Law And More

Tech Lawyers Working for Piece of Action: What if David Einhorn Right about Bubble?

Around the nation there are law firms with tech practices. Some are doing work for startups and even more established tech entities for a piece of the action. Mostly that means equity. Well, they might re-think that mode of compensation.

If hedge fund player David Einhorn is on the money, the current high estimates of the value of tech enterprises could come crashing down. Head of Greenlight Capital, Einhorn views what is going on as the second tech bubble. Many of us remember when the dot.coms went into free fall. Here is Bloomberg coverage of Einhorn's thinking. He had called the implosion of Lehman Brothers right.

Already, the Nasdaq Composite Index has been in decline. It is down about 4.5% since the beginning of March. 

Affordability Puts New Home Sales in Free Fall: Lawyers depending on closing for entry-level service in trouble

Handling the closing for a new home has been traditionally a tactic for lawyers to develop business. The jittery home buyers frequently feel grateful to the lawyer for leading them through the legal mine field. At that end, they have their new home.  For doing their will or later suing the roof contractor for whatever, they will tend to return to that same lawyer.

Now that way to prospect for clients is less likely. As USA Today reports, in March 2014, the sales of new homes went into free fall. They nose-dived 14.5%.  The main factor has been interpreted to be the lack of affordability, both in the price of the property and in the rate of the mortgage. Here is the coverage. 

So, what are lawyers to do?  One proven approach is to get the hang of social media.  This means experimenting with what channels are effective. Not all are for each unique law practice.  Blogging and tweeting may bring in business for an immigration firm. On the other hand for personal injury the channels which have the greatest impact could be YouTube and Facebook. Then those have to integrated seamlessly into the rest of the marketing mix, including presenting seminars and providing complimentary consultations. 

The challenge in marketing in law, as well as much of professional services, is that there are no longer right answers, at least not for long.  The game demands continual deep digs into what could work. For example, I was stunned how productive customized pitches sent email has been for developing new business for my communications boutique. There I have been piggybacking on the recommendations provided in "What Color Is Your Parachute?"

Annie Lin: Ideal Background for Investing in Law School

Annie Lin is senior counsel at Loudr, a startup focused on music licensing and distribution.  Before she attended law school she had developed a brandname as a musical performer. While doing that she noticed that she had an ability to understand the business side of music. 

But she didn't go for an MBA. Instead, as Colleen Taylor reports in Tech Crunch, she went to law school. That's because her love affair was with music licensing. Here are the Tech Crunch article and video interview.

What jumps out is this: Lin was an ideal candidate to invest in law school. She already had a niche identity, knowledge base and contacts.  She was reasonably sure she could parachute into a specialized part of law.  Working in a startup will likely enhance her marketability. That's because she probably has more authority and responsibility than she would as an in-house lawyer in a more traditional setting. Her future seems unusually bright. 

Felony Convictions & Joblessness: Three Cheers for NY AG Eric Schneiderman

New York employers will likely be deterred from breaking the state law and discriminating against those with felony convictions. The state Attorney General Eric Schneiderman has sent a powerful message not to do this, via the settlement with retailer Bed Bath & Beyond. 

Slapped with a $125,000 payout, Bed, Bath & Beyond agreed to end, reports Bloomberg, "automatically rejecting job applicants with criminal records."  Here is the coverage.

This law is on the books in some other states, but not enough of them. When I travel on business and attend 12-step meetings around the nation I hear sad stories of being knocked out of the job box because of a felony conviction. Those in that pickle usually have to find work through their personal network of friends and relatives. Who knows if this difficulty earning a living is what triggers the large number of relapses among substance abusers. 

Self-sabotaging Lawyers: You can change that (but not easily)

That moment of clarity might happen when the partner assigns the project to your colleague, not you.  Or you get it that the past 18 months have been downward-mobility hell.  So, you decide that you must change.  Insanity, as they say, is continuing to do the same things over and over again, expecting different results.

