Illinois Employers Get Ready—Busy Equal Pay Reporting Season Is Coming
According to the Illinois Department of Labor (IDOL), thousands of employers filed for their first Illinois Equal Pay Registration Certificate (EPRC) between mid-2023 and early 2024. Since employers are required to renew these certificates every two years, that means thousands of employers are already facing a submission deadline to ensure EPRC compliance.
Quick Hits
In 2021, Illinois amended its Equal Pay Act of 2003, requiring covered employers to submit demographic and wage data to the Illinois Department of Labor (IDOL) to obtain an Equal Pay Registration Certificate (EPRC).
Employers that have one hundred or more Illinois employees must obtain an EPRC.
An employer’s EPRC must be renewed every two years.
Employers must count employees physically working in Illinois, as well as fully remote employees who report to management in Illinois, to determine if they must file the EPRC application.
For the 2025 submission cycle, the IDOL has made a few changes to the data template and submission process.
EPRC Renewals
In early 2025, the IDOL presented webinars discussing the history of EPRC filings, the changes for the 2025 EPRC renewals, and the highlights of its increased enforcement efforts. This information suggests that more than 70 percent of EPRC renewals will be due in late 2025 and in the spring of 2026. As employers begin to prepare for these renewals, here are several factors to consider:
All 2025 renewals will be based on data from calendar year 2024, which means that the submission work can begin now even if the renewal deadline is later in 2025.
There are new requirements for 2025 filings, which will require additional data and work on the employer side compared to the initial filing cycle.
In late 2023, when many employers filed their initial EPRC applications, there were many filing site disruptions. While these were eventually resolved and the filing platform was updated in the spring of 2025, it seems possible that there could be filing platform issues again in late 2025.
Based on these factors, employers that have a renewal due in 2025 may want to prepare a plan for their EPRC renewal now to avoid issues later in the renewal process.
New EPRC Filers
Employers with Illinois employees that have not previously obtained an EPRC certificate can look to the IDOL’s frequently asked questions (FAQs) guidance on the EPRC to determine if they are required to file a first-time EPRC application in 2025.
Updates for 2025
All employers that are filing their EPRC materials may want to note that the data template has been updated to include information about whether an employee is paid on an hourly or salaried basis and whether an employee is covered by a collective bargaining agreement. The required compliance statement is also now included in the employer portal and does not need to be uploaded as a separate document.
Unlocking the Power of Legal Directories: A Guide for US Lawyers
Part I
For law firms looking to build reputation, attract clients, and secure an advantage in the competitive legal market, one tool often overlooked—or misunderstood—is the legal directory. Directories like Chambers and Partners and The Legal 500 play a significant role in shaping external perceptions of legal expertise. But how do these rankings work? Who reads them? And should your law firm invest time, money, and effort in using them?
In this two-part series on legal directories for lawyers in US corporate practice, we will firstly provide a basic background on the major directories, explain why these rankings matter, and look at who uses them.
In part two of this series, we give helpful tips for navigating the complex world of directory submissions and the benefits of working with expert external consultants along the way. They can act as strategic advisors to help focus your time and resources as well as shepherd your lawyers and BD teams through the legal directory submission process.
Our ultimate objective is to provide high-level guidance so that lawyers and law firms can better understand legal directory rankings and navigate the submissions process with confidence.
Meet the Legal Directories
There are several dozen nationally recognized legal directories available, see the link here for a full explanation of legal rankings.
Below is a summary of the most widely recognised legal directories, although there are also directories that only rank specific practice areas such as IP law.:
Chambers and Partners
Known for its deep research methodology and extensive interviews, Chambers ranks both law firms and individual lawyers by practice area and jurisdiction. Its coverage spans the US (by city, state and nationwide), and rest of the world. Chambers ranks law firms and lawyers using a “Band” system – from 1(Highest) to 6 (Lowest) and has establishing its methodology as a definitive mark of excellence for lawyers in their respective fields for specialty or for overall law firm achievement. Chambers employs a rigorous internal scoring system incorporating work matters and feedback from “referees”. Referees are individuals, predominantly current clients, who vouch for the quality of a particular law firm and lawyer’s work on a confidential and anonymous basis. Here are some key insights from a recent webinar into gaining and improving your Chambers rankings.
The Legal 500
The Legal 500 evaluates firms based on submissions, client feedback, and market research. While similar in global scope to Chambers, ranking by city and nationwide, its presentation style and editorial tone are more commercially focused. There is more weight given to submissions for Legal 500 rankings. In addition, the Legal 500 offers more in terms of legal awards, the Green Guide for ESG orientated lawyers and firms and industry events for law firms to participate in. Join this Q&A with Legal 500 Editors to learn more.
Best Lawyers
A peer-reviewed directory, Best Lawyers relies on lawyer nominations and feedback rather than firm submissions. Its focus is on the US and Canada, and it often feeds into U.S. News – Best Law Firms rankings, which combine peer reviews with client surveys. This focuses recognition for local and national law firms and lawyers.
Here is a comprehensive guide to the Legal Directory Rankings.
Who Actually Reads Legal Directories?
Legal directories aren’t only vanity metrics. In fact, 97% of law firms in a Chambers survey stated a legal ranking increased their ability to win new clients or justify higher fees. Legal 500’s recent survey of 2,536 corporate general counsel indicated that 49% of such GC’s who participated in the survey consulted the Legal 500 directory on at least a monthly basis. Moreover, 69% of GC’s interviewed in that survey referred to a legal directory recommendation before retaining a law firm.
General Counsel
GC’s rely on directories when entering unfamiliar jurisdictions or hiring for niche expertise. A survey by Legal 500 showed over 60% of GC respondents use directories in the decision-making process. Chambers states that 89% of in-house counsel respondents say rankings influence which firm is awarded work.
Business Owners and CEOs
Especially in industries without in-house legal teams, executives turn to these rankings to validate legal credentials and assess risk. 69% of respondents to the Legal 500 survey referred to a legal directory before engaging a law firm in a new matter.
Recruitment and Retention
Firms expanding practice areas or geographies often look for lateral talent through directories. Internally, investing in building junior associate and partner rankings demonstrates a firm’s commitment to career progression, which improves morale and retention.
Not convinced? Find out why you should participate, if they are worth the investment, and more statistics about who uses the legal directories (beyond the obvious) here.
Conclusion
Legal directory rankings aren’t just accolades. They remain a powerful form of validation, strengthening both firm credibility and individual lawyer reputations. Legal rankings are business development tools, recruitment assets, and crucial for brand/reputation management. Understanding more about how each directory works and what they value can make the difference between elevating your rankings and being overlooked.
In the second part of this two-part series, we will cover how to approach the legal directory process, navigate directory submissions and explore why hiring an expert consultant is beneficial to you and your law firm.
August 2025 Legal News: Law Firm News, Industry Awards and Recognition and Women in Law
Thank you for reading The National Law Review’s legal news roundup, highlighting the latest law firm news! Please read below for the latest in law firm news and industry expansion, legal industry awards, recognition and women in the legal field.
