DOCSLIB.ORG

Practitioner

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Practitioner Spring 2018 • Volume 24, Issue 2 the PRACTITIONER FEATURED IN THIS ISSUE: Five Things You Need to Know About Today’s Rapidly Changing Immigration Laws Princesherry Hechanova, p 7 MCLE Article: Judgment Liens: The First and Last Step Joseph Chora, p 22 The Magazine of the Solo & Small Firm Section of the California Lawyersthe AssociationPRACTITIONER • 1 Executive Committee of the Solo and Small Firm Law Section 2017–2018 Officers James Ham, South Pasadena Liaisons Robert M. Klein, Los Angeles Chair Continuing Education of the Bar Steven L. Krongold, Irvine Ritzel S. Ngo, Pasadena (CEB) Liaison Bennett Root, Pasadena Norma J. Piatt, Oakland Chair Elect Angelica O. Sciencio, San Diego Renee N. Galente, Vista J. Christopher Toews, San Luis Obispo Administration Treasurer Section Coordinator Jeremy M. Evans, Los Angeles Advisors John Buelter Immediate Past Chair Cynthia Elkins, Woodland Hills California Lawyers Association Megan E. Zavieh, Alpharetta, GA Nancy B. Goldstein, Westlake Village (415) 795.7205 Steven M. Mayer, Encino [email protected] Editor in Chief Marilyn Ann Monahan, Marina Del Rey Administrative Assistant Omar S. Anorga, Pasadena Philip A. Shapiro, San Diego Michael Barreiro Susan B. Share, Encino California Lawyers Association Members Eleanor Kay Southers, Santa Cruz (415) 795-7204 Trina Chatterjee, Oakland [email protected] Sabrina L. Green, San Diego 2 • the PRACTITIONER Table of Contents Letter From the Chair A Federal Court Upholds the Legality 4 By Ritzel Starleigh Ngo 18 of California Workers’ Compensation Anti-Fraud Legislation With Additional Procedural Due Process Warranties Letter From the Editor By David R. Ruiz 5 By Omar Sebastian Anorga Who Owns the Client? Cannabis Country 20 By Steven L. Krongold 6 By Louis J. Shapiro Esq. MCLE Article: Judgment Liens: Five Things You Need to Know About 22 The First and Last Step 7 Today’s Rapidly Changing By Joseph Chora Immigration Laws By Princesherry Hechanova Coach’s Corner: Get Off the Hamster 26 Wheel Now, Before it is Too Late! Proposed New Ethics Rules, and Their By Eleanor Southers 10 Impact on Solo Practitioners By Neil J Wertlieb Editorial Committee EDITOR OMAR SEBASTIAN ANORGA ASSISTANT EDITORS MEGAN ZAVIEH, HENRY DAVID, JEREMY EVANS, ELEANOR SOUTHERS, RENEE GALENTE, STEVEN KRONGOLD, AND BENNETT ROOT the PRACTITIONER • 3 Ritzel Starleigh Ngo is the Chair for the Solo & Small Letter From the Firm Section of the California Lawyers Association, and Chair she practices family law in Pasadena. Ms. Ngo is experienced in contentious By Ritzel Starleigh Ngo dissolutions; parentage matters; child custody and visitation, spousal and child support; property division; temporary and permanent restraining orders; including domestic violence, elder abuse, and civil harassment. She can be reached at [email protected]. Dear Section Members: • Appointments subcommittee: focus on appointing new members to the section’s ur section has identified several subcommittees executive committee. Subcommittee Chair: Owhich I want you to be aware of, so that you Susan Share: [email protected] can join and participate and share your ideas. Thank you to our members who have reached out to me and • Attorney of the Year Award: focus on identifiying other members of our executive committee with multiple attorney candidates for the attorney of ideas to provide our section with feedback in how we the year award, which is recognized and can support your needs as a small law firm and/or a celebrated that the Sections Convention solo practice. annually in September. Subcommittee Chair: Robert Klein, e-mail: [email protected] The subcommittees of the Solo and Small Firm section, which includes a brief description and e-mail • Programs subcommittee: focus on identifying contact person are as follows: educational MCLE programs (live, webinars, webcasts, Section Convention). Education • Membership, Marketing and Social Media: Chair: Sabrina Green: [email protected]. focus on improving member benefits, and marketing our section and practice, and social We look forward to your participation. media efforts for our section. Steven Mayer, email: [email protected] Please keep a look out for our live program e-blasts and upcoming e-newsletters for details which will • Publications committee: focus on the include executive committee member visits to your PRACTITIONER magazine, reviewing and local bar association, webinars, and committee publishing substantive and