At the top of the list of what requires an internal paradigm shift, along with different behaviors, is self-sabotage. Lawyers are usually twisted geniuses in how to do themselves in. The good news, based on research, is that it is possible to change. The bad news, based on research, is that it's difficult to do that. 

Yesterday The Wall Street Journal reported on the findings of researcher Christopher Soto.  He is director of the Colby Personality Lab at Colby University in Maine.  Here is that seminal article (sub. req.) 

Essentially Soto found that small changes can have big impacts on improving the whatevers, be they careers or relationships with significant others.  Those small changes start with the decision to end the behavior which was getting in the way. However, that requires insight about one's patterns.  Lawyers might not be aware that presenting themselves as the smartest kids in the room is what's alienating everyone.  After the insight, then the focus is on that small bite. Don't try to correct too much at the same time.  The trick here as with most things is to stick with it.  When that behavior seems to be at least under control, then lawyers can add to the success menu.

Incidentally, in 12 step programs sponsors hammer newbies not to take on more than one addiction at a time.  The drunk can address smoking cigarettes next year, not today.

Anthony Chiasson, Todd Newman: Appeal could clarify definition of "illegal trading"

Brand Preet Bharara is not likely to implode, no matter the ruling in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit regarding convicted insider traders Anthony Chiasson and Todd Newman.

That Court will be reviewing what jury instruction is given in framing illegal trading. Does the passer-along of insider information have to gain from that activity? Or is it enough to be classifid as illegal trading for the recipient to simply know the information is confidential and was leaked? What could result is some consensus how to define insider trading and what instruction to give to the jury.  Here is the coverage in Bloomberg Business Week.

Chiasson and Newman, both former hedge fund honchos, may or may not get off the hook.  That isn't what really interests those watching this review.  The eyes are on the prosecution, particularly in the Southern District of New York. Will the overturning of the convictions slow it down? That doesn't seem to be in the cards.  The Bharara legal team will probably simply regroup around any new understanding of what passing on of information is legal and what is illegal.

State Farm: What's with the multiple-choice maze as "compliance" for security

Call 1-877-734-2265 at State Farm and before you conduct your business you will be forced to enter a maze of multiple choice questions.  

They, I was informed by a supervisor at the call center, were devised "in compliance" for security. No, asking plain-vanilla things like the mother's maiden name and one's favorite film doesn't cut it with State Farm.

The multiple choices present, for example, a list of names.  From them I am to select who I sold my house to in 2001. Another set of multiple choices would be which address was I associated with. Those go back almost 20 years.

And, yes, consumers like myself are subjected to this. I have two investment accounts, an auto loan and auto insurance with State Farm. Today I called 877-734-2265 to comply with snail mail from it verifying a change of address. The address was wrong. The call center woman started with the multiple questions, which consumers also encounter when they struggle to access their online State Farm accounts.  In a multiple-choice rage I demanded to speak to the supervisor. 

He turned out to be go by the moniker of "Mark." Only then did he inform me I would not have to enter the maze at all. I could provide product-specific data.  I did just that, from my auto loan.  Why didn't the front lines present me with that choice. But, more importantly, why do the federal and state governments allow such a time-consuming, frustrating mode of security verification? In my way of framing whatevers, State Farm's security screen seems like a sophisticated kind of harassment, under the guise of compliance.

"Father, forgive me. I used the 's__t' word with the front lines and screamed at Mark. Maybe my penace should be to consider hunting for a more user-friendly financial institution.  Then I would sin no more."

64,613 Software Engineers v. Google, Apple, Intel and Adobe

Four tech firms in Silicon Valley allegedly conspired to block their employees from seeking better opportunities elsewhere.  They are Google, Apple, Intel and Adobe.  There are 64,613 defendands, all software engineers.  Here is background on the class action lawsuit, when there were six defendants. 