Law Firm News
Barnes & Thornburg LLP announced that Seth Mailhot, a former compliance officer and investigator at the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), joined the firm’s Washington, D.C., office as a partner.
Bringing over 20 years of expertise in navigating FDA regulations and leading regulatory practices, Mr. Malihot advises clients across the biotechnology, pharmaceutical, food and consumer product sectors. His focus includes premarket approvals, labeling, quality system compliance and product recalls.
“Seth brings invaluable insight into FDA decision-making and how to manage regulatory risk in fast-moving markets,” said Healthcare Industry practice chair John Kelly. “His arrival enhances our ability to deliver practical guidance to healthcare and life sciences clients across the country.”
Tristan A. Dollinger joined von Briesen & Roper, s.c., as a Shareholder in the firm’s Milwaukee office. Mr. Dollinger will practice in the Business and Corporate Law and Health Law Sections.
Having extensive experience in representing assisted living, long-term care, physical and occupational therapy and surgical practices, Mr. Dollinger assists clients with mergers and acquisitions, regulatory compliance and transactions.
Mr. Dollinger is a member of the State Bar of Wisconsin, the Milwaukee Bar Association and the American Bar Association. He has also been recognized by Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch® in America in Corporate Governance and Compliance Law from 2022-2025.
Hogan Lovells announced the addition of Elizabeth Jungman as a partner in the firm’s Pharmaceuticals and Biotechnology practice in the Washington, D.C., office.
Joining the firm from the FDA, Ms. Jungman brings deep experience after serving as Chief of Staff to the FDA Commissioner and Director of the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) Office of Regulatory Policy. Her roles included advising senior agency officials on drug policy development, as well as overseeing day-to–day management of the agency.
In addition, Ms. Jungman is a nationally recognized thought leader in drug regulatory policy, building a career focused on the application of pharmaceutical regulations and laws. This makes her uniquely qualified to assist clients with regulatory issues.
“Bringing on Elizabeth further strengthens our capabilities to provide strategic counsel on the most complex challenges facing pharmaceutical and biotech companies today,” Lynn Mehler, Head of the firm’s Pharmaceuticals and Biotechnology practice, said. “Elizabeth has long been recognized as a go-to policy guru within the pharmaceutical regulatory space, with deep experience in the cutting edge regulatory issues that are top-of-mind for many of our clients. She will be an invaluable asset across the practice.”
Legal Industry Awards and Recognition
Blank Rome LLP announced that nine attorneys from the firm’s Government Contracts group were appointed to leadership roles in the American Bar Association’s Public Contract Law Section for the 2025–2026 term.
The attorneys include:
Robyn Burrows: Vice-Chair – Contract Claims & Disputes; Vice-Chair –Cybersecurity, Privacy and Emerging Technology
Dominique Casimir: Vice-Chair – Debarment & Suspension
Justin Chiarodo: Vice-Chair – Acquisition Reform & Emerging Issues; Vice-Chair – Contract Claims & Dispute
Stephanie Harden: Co-Chair – Accounting, Cost & Pricing
Elizabeth Jochum: Co-Chair – Bid Protest; Co-Chair – Annual Conferences (FPI)
Luke Meier: Vice-Chair – Bid Protest; Vice-Chair – Procurement Fraud & False Claims
Jennifer Short: Co-Chair – Procurement Fraud & False Claims; Vice-Chair – Debarment & Suspension
Samarth Barot: Vice-Chair – Procurement Fraud & False Claims
David Bodner: Co-Chair – Intellectual Property; Vice-Chair – Bid Protest; Vice-Chair – Contract Claims & Disputes
The section provides balanced recommendations on procurement policy, providing a forum for colleagues to engage and gain insights into federal and local public contract law.
Andy Monk, partner at Bracewell LLP, will be honored as a “On the Rise” lawyer at the 2025 Texas Legal Awards in September by Texas Lawyer. The awards highlight achievements across the state’s legal industry.
Mr. Monk is honored with a select group of lawyers under the age of 40 who are influential in their practice areas both in Texas and beyond. His practice focuses on representing public and private companies in securities and corporate transactions.
Goodwin Procter LLP announced that partner April Sun is one of California’s Top Labor & Employment Lawyers by the Daily Journal. The annual list honors lawyers in the state who have made significant contributions to labor and employment law through career achievements and wins.
Ms. Sun, a partner in the Employment practice and Trade Secrets, Employee Mobility & Non-Competes group in the firm’s San Francisco office, has obtained successful results for clients in various fields. Including venture capital and private equity, she focuses her practice on employment discrimination, harassment and employee mobility cases. She has represented clients at both the state and federal level.
Women in Law
Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP announced that Lauren Smyth was named a finalist by the 2025 Texas Legal Awards in the Best Mentors category.
Ms. Smyth focuses her practice primarily on commercial real estate. She represents sellers, buyers, landlords and tenants in the operation and acquisition of commercial properties. Her experience ranges from the creation of large-scale condominium regimes to complex lease negotiations.
Amber Ahmed, Of Counsel at Beveridge & Diamond PC, was one of 43 legal professionals elected to the 8th Leadership Class of The Institute for Energy Law (IEL). The organization cultivates industry expertise and leadership by bringing together energy professionals to strengthen collaboration and communication skills.
Ms. Ahmed, a former Assistant Attorney General in the Environmental Protection Division for the Texas Office of the Attorney General, represents clients in regulatory compliance and environmental litigation. This includes enforcement actions under state and federal environmental laws.
“I’m honored to be recognized by IEL and excited to join the 8th Leadership Class,” Ahmed said. “I look forward to engaging with my fellow participants and gaining valuable perspectives to enhance how I support B&D clients.”
Sullivan & Cromwell LLP announced that Regina Readling is rejoining the firm as a partner in its New York office and Executive Compensation Group.
“S&C advises clients on the most complex and high profile deals of the day,” said Ms. Readling. “I’m excited to rejoin the firm where I started as a lawyer and look forward to continuing to work alongside an incredibly talented group of colleagues on market-leading transactions.”
Ms. Readling focuses her practice on mergers and acquisitions, initial public offerings, divestitures and other strategic transactions. In addition, she advises a wide range of well-known clients, from Amazon.com to The Kroger Company and The Home Depot.
“We’re delighted to welcome Regina back to our firm,” said Sullivan & Cromwell Co-Chairs Robert Giuffra and Scott Miller. “Our compensation practice is critical to the success of our unmatched public company transactional practice. The addition of Regina, who is a leading executive compensation partner and has worked with so many S&C teams throughout her career, is an exceptional opportunity to enhance our transactional practice.”
How to Use AI Without Sacrificing Firm Credibility
AI is transforming how legal professionals perform research and draft documents. But effective adoption depends on precision and human oversight. Law firms can significantly benefit from AI-powered tools, provided they are used intentionally.
What happens when team members lean too heavily on generative AI? Here are some common “tells” that reveal when the work isn’t fully human:
A sudden surge in em dashes – : text like this: — — —
Overused rhetorical couplets, like: “It’s not just __, it’s __.”
These often sound like motivational posters rather than thoughtful commentary.