procedural articles. updates. Subcommittee Chair: Omar Anorga, e-mail: [email protected] All the best for your practice, • Outreach committee: focus on serving the Ritzel Starleigh Ngo needs of the underserved attorney/legal population in our section, which includes lesser- populated areas. Subcommittee Chair: Nancy Goldstein, email: [email protected] 4 • the PRACTITIONER Mr. Anorga represents businesses and individuals Letter From the with various legal problems, and he strives to always resolve these problems in a Editor smart, and cost-effective manner. Mr. Anorga has vast By Omar Sebastian Anorga experience with litigating legal disputes in both state and federal court. Lastly, The Anorga Law Firm, Inc., has a large stable of Spanish-speaking business owners, and Mr. Anorga is able to communicate with them in their native language. his issue of the PRACTITIONER is professor Neil J. Wertlieb who examines several Tpredominately focused in on providing you with proposed new amendments to the Rules of articles examining certain new laws or updates and Professional Conduct, and how those amendments revisions to existing laws, each being enacted and/or can change current standards, and add new implemented earlier this year. In addition to keeping obligations for licensed practitioners. Thereafter you abreast of changes in the law, and how it could author David R. Ruiz discusses how a Federal Court affect your practice, we are also providing you with upheld the legality of the California anti-fraud an informative MCLE article on how judgment liens provisions and added some notice and hearing can be a powerful tool in your collection efforts, and requirements to guarantee due process for medical a best practices article on how you can better manage providers. Finishing up the update articles, author your time in an effort to balance life/work activities. Steven L. Krongold examines the issue of what property interest—and, therefore, profits—a We start off with author Louis J. Shapiro, who dissolved law firm might have in cases that are in provides us an article on how the lawful recreational progress but not completed at the time of dissolution. use of cannabis is having an effect on DUI prosecution. Next, author Princesherry Hechanova As you can see, this issue of the PRACTITIONER is writes on important changes having an impact on jam-packed with great content—we hope you enjoy immigration policies. We move onto attorney and it and find it useful! the PRACTITIONER FOR SOLO & SMALL FIRMS Editor the PRACTITIONER for Solo & Small Firms is designed to provide accurate Omar Anorga, [email protected] information to professional advocates. However, we make this subject matter available Disclaimer to our members with the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering The statements and opinions expressed in the PRACTITIONER for Solo & Small legal or other professional service. If legal advice or other expert assistance is required, Firms are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the services of a competent professional should be sought. the California Lawyers Association, the Solo and Small Firm Section, or any Copyright © 2018 government entity. California Lawyers Association, 180 Howard Street, Suite 410, San Francisco, CA 94105 the PRACTITIONER • 5 Lou Shapiro, a former LA County Public Defender, is a Cannabis Country criminal defense attorney out of Century City and a certified By Louis J. Shapiro Esq. criminal law specialist by the State Bar of California. He is also a TV/Radio Legal Analyst, NBC Trial & Error Legal Consultant and advises on the board member of the California Innocence Project. ven though it’s only been a few months since Carboxy THCA is the amount of non- Ecannabis became lawful to use recreationally, we psychoactive THC in the system. THCA does are already seeing its immediate impact to the DUI not affect the mind or mental processes. It also indicates sector. a long-term time frame of THC usage. This property attaches to fat cells and remains in the system days- Cannabis DUIs are becoming an increasing months after absorption. A frequent user will have a conundrum for everyone involved. Starting with law higher amount of THCA in their system. In this enforcement, police are making cannabis DUI arrests instance, the number is quite low according to most when they smell its odor and the driver admits to any experts and does not fit the profile of a habitual user. recent usage. Because no current scientifically validated roadside testing exists