the goal of the email theft may indeed have been economic in nature.”

Read the Fortune article.

Photo by Brian Solis

A company’s board of directors is supposed to act in the best interests of shareholders, but that doesn’t always seem to be the case in Silicon Valley, where some chief executives are capable of driving boards to act in their own interests, according to a commentary in MarketWatch.

As an example of worrisome corporate governance in the tech mecca, writers Therese Poletti and Jeremy C. Owens point to new information that shows the relationship between a Facebook Inc. board member and Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg. Reports cover recently unsealed documents in a shareholder lawsuit that contends Facebook’s recent stock split with a new class of nonvoting stock is tantamount to “granting Zuckerberg billions of dollars in equity, for which he will not pay anything.”

The reports also reveal that board member and venture capitalist Marc Andreessen helped Zuckerberg prepare for questions from a Facebook special committee of the board that reviewed the three-way stock split.

Read the MarketWatch article.

The president and chief operating officer of Texas-based Adeptus Health is the latest executive out the door at the nation’s largest operator of freestanding emergency facilities, reports The Dallas Morning News.

Graham Cherrington is the second executive to leave the embattled company suddenly in recent months, following a disappointing $11.7 million loss in third quarter. He follows longtime chief executive officer Thomas Hall, whose retirement was accelerated to November, writes reporter Sabriya Rice.

“The company went public with its freestanding emergency room model in June 2014, and now operates more than 90 facilities across the United States.  In 2015 it generated $365 million in revenue,” she writes. “Shares plummeted in November following the disappointing loss and an unexpected request to secure $27.5 million in emergency financing from investors.”

Read the Dallas News article.

Nick Szabo, the man widely credited with inventing the smart contract concept, says smart contracts will not rid the world of lawyers, despite the greatest efforts of blockchain innovators, reports CoinDesk.

Szabo gave the keynote address at the Smart Contracts Symposium at Microsoft’s New York headquarters.

Reporter Michael del Castillo quoted Szabo as saying, “Lawyers worried about losing their jobs to robots, you’re actually doing something that’s mostly complimentary to a smart contract. Smart contracts are mostly making possible new things that haven’t been done before.”

Read theCoinDesk article.

Cloud-based services and data services are creating new contract challenges for service providers— and their customers, write Glynna Christian and Molly Bright in an article posted on the website of Kaye Scholer.

“Many of these issues relate to the myriad changing pass-through terms required by a service provider’s own network of underlying agreements with the sub-providers of the services and data needed to make the service provider’s cloud-based services operate,” they write. “These agreements may include arrangements with cloud infrastructure providers, software providers and data providers that often require the service provider to ensure that its customers comply with acceptable use policies, limitations of liability, indemnification and intellectual property licensing or other content requirements.”

In some cases, a service provider can incorporate these terms into its customer agreements by embedding hyperlinks to these contract terms in its customer agreements.

Read the article.