For example:
” Leadership isn’t just a role—it’s a responsibility”
“Learning isn’t just absorbing—it’s transforming.”
Random bolding mid‑sentence, especially with no clear reason.
Vague or overly motivational phrases that lack substance or specificity.
Overly long, unnaturally formal prose, especially in contexts where people tend to be more casual, like internal emails.
These patterns may seem subtle, but readers intuitively pick up on them. They send an unintended message: someone is outsourcing their thinking. This is especially risky when attorneys represent the firm in client communications, strategic content, or pleadings.
Recent incidents underscore the stakes:
In Mata v. Avianca, Inc., plaintiff’s counsel was sanctioned in June 2023 after submitting a brief that cited six fake legal authorities generated by ChatGPT. The court imposed a $5,000 sanction once the fabricated cases were exposed.
In July 2025, a bankruptcy attorney at a U.S. firm was fined $5,500 and required to attend mandatory AI training after a judge found that four case citations in his filing did not exist and had been created by ChatGPT.
Also in July 2025, three attorneys at a major firm defending the Alabama prison system were sanctioned for reckless reliance on ChatGPT-generated legal citations. U.S. District Judge Anna Manasco said, “In simpler terms, the citations were completely made up.” The attorneys were ordered removed from the case and referred to the state bar.
Law firms must be proactive when it comes to AI. One careless filing can damage credibility, expose malpractice risk, and spark punitive sanctions.
Why It Matters to Law Firm Leaders
From marketing content and proposal responses to internal training materials, every document contributes to your firm’s reputation. When writing feels too generic or AI-generated, it can erode:
Professional credibility: Clients expect thoughtful, original communication.
Internal standards: Team members may imitate sloppy form if it’s tolerated.
Brand consistency: Inconsistent messaging makes your firm sound fragmented. Your writing should reflect the ideas of your best partners, not a chatbot.
Malpractice exposure: Courts and ethics boards now hold lawyers responsible if AI-generated errors appear in pleadings or filings.
Accountability: Unclear responsibility can lead to disagreements over errors found in important documents.
Client trust: Even small lapses can make clients question your diligence or reliability.
These are not only stylistic issues; they are governance concerns. Careless or inconsistent writing across emails, pleadings, presentations, social media posts, and internal documents can result in loss of efficiency, delay of business development efforts, and unnecessary friction within teams.
How can your law firm rein in “AI vernacular” while enjoying the fruits of innovation?
Create clear style standards: Define and provide examples of your preferred voice, tone, and formatting. Include practical guidance on what to avoid: excessive em dashes, vague motivational language, empty statements, and random formatting.
Implement peer review: Ensure that any public-facing content or client deliverables get a second set of human eyes before they go out.
Educate your team: Make clear that AI is a tool, rather than a substitute for legal judgment. Emphasize diligent fact-checking and thoughtful editing.
Monitor stylistic shifts: If someone’s writing suddenly changes (longer sentences, inflated diction, strange formatting), it may be worth reviewing their workflow.
Use mistakes as training opportunities: When AI-generated content misses the mark, use it as a moment to strengthen your team’s awareness of voice, audience, and accuracy.
Benefits of Intentional AI Adoption
Trust. Maintaining your firm’s authentic voice builds trust. Audiences recognize when writing is specific, professional, and tailored to their needs. Conversely, relying solely on AI-generated text will make it harder to establish a reputation as an expert, in part because one is always rehashing old ideas rather than leading the conversation.
Integrity. Whether you’re drafting a blog post on litigation tactics or a memo about firmwide strategy changes, your writing should read as if it were personally written in your own words. This helps the firm’s voice remain recognizable, relatable, and unique. After all, you don’t want your firm to just sound like “AI-Generated Company #1,642.” (There are enough of those already.) You want it to sound like the talented people who make the firm what it is. Your audience will recognize that your company remains genuine and doesn’t take shortcuts.
Growth. Rigorous editorial processes develop internal talent. There is no replacement for doing the work. When associates, paralegals, and marketing staff receive feedback and review, they grow in clarity and purpose.
Bottom Line
Using AI is smart. Producing written content that feels empty, inauthentic, or verbose is not. When your firm’s content starts to sound canned, people’s eyes glaze over, and your professional reputation can suffer.
You can preserve the benefits of AI (speed, structure, initial draft generation) without letting your message become generic or hollow. The key is straightforward: publish a standard, employ a review process, and preserve your firm’s character.
To help you get started, we’ve included a checklist and a training memo below.
Quick Checklist for Reviewing Content
Before publishing anything, run this quick check to ensure your content reflects the firm’s voice and meets quality standards:
____ Does the document avoid overused or repeated phrases? (Example: “It’s not just … It’s …”)
____ Are em dashes (—) used sparingly and only when appropriate?
____ Is bolding purposeful and consistent?
____ Is the tone clear and professional, avoiding cliché, vague, or empty phrasing?
____ Have all factual claims and citations been verified manually?
____ Has the piece been peer-reviewed by someone with knowledge of firm voice and standards?
Example Training Memo
To: All Attorneys, Paralegals, Marketing Team
From: [Supervising Partner]
Subject: Guidelines for Using AI Tools in Drafting and Research
Dear Team,
As AI tools become part of our drafting processes, this memo outlines the firm’s expectations to maintain quality, reduce risk, and ensure consistency across the firm. AI may assist, but not replace. Use generative AI tools to draft, summarize, or outline, but never submit AI output without reviewing every element carefully.
Verify all citations. If an AI tool suggests case law or precedent, confirm it across LexisNexis, Westlaw, or official reporters. Never assume AI is accurate.
Maintain tone and voice. While AI may help generate draft language, revise to match our firm’s preferred style: direct, clear, client-focused.
Use internal review. All client-facing or public documents created using AI must be reviewed by at least one peer before finalization.
Report promptly. If you discover an AI-generated error (fake citation, misquote, factual issue) either edit it (if it’s in your own document) or notify your supervisor immediately so we can address it before submission.
By following these practices, we benefit from the advantages of AI, but also uphold our standards of precision, professionalism, and accountability.
Thank you for your attention and dedication to maintaining our firm’s quality and credibility.
[Name]
Final Thoughts
AI is here to stay. The way your firm uses this technology will determine whether it drives your competitive edge or undermines your reputation. Law firm leaders can capitalize on the speed and power of AI by setting clear standards, consistently reinforcing the firm’s distinctive voice, and stressing individual accountability throughout the process.
Lessons from Lincoln for Legal Professionals
Abraham Lincoln is most commonly celebrated for his presidency, but before he ever entered the White House, he built a formidable reputation as a trial lawyer in Illinois. Over nearly three decades in legal practice, Lincoln participated in thousands of cases ranging from land disputes to high-profile criminal trials. His methods, marked by diligence, clarity, moral integrity, and strategic storytelling, continue to serve as a benchmark for legal professionals today. For expert witnesses and attorneys alike, Lincoln’s legal legacy offers enduring wisdom that is remarkably applicable in modern courtrooms.
This article explores the essential takeaways from Lincoln’s legal practice that today’s legal experts can apply in litigation, testimony, and the pursuit of justice.