for cannabis impairment—as for 11-Hydroxy THC indicates a short-term time frame of alcohol impairment—police are resorting to simply THC absorption. The higher the number the more arresting the driver, and passing the issue onto the recent the absorption. In some cases, this particular prosecutors. THC will not appear in results due to absorption occurring several (i.e., between four and six) hours Once the prosecutor is assigned the case, he or she is before the test. This appears to be the case in these test provided with a qualitative toxicology report by the results. The fact that this is not present indicates that local crime lab. This report only reveals whether the driver did not have a recent usage prior to driving cannabis was detected in the blood stream. It does not and is very good for the defense. provide numerical information. It is up to the defense attorney to make a discovery request for the quantitative The performance on the standardized field sobriety analysis of the sample.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
    Case 3:08-cv-05322-LB Document 65 Filed 11/25/09 Page 1 of 23 1 2 3 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 5 6 KENDRICK PATTERSON, ADAM BERGMAN, ) No. 09-3031 SC MICHAEL ATTIANESE, ANDREA LEVY, ) 7 DARYL YEAKLE, and RAYMOND R. ) And related case: 8 PLANTE, each individually and on ) behalf of all others similarly ) 09-5322 SC 9 situated and the general public, ) ) ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' 10 Plaintiffs, ) MOTIONS TO DISMISS ) PLAINTIFFS' THIRD CAUSE OF 11 v. ) ACTION 12 ) STEPHEN V. O'NEAL, individually and ) ii 13 on behalf of those similarly ) situated; THOMAS HILL, individually ) 14 and on behalf of those similarly ) 15 situated; ELLEN L. BASTIER, ) individually and on behalf of those ) 16 similarly situated; MARK WEITZEL, ) individually and on behalf of those ) 17 similarly situated; JULIAN ) United States District Court For the Northern District of California 18 MILLSTEIN, individually and on ) behalf of those similarly situated; ) 19 JEFFREY STEINER, individually and ) on behalf of those similarly ) 20 situated; DAVID P. GRAYBEAL, ) individually and on behalf of those ) 21 similarly situated; ORRICK, ) 22 HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE LLP, a ) limited liability partnership; DLA ) 23 PIPER LLP, a limited liability ) partnership; NIXON PEABODY LLP, a ) 24 limited liability partnership; ) 25 HOWREY LLP, a limited liability ) partnership; and MORGAN LEWIS & ) 26 BOCKIUS LLP, a limited liability ) partnership, ) 27 ) Defendants. ) 28 ) Case 3:08-cv-05322-LB Document 65 Filed 11/25/09 Page 2 of 23 1 And related case: ) ) 2 ADAM BERGMAN, et al., ) 3 ) Plaintiffs, ) 4 v. ) THELEN LLP, a California limited ) 5 liability partnership, and DOES 1- ) 500, ) 6 Defendants.
    [Show full text]
  • The Uncertain Future of the Unfinished Business Doctrine Dan
    The Uncertain Future of the Unfinished Business Doctrine 2015 Volume VII No. 26 The Uncertain Future of the Unfinished Business Doctrine Dan Teplin, J.D. Candidate 2015 Cite as: The Uncertain Future of the Unfinished Business Doctrine, 7 ST. JOHN’S BANKR. RESEARCH LIBR. NO. 26 (2015). Introduction It is no secret that the legal industry has experience financial difficulty following the great recession. Many law firms have been less profitable, and in some extreme circumstances, have filed for bankruptcy. The worlds largest law firms are of no exception to this recent phenomenon. The collapses of the mega-firms Dewey & LeBoeuf,1 Coudert Brothers LLP,2 Heller Ehrman LLP,3 Howrey LLP,4 Thacher Proffitt & Wood LLP,5 and Thelen LLP6 are prime examples. Since most law firms, especially large firms, do not reorganize in bankruptcy, a bankruptcy trustee will often be appointed to administer the firm’s estate. In order to maximize 1 The End of an Era: Why Dewey & LeBoeuf Went Under, FORTUNE (May 29, 2012) http://fortune.com/2012/05/29/the-end-of-an-era-why-dewey-leboeuf-went-under/. 2 Jones Day Prevails in Coudert Brothers “Unfinished Business” case in unanimous New York Court of Appeals Ruling, (July 2014) http://www.jonesday.com/jones-day-prevails-in-coudert-brothers-unfinished-business-case-in- unanimous-new-york-court-of-appeals-ruling/. 3 Recession Batters Law Firms, Triggering Layoffs, Closings, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL (Jan. 26, 2009) http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB123292954232713979. 4 Why Howrey Law Firm Could Not Hold It Together, THE WASHINGTON POST (Mar.