One of the plaintiffs who got the ball rolling on this lawsuit - Brandon Marshall - is dead.  Somehow he wound up behaving in an aberrant manner and had a confrontation with law enforcement.  He was shot in the chest.  His supporters speculate that he was stressed out from being associated with legal action taking on such powerful companies. Here is THE NEW YORK TIMES coverage of this aspect of the lawsuit.

Many expect the defendants to settle.  The trial would take place next month.  Its timing is not good. Rather than representatives of progress for mankind, some tech companies are beginning to be viewed as pernicious forces. For example, the Google bus was attacked. There is fear of the power of a corporation like Google. 

As we are quite aware, testimony during the trial could disclose the internal workings of tech companies and the values of their players.  The late Steve Jobs could wind up with a tarnished halo. But worst of all, rather than being an ultimate meritocracy, the tech sector could be shown to be a field force which holds back talent to increase its own profits. 

It will be interesting to see if the plaintiffs accept a settlement and the terms and conditions of that agreement.  Likely it would total billions of dollars.

 

39,675 Enrolled in Law School Fall 2013 - Unemployment As Sustainable

It's a fundamental of economics: When supply exceeds demand in the labor market, unemployment will be sustained. Along with that, wages will tend to decline and working conditions could also deteriorate. So, with 39,675 full and part-timers enrolled in law school in the fall of 2013 (Source: ABA), joblessness will be sustained among JDs. Better times are not necessarily ahead, no matter how much the economic recovery gains traction.

In the National Law Journal, Karen Sloan chronicles the high unemployment for the JD Class of 2013. "Only 57 percent of 2013 graduates found long-term full-time jobs that rquire bar passage, up slightly from 56.2 percent in 2012."  Here is the NLJ coverage.

Of course, the Law of Attraction continued to operate.  Some schools such as at Columbia University continued to have good results in placement. For 2013, nine out of its 10 JDs landed full time legal jobs which were not paid for by the school. Its overall placement rate had been 88.3 percent.

However, no one knows what will happen to those fortunate graduates.  The legal sector has been chewing up and spitting out its associates, along with partners. The game seems to have become get the money (to repay law school debt) and the experience when you can.  Just as the pattern is on Wall Street, most can consider themselves to be on "short time." When they lose that first job then they have to figure out what to do next.  Should they scramble to find another job practicing law, open their own firm or seek out employment using their legal background. The latter could include gong to work for a highly regulated industry such as insurance or energy.

Lawyers are not alone in being part of a severe glut in their field. For writers like myself the glut keeps growing.  For example, newspapers continue to lay off reporters and editors. My solution has been to return to my core competence in executive communications, that is, ghostwriting and speechwriting.  That niche has excess labor but demand and compensation bounced back strong after a severe recession at the turn of the century. What I have discovered is I have to follow the market, not likes.  Journalism was fun but now it's done.  I only knock out my own bylined pieces for media outlets to help me attract new business. No longer can I play around in that sand box in a serious way.

Elkan Abramowitz: Will he save or hurt Patton Boggs merger prospects?

Obviously, Patton Boggs needs to merge in order to survive.  So far there are two propsects.  But what potential partner wants to deal with all the legal liability Patton Boggs is facing in the civil fraud allegations by Chevron? Those are related to the environmental itigation against the oil company in Ecuador.

The appearance of celebrity defense attorney Eklan Abramowitz on Patton Boggs' behalf could help or hurt the merger plans.  He is the big gun who represented Woody Allen in sexual assault allegations and is currently defending Dewey & LeBoeuf former head Steven Davis. Here is the coverage by Bloomberg Business Week. 

If Abramowitz can shred the allegations into nothingness, then moves will probably be made toward a merger.  However, if his mere presence sends a signal to potential partners that the legal situation is very serious, then it might have been a bad judgment call for Patton Boggs to bring him into the loop. 

The tangled Chevron litigation which has been going on for years has become infinitely more interesting.