1. Ground Every Case in Facts and Relatable Narratives
Lincoln instinctively understood the persuasive power of narrative. Jurors respond not merely to legal argument but to stories they can understand and empathize with. Rather than delivering abstract legal points, Lincoln created vivid, humanized accounts of events.
In the 1858 trial of William “Duff” Armstrong, Abraham Lincoln secured an acquittal for the young man accused of murder by using a quiet but powerful piece of evidence: an almanac. The prosecution’s key witness, Charles Allen, claimed he had seen Armstrong strike the victim, James Metzker, with a weapon, by the light of the moon. Lincoln calmly introduced an 1857 astronomical almanac, which showed that the moon was low in the sky at the time of the alleged crime and would not have provided enough light for a clear view. Rather than directly attacking the witness, Lincoln let the facts undermine the credibility of the testimony, allowing the jury to visualize the impossibility of the claim on their own.1,2
Modern legal experts can adopt this same storytelling mindset. Presenting evidence in a coherent and relatable sequence helps jurors, who are often laypersons, stay engaged and comprehend technical material. In expert testimony, well-chosen metaphors and illustrative examples, combined with modern tools such as visual timelines and 3D reconstructions, enhance the narrative and anchor the facts.
2. Know the Opposition as Well as Your Case
Lincoln’s reputation as a masterful advocate stemmed from thorough preparation and a deep understanding of both sides of an issue. He famously said, “When I am getting ready to reason with a man, I spend one‑third of my time thinking about myself and what I am going to say—and two‑thirds thinking about him and what he is going to say.”3
For legal experts today, this skill is indispensable. Whether preparing for cross-examination or anticipating objections in court, a comprehensive grasp of opposing viewpoints equips attorneys and expert witnesses with the foresight to rebut challenges with precision.
3. Clarity Is Greater Than Complexity
Lincoln’s ability to explain intricate legal matters in simple, digestible language set him apart. He avoided jargon and spoke to jurors like neighbors rather than colleagues. This accessibility wasn’t a simplification of content, but rather a refinement of communication.
In his famed “tail-leg” analogy, he asked, “If you call a tail a leg, how many legs does a dog have?” When the answer came “five,” Lincoln corrected: “No, calling a tail a leg doesn’t make it one.” This humorous logic helped illustrate how labeling does not change reality, an important concept in legal definitions and disputes.4
Today, this principle is crucial for expert witnesses, who must often convey complex scientific or technical findings. A report that no one understands carries little weight. Precision combined with plain language increases comprehension, bolsters trust, and ensures a stronger influence on case outcomes.
4. Let Ethics Be Your Compass
Abraham Lincoln’s legal career was marked not only by his formidable courtroom skills but also by a deep-seated moral compass that guided his professional choices. On one occasion in Springfield, a man asked Lincoln to sue a widow to recover a $600 debt. Lincoln calmly explained that while his client might have a legal claim, the moral right belonged to the widow and her six fatherless children. He refused to take the case, even though he could have won, and offered instead free advice, urging the man to find an honest way to earn the money.5
Judge David Davis and others later observed that Lincoln would “never defend wrong,” even when it meant turning down fees. He believed some things, though legally right, were morally unjustifiable—a stance that reflected his principle of letting justice, not profit, define his work.
He famously wrote, “Resolve to be honest at all events; and if in your own judgment you cannot be an honest lawyer, resolve to be honest without being a lawyer.”6
For expert witnesses, this lesson is especially relevant. Taking on a weak or unethical case not only puts credibility at risk but also undermines the legal system. Expert integrity is not just about honesty under oath; it begins with the selection of cases. Upholding standards of objectivity, even under pressure, maintains both personal and institutional integrity.
5. Cross-Examination Requires Composure, Not Combat
According to historian Doris Kearns Goodwin in her biography of Lincoln, Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln, Lincoln possessed an extraordinary gift of remaining composed in the face of hostility, a trait that increased his credibility.7 Lincoln’s courtroom strategy never hinged on aggression. He preferred to let faulty arguments collapse under the weight of their own contradictions. During cross-examinations, he guided witnesses into revealing inconsistencies through calm and logical questioning.
This approach was evident again in the Armstrong trial, where instead of discrediting the witness through confrontation, Lincoln discredited the testimony through evidence—the moon’s position—without undermining the witness’s dignity.
Modern legal professionals should emulate this restraint. Particularly for expert witnesses, resisting provocations and responding to cross-examination with calm, well-reasoned answers ensures that testimony remains credible and unshaken.
6. Diligence Is the Foundation of Legal Success
One of Lincoln’s most quoted legal dictums is: “The leading rule for the lawyer, as for the man of every calling, is diligence.” Lincoln’s work ethic was tireless. He often read case materials deep into the night and traveled for days to attend court sessions across Illinois. Legal historian Brian Dirck observes that Lincoln’s law office ran on long hours, careful records, and a steady stream of research and writing.8
For expert witnesses, this is perhaps the most transferable of all Lincoln’s habits. Each deposition or courtroom appearance is only as good as the preparation behind it. Thoroughly reviewing documents, anticipating questions, and validating findings all contribute to high-impact testimony.
Meticulous groundwork translates into professional confidence and, more importantly, influence.
7. Humor, Used Wisely, Humanizes the Law
Lincoln often used humor as a deliberate tool to connect with jurors and break the tension. His wit, however, was never caustic. It served to humanize legal proceedings and defuse confrontation.
In one notable case in Woodford County, Abraham Lincoln represented Mrs. Goings, a woman indicted for the murder of her abusive husband, a man known for his violent temper. The circumstances strongly suggested self-defense, and public sentiment largely sided with her. During a court session, when Mrs. Goings was suddenly discovered missing, Lincoln was questioned about her whereabouts. He replied that she had asked him where she could get a drink of water, and he had told her he’d always heard the waters of Tennessee were excellent.9 The implication was clear—she had fled, and Lincoln had subtly aided her escape without explicitly admitting so. Rather than harm his credibility, the quip disarmed the court and won laughter, showcasing how Lincoln’s humor and humility could defuse tension while reinforcing his deep sense of justice.
Today’s legal professionals may find themselves in adversarial settings, but tactful humor, when appropriate, can build rapport with juries and humanize even the most technical testimonies.
8. Maintain Ethical Distance from Difficult Clients
Not every case deserves your time. Lincoln demonstrated that a discerning legal mind should be matched by the ability to walk away when necessary. His unwillingness to support dishonest clients or frivolous claims cost him fees but preserved his reputation.
Law practitioners today face similar pressures. Early-career professionals may feel compelled to accept every engagement. Yet Lincoln’s example shows that discernment builds enduring careers.
Avoiding cases that compromise objectivity or involve questionable tactics ensures long-term credibility with both courts and attorneys.
9. Use Analogies to Clarify, Not Confuse
Lincoln’s analogies were memorable because they clarified, not complicated. Scholar Harold Holzer notes Lincoln’s ability to use humble, down-to-earth metaphors drawn from rural life to explain complex political ideas in ways his audience could easily grasp.