    [Show full text]
  • “Taking Care of (Unfinished) Business,” Association Of
    WINTER 2017 TAKING CARE OF Jewel court held, “in the absence of a partnership agreement, the (UNFINISHED) BUSINESS Uniform Partnership Act requires that attorneys’ fees received on cases in progress upon dissolution of a law partnership are to be Breakups are tough. Law fi rm shared by the former partners according to their right to fees in the breakups are no exception. When a former partnership, regardless of which former partner provides partnership dissolves, law fi rm partners legal services in the case after the dissolution.”3 However, the are free to join new fi rms during the Jewel court acknowledged that partnerships can (and should) winding-up process; however, when stipulate how fees are to be allocated in the event of dissolution.4 a partner brings unfi nished client business to a new fi rm, the partner may B. Jewel’s Fallout: The Brobeck Debacle owe his or her former fi rm a portion of After Jewel, many law fi rms included “Jewel waivers” in any fees generated from this unfi nished their partnership agreements, stipulating how fees earned from business. This is termed the “unfi nished Michael McNamara business” rule. In California, the ongoing business would be allocated in the event of dissolution. “unfi nished business” rule has been While Jewel waivers are readily enforceable when a law fi rm sparsely litigated, mainly in the context dissolves voluntarily, unique issues arise when a law fi rm of contingency fee cases.1 On September becomes insolvent and dissolves prior to a bankruptcy. 14, 2016, the California Supreme Court In the case of In re Brobeck, Phleger & Harrison LLP, shortly granted a request from the Ninth Circuit before the fi rm dissolved, the partners amended the fi rm’s Court of Appeals to determine whether partnership agreement to include a Jewel waiver.5 When many California’s “unfi nished business” rule of the partners joined new fi rms, the Brobeck fi rm was forced also applies to non-contingency fee into involuntary bankruptcy.
    [Show full text]
  • HOWREY LLP, 14-Cv-04887-JD 9 14-Cv-04888-JD Appellee
    Case3:14-cv-04882-JD Document13 Filed06/03/15 Page1 of 19 1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 5 HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP, Case Nos. 14-cv-04882-JD 6 14-cv-04883-JD Appellant, 7 14-cv-04884-JD v. 14-cv-04885-JD 8 14-cv-04886-JD HOWREY LLP, 14-cv-04887-JD 9 14-cv-04888-JD Appellee. 14-cv-04889-JD 10 PILLSBURY WINTHROP SHAW ORDER ON APPEAL 11 PITTMAN LLP, 12 Appellant, 13 v. 14 HOWREY LLP, 15 Appellee. SEYFARTH SHAW LLP, 16 Appellant, 17 v. United States District Court District United States Northern District of California District Northern 18 HOWREY LLP, 19 Appellee. 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Case3:14-cv-04882-JD Document13 Filed06/03/15 Page2 of 19 PERKINS COIE LLP, 1 Appellant, 2 v. 3 HOWREY LLP, 4 Appellee. 5 NEAL, GERBER & EISENBERG LLP, 6 Appellant, 7 v. 8 HOWREY LLP, 9 Appellee. 10 KASOWITZ, BENSON, TORRES & 11 FRIEDMAN LLP, 12 Appellant, 13 v. 14 HOWREY LLP, 15 Appellee. SHEPPARD MULLIN RICHTER & 16 HAMPTON LLP, 17 Appellant, United States District Court District United States Northern District of California District Northern 18 v. 19 HOWREY LLP, 20 Appellee. JONES DAY, 21 Appellant, 22 v. 23 HOWREY LLP, 24 Appellee. 25 26 27 28 Case3:14-cv-04882-JD Document13 Filed06/03/15 Page3 of 19 1 Eight law firms that provided legal services to former clients of debtor Howrey LLP appeal 2 the bankruptcy court’s denial of their motions to dismiss.
    [Show full text]
  • I:\Chambersdm\Chambers 22 E-Ordersnew\Orders to Be Converted\Howrey\Howrey
    Entered on Docket September 09, 2014 EDWARD J. EMMONS, CLERK U.S. BANKRUPTCY COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 1 Signed and Filed: September 9, 2014 2 3 4 5 ________________________________________ DENNIS MONTALI 6 U.S. Bankruptcy Judge 7 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT 8 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 In re ) Bankruptcy Case 10 ) No. 11-31376DM HOWREY LLP, ) 11 ) Debtor. ) Chapter 11 12 ___________________________________) ALLAN B. DIAMOND, Chapter 11 ) Adversary Proceeding 13 Trustee for Howrey LLP, ) No. 13-3093 DM ) 14 Plaintiff,) ) 15 v. ) ) 16 JONES DAY LLP, ) ) 17 Defendant.) ___________________________________) 18 19 MEMORANDUM DECISION ON MOTIONS TO DISMISS 20 I. INTRODUCTION 21 Plaintiff Allan B. Diamond, chapter 11 Trustee (“Trustee”) 22 for debtor Howrey LLP (“Howrey” or “Debtor”), filed multiple 23 nearly identical complaints for avoidance and recovery of actual 24 and constructive fraudulent transfers and for an accounting and 25 turnover and other relief, seeking to recover from several law 26 firm defendants the value of profits received by them with respect 27 to unfinished business that previously had been handled by Debtor. 28 Relying on District of Columbia law which in turn relies on Jewel -1- Case: 13-03093 Doc# 48 Filed: 09/09/14 Entered: 09/09/14 17:42:15 Page 1 of 13 1 v. Boxer, 156 Cal. App. 3d 171 (1984), Trustee seeks to recover 2 profits realized or to be realized by the defendant law firms from 3 Debtor’s unfinished business (“Howrey Unfinished Business”). 4 Trustee alleges that pre-petition waivers executed by Howrey 5 partners relieving them of their duty to account for profits made 6 on the Howrey Unfinished Business (the “Jewel Waiver”) constituted 7 fraudulent transfers, and that the defendant law firms are liable 8 as subsequent transferees.
    [Show full text]
  • Lessons from Law Firm Bankruptcies and Proposals for Reform Edward S
    Santa Clara Law Review Volume 55 | Number 3 Article 1 10-7-2015 Lessons from Law Firm Bankruptcies and Proposals for Reform Edward S. Adams Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/lawreview Recommended Citation Edward S. Adams, Lessons from Law Firm Bankruptcies and Proposals for Reform, 55 Santa Clara L. Rev. 507 (2015). Available at: http://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/lawreview/vol55/iss3/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Santa Clara Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Santa Clara Law Review by an authorized administrator of Santa Clara Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. LESSONS FROM LAW FIRM BANKRUPTCIES AND PROPOSALS FOR REFORM Edward S. Adams* TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction .................................................................... 508 I.History of Law Firm Bankruptcies ............................. 510 A. Finley Kumble ................................................ 511 B. Coudert Brothers ............................................ 514 C. Thelen ............................................................. 517 D. Heller Ehrman ................................................ 519 E. Dewey & LeBoeuf ........................................... 521 1. The Rise and Fall of Dewey ...................... 522 2. Reasons for Dewey’s Bankruptcy ............. 528 II.Solutions to Law Firm Bankruptcies ......................... 530 A. Introduction ...................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Why Law Firms Collapse
    Why Law Firms Collapse John Morley1 Law firms don’t just go bankrupt—they collapse. Like Dewey & LeBoeuf, Heller Ehrman, and Bingham McCutchen, law firms often go from apparent health to liquidation in a matter of months or even days. Almost no large law firm has ever managed to reorganize its debts in bankruptcy and survive. This pattern is puzzling, because it has no parallel among ordinary businesses. Many businesses go through long periods of financial distress and many even file for bankruptcy. But almost none collapse with the extraordinary force and finality of law firms. Why? I argue that law firms are fragile because they are owned by their partners, rather than by investors. Partner ownership creates the conditions for a spiraling cycle of withdrawals that resembles a run on the bank. As the owners of the business, the partners of a law firm are the ones who suffer declines in profits and who have to disgorge their compensation in the event the firm becomes insolvent. So if one partner leaves and damages the firm, it is the remaining partners who bear the loss. Each partner’s departure thus has the potential to worsen conditions for those who remain, meaning that as each partner departs, the others become more likely to leave as well, eventually producing an accelerating race for the exists bank. This kind of spiraling withdrawal is sometimes thought to be an unavoidable consequence of financial distress. But if law firms were not owned by their partners, this would not happen. Indeed, the only large law firm in the history of the common law world that has ever survived a prolonged insolvency is also one of the only large law firms that has ever been owned by investors.