His famous critique of euphemistic language, comparing a “horse chestnut” to a “chestnut horse,” called out those who distorted truth with language. During the first Lincoln–Douglas debate in 1858 (Ottawa, Illinois), Abraham Lincoln aimed at Stephen Douglas’ slippery rhetoric: Douglas was twisting words to support the expansion of slavery. Lincoln famously quipped that Douglas was using language so contorted that one could “prove a horse‑chestnut to be a chestnut horse.”10 In other words, you can label something however you like, but that doesn’t change its nature. The audience’s laughter at this pointed analogy showed how effectively Lincoln exposed the deceptive use of language.
In expert testimony, analogies can powerfully explain technical details. However, they must be grounded in truth and relevance. Misused, they risk misleading juries. Used as Lincoln did, they facilitate understanding.
Legal professionals should practice drawing parallels between technical data and everyday experiences—bridging gaps in comprehension without sacrificing accuracy.
Conclusion
Abraham Lincoln’s legal career remains a goldmine of professional wisdom. His approach, marked by storytelling, integrity, plain language, diligence, and ethical discernment, offers a template for legal professionals across disciplines. Whether preparing testimony, presenting findings, or navigating the moral complexities of modern law, professionals can turn to Lincoln as a standard-bearer for how justice should be practiced.
The courtroom may have evolved with technology and legal complexity, but Lincoln’s principles endure. Among them is his timeless counsel to avoid unnecessary litigation: “Discourage litigation. Persuade your neighbors to compromise whenever you can. Point out to them how the nominal winner is often a real loser—in fees, expenses, and waste of time.”11 His words serve as a powerful reminder that true justice often lies in the wisdom to resolve conflict with fairness and restraint.
All of the views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and not necessarily those of The National Law Review.
References
Abraham Lincoln Was a Self-Taught Lawyer—a Really Good One | TIME
Abrams, D. (2018). Lincoln’s Last Trial: The Murder Case That Propelled Him to the Presidency, pp. 201–215.
When I’m getting ready to reason with a… Abraham Lincoln – Forbes Quotes
Tarbell, Ida M. The Life of Abraham Lincoln. New York: McClure, Phillips & Co., 1900.
Burlingame, M. (n.d.). [PDF]. In Abraham Lincoln: A Life, Vol. 1, Chap. 9. Lincoln Studies Center, Knox College.
Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln. (1953). Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln [Digital collection]. University of Michigan Library Digital Collections.
Goodwin, D. K. (2005). Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln. Simon & Schuster.
Dirck, B. (2009). Lincoln the Lawyer. University of Illinois Press.
Zall, P. M. (2009). Lincoln laughing: Humor as rhetorical strategy. Illinois History Teacher, 15(2). Northern Illinois University.
Schrag, Z. M. (n.d.). Abraham Lincoln, first debate with Stephen A. Douglas at Ottawa, Illinois, August 21, 1858 (excerpt). Course materials for History 120, George Mason University.
Lincoln, A. (1953). Fragment: Notes for a law lecture (Vol. 2, pp. 134–135) [Digital edition]. In Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln (Sept. 3, 1848–Aug. 21, 1858). Rutgers University Press. University of Michigan Library Digital Collections.
Court of Appeals Decision May Offer Employers Relief for Attorneys’ Fees Under California Labor Code Section 1102.5
California Labor Code section 1102.5 authorizes employees to recover attorneys’ fees if they bring a successful action. However, the employer may preclude an award of attorney’s fees to the employee by establishing the same-decision affirmative defense outlined in Labor Code section 1102.6.
Background on California Labor Code Section 1102.5 Whistleblower Retaliation Claims
On July 8, 2025, California’s Second District Court of Appeals reversed a trial court’s decision awarding attorneys’ fees to an employee alleging whistleblower retaliation under Labor Code section 1102.5. The Court of Appeals explained that there is no discretion provided to courts in awarding attorneys’ fees under Labor Code section 1102.5 – meaning, if an employer successfully establishes the same-decision affirmative defense scheme in section 1102.6, the employee has not brought a “successful action” that would warrant an award of attorneys’ fees.
In 2017, Lampkin, a former deputy at the Los Angeles Sheriff’s department, filed a single cause of action for whistleblower retaliation under Labor Code section 1102.5 against the county. Lampkin requested monetary damages, but no injunctive or declaratory relief. At trial, the jury found that although Lampkin established that he had engaged in protected activity, the county also met its burden that it would have made the same decision for independent, legitimate reasons. Considering this, the jury did not award Lampkin damages. Lampkin requested the trial court declare him the prevailing party, relying on Harris v. City of Santa Monica (2022) 79 Cal.App.5th 367, which holds that the same-decision defense does not bar a fee award on claims brought under the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA). The trial court agreed and allowed Lampkin to file a memorandum of costs and a motion for attorneys’ fees. The trial court then awarded Lampkin costs of $52,043.65 and $400,000 in attorneys’ fees. The county appealed.
The Court of Appeals reversed the trial court’s decision and refused to extend the decision in Harris to claims brought forth under Labor Code section 1102.5. The court found that the application of Harris to FEHA claims was distinguishable from the Labor Code for three reasons:
The cases were procedurally different. In Harris, the jury had awarded monetary damages;
The FEHA expressly grants courts discretion to award attorneys’ fees, whereas Labor Code section 1102.5 does not.
The FEHA has broader statutory language than Labor Code section 1102.5. The FEHA only prohibits actions against an employee because of their membership in a protected class, which may be interpreted multiple ways. In contrast, the Labor Code section 1102.6 offers straightforward instructions that once the same-decision defense is met, the case ends. There is no limitation on the extent of or different ways to interpret the same-decision defense.
The Court of Appeals recognized that the Legislature included the same-decision defense in Labor Code section 1102.6 to limit employer liability in cases where a legitimate, independent reason for the adverse action exists. Without this limitation, for example, a plaintiff could potentially prevail on claims where protected disclosure played a minor role in the employer’s decision, exposing employers to liability for decisions influenced by mere passing remarks.
Takeaways for Employers: Attorneys’ Fees and the Same-Decision Defense Under Labor Code 1102.5
Lampkin sets forth a clear distinction between FEHA and Labor Code section 1102.5 whistleblower retaliation claims. While this decision may offer employers relief when they successfully prove an affirmative defense, it is arguably limited to situations where relief is obtained. The Lampkin court expressed no opinion as to the outcome where a plaintiff obtained some form of relief, for example injunctive relief.
Structuring Co-Tenancy Clauses: A Collaborative Approach to Risk and Remedy
Why Co-Tenancy Clauses Matter Now More Than Ever
In the ever-morphing world of Retail Leasing, co-tenancy clauses often become the focus of negotiation—and a frequent flashpoint of disputes. Designed to protect tenants from being left vulnerable when shopping centers lose key retailers, these lease provisions can make or break a deal.
What Are Co-Tenancy Clauses, Really?
At its core, a co-tenancy clause is a provision in a retail lease that ties the lease obligations of the tenant—typically rent payments or continued occupancy—to the presence and performance of other tenants in a retail center. If certain conditions aren’t met, tenants may be entitled to pay less rent, shift to an alternative rent structure (i.e., a percentage model), or even walk away from the lease altogether.