    [Show full text]
  • Thomas E. Rutledge* Tara A. Mcguire**
    CONFLICTING VIEWS AS TO THE UNFINISHED BUSINESS DOCTRINE Thomas E. Rutledge* Tara A. McGuire** As the era of failed law firms, both large and small, continues, 1 so does debate as to the Unfinished Business Doctrine as most famously embodied in Jewel v. Boxer .2 Notwithstanding its general acceptance over the last 30 years, it was recently rejected in New York. Demonstrating that New York was not setting a contrary trend, the Colorado Supreme Court subsequently affirmed the doctrine. This uncertainty as to the doctrine’s application mandates that law and other professional firms consider and address the doctrine in their organizational agreements. Failure to do so only increases the likelihood of disputes, the expense of dispute resolution, and perhaps surprise as to the ultimate determination as to whether and how it should apply to a particular firm. Copyright © 2015 by the Authors. All rights reserved. * Thomas E. Rutledge is a member of Stoll Keenon Ogden PLLC resident in the Louisville, Kentucky office. A frequent speaker and writer on business organization law, he has published in journals including THE BUSINESS LAWYER , the DELAWARE JOURNAL OF CORPORATE LAW , the AMERICAN BUSINESS LAW JOURNAL and the JOURNAL OF TAXATION , and is an elected member of the American Law Institute. ** Tara A. McGuire is an associate at Stoll Keenon Ogden PLLC; J.D., University of Louisville School of Law (Spring, 2015). 1 See, e.g. , Mudge Rose Guthrie Alexander & Ferdon v. Pickett, 11 F. Supp. 2d 449, 450 (S.D.N.Y. 1998) (factual discussion of Mudge Rose Guthrie Alexander & Ferdon firm dissolution in 1995); LaBrum & Doak, LLP v.
    [Show full text]
  • Los Angeles Lawyer April 2015
    Exper Guide to THE MAGAZINE OF THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION t W PAGE it ne 38 sse s APRIL 2015 / $4 EARN MCLE CREDIT PLUS 2014 Ethics Prosecuting Roundup Elder Financial page 23 Abuse page 30 Lender Liability after Foley page 12 Inverse Condemnation for Water Damage page 14 Secrecy in Doubling Mediation page 68 Down Los Angeles lawyer Robert M. Heller argues that double derivative indemnity litigation may come to California page 16 FEATURES 16 Doubling Down BY ROBERT M. HELLER If California courts continue to pursue a remedy for every wrong, they are likely to sanction double derivative standing 23 2014 Ethics Roundup BY JOHN W. AMBERG AND JON L. REWINSKI Last year brought ethical challenges for dissolving law firms and a surprise for the State Bar’s Commission for the Revision of the Rules of Professional Conduct Plus: Earn MCLE credit. MCLE Test No. 245 appears on page 25. 30 Out of Bounds BY SARA COLÓN AND CATHERINE ESCHBACH Bounds v. Superior Court highlights the need to draft complaints so that financial elder abuse claims may apply 38 Special Section Semiannual Guide to Expert Witnesses DEPARTMENTS Los Angeles Lawyer 8 On Direct 14 Practice Tips the magazine of Brian Panish Applying the inverse condemnation INTERVIEW BY DEBORAH KELLY remedy to water damage the Los Angeles County BY JOYCE S. MENDLIN AND ROGER M. ROSEN Bar Association 10 Barristers Tips April 2015 Overview of the guidelines of civility and 66 By the Book Volume 38, No. 2 professionalism A World More Concrete BY DAVID B. JONELIS REVIEWED BY ERIC HOWARD 12 Practice Tips 68 Closing Argument The application of Foley in recent lender Six examples to counter the allegation COVER PHOTO: TOM KELLER liability decisions that mediators lie BY STUART M.
    [Show full text]
  • At What Price a Big Law Partnership?Mcode=0&Curindex=0&Curpage=ALL
    newyo rklawjo urnal.co m http://www.newyorklawjournal.com/id=1202640748135/At What Price a Big Law Partnership?mcode=0&curindex=0&curpage=ALL At What Price a Big Law Partnership? During the late 20th century, being a Big Law partner had the sweet smell of success.1 The beginning of the 21st century, however, has seen a wave of Big Law bankruptcy f ilings, mainly involving Big Law f irms organized as limited liability partnerships (f ailed Big Law Partnerships).2 Circa 2014, the phenomenon of f ailed Big Law partnerships has caused the odor associated with achieving the status of a Big Law partner to become distinctly gamey. Why? Because bankruptcy f ilings by f ailed Big Law partnerships have routinely prompted attacks on the f ormer partners in f ailed Big Law partnerships (f ormer Big Law partners) on various theories of personal liability.3 In sum, f ormer Big Law partners are of ten looked upon as the ultimate deep-pocket def endants in Failed Big Law Partnership bankruptcy cases, both (i) by the bankruptcy trustees of f ailed Big Law partnerships4 as well as (ii) by the individual creditors of f ailed Big Law partnerships.5 This article explores why—of all the various f orms of business organizations presently being utilized by Big Law f irms6—f orms of business organizations which require their equity security holders to identif y themselves to the public as "partners" are by f ar the most problematic of all the various and sundry f orms of business organization presently in use by Big Law.7 Question Presented What is it about LLLPs
    [Show full text]
  • In the Matter of Heller Ehrman Llp
    FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT IN THE MATTER OF HELLER No. 14-16314 EHRMAN LLP, Debtor, D.C. No. 3:14-cv-01236-CRB HELLER EHRMAN LLP, Liquidating Debtor, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP, Defendant-Appellee. 2 IN THE MATTER OF HELLER EHRMAN LLP IN THE MATTER OF HELLER No. 14-16315 EHRMAN LLP, Debtor, D.C. No. 3:14-cv-01237-CRB HELLER EHRMAN LLP, Liquidating Debtor, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. JONES DAY, Defendant-Appellee. IN THE MATTER OF HELLER No. 14-16317 EHRMAN LLP, Debtor, D.C. No. 3:14-cv-01238-CRB HELLER EHRMAN LLP, Liquidating Debtor, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. FOLEY & LARDNER LLP, Defendant-Appellee. IN THE MATTER OF HELLER EHRMAN LLP 3 IN THE MATTER OF HELLER No. 14-16318 EHRMAN LLP, Debtor, D.C. No. 3:14-cv-01239-CRB HELLER EHRMAN LLP, Liquidating Debtor, ORDER CERTIFYING Plaintiff-Appellant, QUESTION TO THE CALIFORNIA v. SUPREME COURT ORRICK HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE LLP, Defendant-Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California Charles R. Breyer, Senior District Judge, Presiding Argued and Submitted June 13, 2016 San Francisco, California Filed July 27, 2016 Before: Richard R. Clifton, and Sandra S. Ikuta, Circuit Judges, and Royce C. Lamberth,* District Judge. Order * The Honorable Royce C. Lamberth, United States District Judge for the District of Columbia, sitting by designation. 4 IN THE MATTER OF HELLER EHRMAN LLP SUMMARY** Bankruptcy The panel certified the following question to the California Supreme Court: Under California
    [Show full text]
  • Crunch and Prospects for 2014 a US Law
    Lessons Learned From the Credit Crunch and Prospects for 2014 - A U.S. Law Firm Perspective Københavns Advokatforening App,ril 29, 2014 Uri Doron, Jenner & Block Uri Doron, Partner 2 Who am I? Why am I here? • M&A Partner at Jenner & Block’s New York Office • My practice focuses on representing Scandinavian clients in the U. S. • I have been “fortunate” enough to experience some of the market trends personally 3 IifihlldbI was an associate at a firm that collapsed because its partners became too greedy 4 I was a partner at a firm that tried the strategy of “Global Domination” by merging with several firms and open ing 28 o ffices aroun d the wor ld 5 AdAnd now I am a partner at a USlU.S. law firm t hat is trying to distinguish itself not by the numbers, but by its excellence and quality (quite a unique approach nowadays…) 6 What I am Trying to Avoid… 7 What I Will Start With… 8 Several Firms Have Collapsed • There have been several collapses of large US firms in the past decade: – Brobeck, Phleger, & Harrison (2003) – Coudert Brothers LLP (2006) – Jenkens & Gilchrist (2007) – Thelen LLP (2008) – Heller Ehrman LLP (2008) – Dreier LLP (2008) – Howrey LLP (2011) – Dewey & LeBoeuf LLP (2012) 9 The Lessons Learned from the Collapse of Dewey & LeBoeuf 10 Why Should We Focus on the Dewey Story? • The most “spectacular” law firm failure in the U.S. (and there were several) • The mistakes are indicative of the changes in the U. S. legal industry and many U.
    [Show full text]