The Three “Flavors” of Co-Tenancy
1. Opening Co-Tenancy
This provision states that tenants neither have to open nor pay full rent until a certain number of other tenants (often anchors) have also opened. This is common in developing centers or during major renovations. This provides assurance to the tenants that the shopping center will be sufficiently occupied to ensure foot traffic and potential sales before committing to opening the store.
2. Operating Co-Tenancy
Under this provision, once a tenant is opened and operating, they may be allowed to adjust rent or exit if the center loses key tenants after opening. This is to protect the tenants from operating in centers with insufficient foot traffic, or “ghost centers.”
3. Delivery Co-Tenancy
This type of clause refers to an occupancy condition that must be met before a tenant takes possession of the leased premises. Specifically, tenants want proof that the center will have enough open stores to attract shoppers. Clauses like these are usually contingent on construction timelines or lease signing with other tenants.
Why It Matters More Than Ever
The traditional purpose of co-tenancy was to protect tenants from being stranded in “ghost centers,” after the closing of key anchors. However, the retail landscape of today is far more fluid, and as such, co-tenancy clauses—and the way we structure them—need to evolve. Many legacy anchors are downsizing, being replaced by nontraditional uses, or being redeveloped altogether. Foot traffic these days is also driven by more factors than just square footage.
As this shift continues, it’s no longer enough to simply have a few “big-name” tenants in a lease. Clauses need to define what a “material failure” looks like and ensure that lease remedies reflect an actual disruption in business.
Five Tips for Drafting Stronger Co-Tenancy Clauses
1. Be Precise
It cannot be overstated how essential precision is in drafting these clauses. Avoid ambiguous terms like “comparable tenant mix” or “similar retail profile.” Specify anchor tenants by name, clearly define minimum square footage, include hours of operation requirements, and address what constitutes a “replacement” tenant. Clear and measurable terms make clauses more affordable and less likely to spark disputes.
2. Add Realistic Cure Periods
A well-structured clause should include a cure period—commonly 60 to 180 days—before any remedy is triggered. This gives landlords a window to rectify the issue, re-lease, or adjust before tenants start pulling back.
3. Link Remedies to Sales Impact
Consider requiring proof of declining sales (for example, 20% over 12 months) before tenants can claim rent relief or termination rights, ensuring that remedies are based on real-world effects.
4. Using Tiered Remedies
Instead of jumping straight to immediate or indefinite rent abatement, structure remedies in stages.
First, switch to a percentage rent model
Then, offer a temporary rent reduction
Allow lease termination only after prolonged failure and notice
This approach aligns incentives and gives both parties time to course-correct.
5. Carve Out Exceptions In the Form of Non-Curable Events
Include exceptions for closures due to events outside of the landlord’s control, such as natural disasters, bankruptcy, or redevelopment. Negotiating these issues up front can help avoid disputes down the road.
The Attorney’s Role: Balance, Not Bias
Because attorneys on both sides of the table are tasked simultaneously with protecting a client’s interests and drafting agreements that can stand up to scrutiny and the realities of the market, it’s paramount to approach negotiations with the right mindset: collaboration over confrontation. The goal is not to “win,” but to create a structure that works for both sides over time.
Tough questions need to be asked:
What occupancy levels truly affect business?
Can proof of impact be built in?
Are cure periods realistic?
When both sides work from a place of clarity and intent, deals not only close but also last.
Final Thoughts: Partnership Through Precision
Co-tenancy clauses aren’t just for tenant protection—they’re critical risk-sharing mechanisms that require legal sophistication. With clear terms, fair triggers, and reasonable remedies, attorneys can structure clauses that protect tenants, support landlords, and promote business continuity. It all comes down to precision. The best co-tenancy provisions are not the most aggressive—they are the most clearly defined, reasonably limited, and operationally realistic.
A New Form of Legal Advertising?
Are social media influencers the new path for law firm advertising?
Legal ethics rules once prohibited advertising until those rules were successfully challenged as violating the First Amendment. State bar associations still limit how lawyers can advertise, but plaintiffs’ firms have capitalized on billboards and viral videos (the Law Hawk comes to mind). By contrast, defense firms have shied away from aggressive mass marketing.
This article from The Wall Street Journal discusses how Neon Coat allows businesses—including law firms—to give away free services to influencers in exchange for social media mentions. Will this be the new frontier for legal advertising?
Maybe potential clients won’t be influenced if “hot” TikTok stars promote a lawyer, but I can envision a version that offers similar deals to influential CEOs and businesses. Law firms may want to seek advisory opinions from their state bar associations on how to ensure paid social media mentions stay within ethical guidelines.
How do you build a successful small business? For some, the answer is simple: Get hot people to show up.
www.wsj.com/…
Mastering Deposition Designations in California: Best Practices for Trial Success
Some of the most critical evidence at trial comes in the form of deposition testimony from witnesses who are unable to testify live at trial. Done right, deposition designations can powerfully support your case. Done poorly, they can confuse the jury or worse yet, be excluded. Below are six best practices for California practitioners to ensure your designations are both effective and admissible.
1. It All Starts with a Good Deposition
Laying the groundwork for trial happens long before the jury is sworn in. If a witness lives beyond the court’s subpoena power, their deposition may be the only chance to present their testimony. CCP § 2025.620(c). If you’re taking the deposition, prepare as though you’re conducting a trial examination. A detailed outline and clear objectives will help you elicit testimony that’s both compelling and admissible. If you plan to introduce documents, consider arranging for a document camera or other graphic presentation of the evidence alongside the witness so that you won’t need to later manually show the jury the documents presented to the witness. If it’s a particularly long examination, you should also consider arranging for a second camera on the examiner. While this might be uncomfortable for the examiner, it will be a much less stale presentation to the jury who will grow tired of staring at one person for hours. Conducting a well-executed deposition lays the groundwork for the most effective deposition designations.
If you’re defending the deposition, there are two things to keep in mind.
First, in terms of asserting objections, under California law, any objections to form must be made during the deposition; failing to do so waives them. CCP § 2025.460(b). Though you can later assert evidentiary objections as part of the designations process, you want to be sure to make proper form objections to preserve the record.
Second, because this may be your only chance to frame the witness’s testimony, you should consider conducting a thorough redirect to clarify or rehabilitate your witness. With that in mind, treat every question as if it will be played to a jury—because it might be.
2. Coordinate the Briefing Schedule Early
Deposition designation deadlines can sneak up quickly. Some California jurisdictions have local rules governing the process, but often, there will simply be a deadline by which you must submit designations and counterdesignations to the court. See, e.g., S.F. Superior Local Rule 6.3. In that circumstance, you’ll need to work backward from the court’s deadline, and you do not want to leave this important step for the final days before trial.
Connect with opposing counsel well in advance to agree on a schedule for exchanging designations, objections and counter-designations, and responses to objections (more on that below). The schedule should also include time for formatting designations and objections, printing, and lodging transcripts with the court—this process often takes longer than expected, particularly if the court requires highlighted deposition transcripts or specific objection formatting. Early coordination helps avoid last-minute disputes and ensures both sides have adequate time to prepare.
3. Build in Time for Responses to Objections
Not all objections are straightforward. Sometimes, testimony that appears irrelevant or inadmissible on its face becomes admissible when viewed in context with other evidence. For example, a relevance objection might be overcome by explaining how the testimony ties into a document or witness not yet introduced. Build time into the schedule to craft thoughtful responses that provide this context to the court.
4. Dealing with Over-Designation
In cases with multiple deponents, some attorneys may over-designate testimony. This could be a way for counsel to try to preserve options, but it also could be a tactic to try to bog counsel down with work that distracts from other trial prep. Aside from draining resources, this also reduces the amount of time both responding counsel and the court have to actually analyze the admissibility of each individually designated piece of testimony.
Anticipate this possibility and build in enough time to respond thoroughly. Depending on the volume, the court may be receptive to a priority list—that is, the court reviews the designations in tranches with the most likely to be used going first. Remember, a robust objection process is essential to prevent irrelevant or prejudicial testimony from reaching the jury.
5. Don’t Forget Foundation
The rules of evidence still apply to deposition designations. While it may be tempting to skip over foundation testimony, especially when it involves long pauses while a witness reviews documents, but doing so can backfire and be ripe for an objection on foundation grounds. To prepare for this, either designate the foundation testimony or, better yet, reach an agreement with opposing counsel that foundation was laid for certain areas of testimony. This avoids playing tedious video clips and keeps the jury engaged.
6. Get a Fresh Set of Eyes
Before finalizing designations, consider asking a colleague who hasn’t read the transcript to review the selected excerpts. Ask them to summarize what they learned back to you. You’ll be surprised how often they’ll identify the missing context or confusing gaps. This simple step can dramatically improve the clarity and impact of your designations.
By following these best practices, you’ll be better positioned to present clear, admissible, and persuasive deposition testimony at trial.
Most Law Firms Are Building on Leaky Foundations, and AI Will Expose It
In May, the FBI issued a warning1 about a group that has been targeting law firms across the United States using phishing and social engineering, exploiting the legal industry’s handling of confidential and sensitive data.
While the legal profession is no stranger to cybersecurity risks, this warning comes at a time when the sector is also undergoing a major technological shift. Many law firms are integrating AI into their workflows without fully addressing the structural vulnerabilities in their technology infrastructure. Between the urgency of needing to “keep up” with innovation and the realities of outdated AI systems, law firms are exposed to a level of risk that many aren’t prepared to manage.
Shadow AI, a threat from within
With the rise of AI adoption, cybersecurity threats aren’t exclusively from external actors anymore. One of the most pressing concerns is employees’ often invisible use of unapproved generative AI tools, a phenomenon known as “Shadow AI,” and tools we’re all familiar with, like ChatGPT.
Shadow AI2 refers to AI tools introduced into a workplace without the awareness or approval of IT, legal operations, or firm leadership. These tools are widely available and easy to access, which has led to their rapid adoption across all types of organizations. A recent study found that 99 percent3 of enterprises are exposed to Shadow AI, and fewer than one in seven4 have implemented any AI-specific security or governance controls.
This lack of oversight is particularly dangerous in the legal sector. Often under pressure to meet tight deadlines, legal professionals may use public AI tools to draft emails, conduct research, summarize documents, or brainstorm ideas. If those tools are not governed or secured properly, they can expose sensitive information to environments that are outside of the firm’s control, widening opportunities for unintended disclosure, data leakage, and regulatory risk.
Law firms’ infrastructures are outdated
Many firms continue to rely on a mix of legacy software, public cloud services, and SaaS platforms that were not built with AI integration or legal confidentiality in mind.
While public cloud models offer scalability and ease of use, they often lack the transparency and control that legal organizations need. In many cases, law firms can’t easily determine where their data is stored, how it is processed, or whether it’s being used to train third-party AI models. Even with terms of service and privacy policies in place, the firm’s visibility into the actual movement and handling of data can be limited.
Generative AI tools also become increasingly dependent on firm-specific knowledge and documents as they need access to internal data to provide relevant and reliable outputs. Without a secure environment for these interactions, law firms risk breaching client confidentiality and professional obligations.
Private, isolated AI should be the new standard
Isolated AI environments can address these risks, providing dedicated, private systems designed specifically to support secure and governed AI use within law firms and other professional organizations.
An isolated environment prevents data from being transmitted to or stored on third-party servers outside of the firm’s jurisdiction. This containment is essential for meeting regulatory requirements and fulfilling obligations to clients.
These environments also offer a high degree of customization. AI tools can be trained or fine-tuned using firm-specific documents and knowledge bases without sending that data to external vendors. This results in more accurate and relevant outputs while preserving the integrity and privacy of the firm’s information.
Moving toward isolated environments does not require abandoning cloud computing entirely. Instead, it involves choosing infrastructure models that are purpose-built for security, compliance, and performance within regulated sectors. A properly implemented private cloud, for example, can offer the same flexibility and scalability as public alternatives, while providing the safeguards necessary for legal practice.
AI security is a shared responsibility
To use AI safely and effectively, law firms must also establish clear governance policies that define how these tools are adopted, used, and monitored.
AI governance should address multiple areas:
Tool approval processes that ensure all software is reviewed for compliance, security, and relevance before deployment.
Training programs that help employees understand the risks of using unauthorized AI tools and promote safe alternatives.
Guidelines that define which tasks are appropriate for AI assistance and which require human oversight.
Ongoing audits and evaluations to measure the effectiveness and compliance of AI systems over time.
This governance framework should not be limited to IT departments. It requires collaboration between legal leadership, technology teams, compliance officers, and client-facing staff. AI affects the firm’s risk profile, reputation, and operational integrity, which makes it a shared responsibility across the organization.
More AI use should mean more security
The more law firms rely on AI, the more critical it becomes to ensure that every aspect of its deployment, like where it runs, what data it uses, and who controls it, is aligned with professional obligations and long-term business interests.
The rise of Shadow AI is a warning sign that internal systems and governance models have not kept pace with external innovation.
Law firms need to transition away from general-purpose platforms and toward secure, isolated AI environments that are tailored to the demands of legal practice. This approach supports innovation without compromising the trust that clients place in their legal counsel.
The threats are here, the tools are advancing, and the risks are growing.
What’s needed now is a deliberate shift toward infrastructure and policies that treat AI with the same seriousness as the law itself.
Notes
https://www.ic3.gov/CSA/2025/250523.pdf
https://www.ibm.com/think/topics/shadow-ai
https://142972.fs1.hubspotusercontent-na1.net/hubfs/142972/Files/reports/2025-varonis-state-of-data-security-report.pdf
https://virtualizationreview.com/articles/2025/06/16/ai-booms-but-cloud-security-lags-just-13-use-ai-specific-protections-says-wiz.aspx
Lawyer on the Move: A Checklist for Planning a Lateral Move
In this month’s article, I cover another question that I am often asked regarding the lateral partner process. The question that is always asked is, “Do you have a checklist?” My answer is always the same. “Yes, but it is only a starting point because each situation is different and presents unique issues that must be analyzed separately and apart from the checklist.” Below are some of the most critical considerations and practical steps attorneys should keep in mind when contemplating a lateral move.
Q: I’m a partner and have been contemplating a lateral move to another law firm. What should I be thinking about in terms of planning?
A: Transitioning to a new law firm can be an exciting and life-changing event. But, it requires planning. The process can take anywhere from 3 to 6 months or more depending upon each attorney’s particular situation.
Departing attorneys must balance their fiduciary obligations to their clients along with their fiduciary obligations owed to the law firm and partners. To assist with navigating this important and challenging time, below is a list of considerations that laterals should keep in mind when moving from one firm to another. The list is not meant to be exhaustive, but rather a starting point.
Planning and preparation:
Review the partnership agreement and all related materials
Prepare a list of firms that you may be interested in
Engage a recruiter – For more advice on engaging a recruiter, consult my May 16, 2025 article on “Lawyer on the Move: Using a Legal Recruiter” published in The National Law Review.
Engage ethics counsel familiar with these issues/obligations
Plan and prepare for proper notice to the firm
Responsibilities relating to client matters
Notify clients of departure using best practices set forth in your specific jurisdiction
Determine which matters will be transferred and which matters will be closed
File motions to withdraw/substitute/notice of change of firm name and address, etc.
Work with the firm regarding file transfer letters
Administrative tasks
There are a myriad of administrative tasks that need to be completed during a transition. Moreover, each situation will depend on the specifics of your practice and firm protocol. Oftentimes, a firm will provide the departing attorney with a departure checklist outlining the tasks that must be completed before that individual is released by the firm. These tasks range from completing all your time entries to drafting a transition memorandum, including upcoming deadlines, for each matter that is being restaffed and will remain at the firm after you depart. Specifically, you should:
Familiarize yourself with the firm’s departure checklist, if applicable. If the checklist references other firm policies or documents that are not in your possession, ask for a copy so you fully understand each task before you get started.
Work with the transition partner assigned by the firm to complete each task in a timely manner.
Consult with your counsel to make certain nothing is missed.
Responsibilities of withdrawal
Consider ethical walls or legal holds for matters being transferred
What can and cannot be said to clients regarding your departure, and when can you have these discussions?
What can and cannot be said to your colleagues regarding your departure, and when can you have these discussions? Does it depend on whether the colleague is a partner or an associate at your firm?
The checklist set forth above involves complicated fiduciary and ethical issues that need to be analyzed under the rule(s) of the specific jurisdiction(s) in which you practice and hold your license(s). There can be serious consequences if the rules are not followed. The checklist represents only the tip of the iceberg in terms of the issues that need to be navigated during a lateral move.
There are numerous additional issues that also must be considered throughout the transition process. You would be well advised to hire ethics counsel to advise you on the topics noted above and numerous other related issues such as complying with your fiduciary duties, securing your book of business, and handling the return of your capital account, if applicable. Benefits issues may also arise and must be addressed as you transition from one firm to another.
You are smart to think ahead! Good luck with your potential move, and hopefully, this list will help you to start planning your next steps.
5 Megatrends Shaping the World: How to Stay Ahead of the Curve
Staying the course isn’t always enough – family enterprises must adapt to an ever-changing world to be competitive and ready for the future.
In brief
The willingness to keep up with real-time change is critical. Not doing so can leave family-owned firms lagging in the marketplace.
Megatrends like digital, risk management, regulatory, NextGen and philanthropy are essential and relevant to family firms for potential success.
Embracing risk in lieu of avoiding it will better position family enterprises to head off disruptions and enhance business growth.
Family enterprises, including family offices, blend tradition with innovation. The pandemic was a stark reminder of the speed of change and the fragility of systems that cannot adapt.
The world is not just evolving; it is transforming rapidly and unpredictably. Megatrends such as technological advancements, regulatory shifts, and demographic changes are not isolated forces, but interconnected ones that are shaping our world. To thrive in a globalized economy, family enterprises must adopt a forward-looking, hyper-focused approach to resiliency.
Here are five megatrends that family enterprises need to keep their eye on and plan for:
Digital transformation: Embrace it
Private capital is on the rise, placing family businesses at the forefront of a changing environment. With increasing immigration, rapid technological progress, and a growing reliance on a smaller workforce, the need for adaptability is not just a choice, but a necessity for these enterprises.
To navigate this shift, these businesses need to integrate technology into their core strategies for growth and resilience. This includes implementing robust data management and security to safeguard vital information while allowing necessary access. For family businesses, the digital revolution means more than just adopting new tech — it means a fundamental transformation in operations, engagement, and value delivery. A digital-first mindset, characterized by agility and continuous learning, is essential.
Looking ahead to a future with artificial intelligence, the metaverse, and Web 3.0, family enterprises must explore the limits of what’s possible and prepare for a blended digital-physical reality with new avenues for innovation and connectivity. Adapting is not just about surviving; it’s about thriving in a digital-centric world where adaptability equals success.
Enterprise risk management: building resilience
A robust enterprise risk management (ERM) system is crucial in today’s unpredictable landscape. Simply identifying risks is inadequate; businesses need to be adept at early detection, response, and recovery from unexpected incidents to maintain resilience amid volatility.
Traditional risk management methods fall short. Even large global corporations struggle to create sustainable risk strategies, highlighting the necessity for a more dynamic approach. ERM must be woven into a company’s fabric, with a focus on comprehensive risk handling.
Companies should appoint a risk steward responsible for overseeing risk management across the organization and fostering a unified, proactive approach. This individual should have a clear grasp of the company’s primary risks and the following attributes:
The skill to dismantle organizational barriers and collaborate across various operational levels
An understanding of the organization’s risk tolerance and how to incentivize leaders to agree on a standard risk definition
The ability to align risk priorities with overall business performance
Whether enhancing current systems or introducing new ones, adequate data and technology infrastructure should:
Establish a shared risk ecosystem with a unified taxonomy and data model
Streamline and automate risk management tasks, reducing effort and training requirements
Eliminate redundancies, phase out outdated systems, and leverage optimized technologies like cloud services and advanced analytics
Ensure systems are robust enough to endure disruptions and recover quickly – resilience is the future of risk management.
Regulatory environment: anticipating change
A global perspective is crucial when considering megatrends. With regulatory environments in flux, international organizations that are informed on the latest global developments, like the World Economic Forum, can provide crucial guidance for family enterprises seeking to identify and get ahead of the next megatrends.
By following their lead, family enterprises will be better equipped to anticipate and plan strategically for these changes. Additionally, proactive family enterprises are at the forefront of initiatives such as public-private partnerships as a means to address societal issues.
Rising generations: the future of leadership
As Gen Z enters the workforce and ascends into leadership roles, new viewpoints and priorities emerge found in EY data from the 2024 Live Work Play Study. Their inherent digital fluency, practical mindset, and drive for meaningful change are poised to influence the direction of family businesses. Understanding the unique motivations and behaviors of each generation is crucial for cultivating a workplace culture that capitalizes on the diverse strengths of each generation.
Philanthropy: a new approach to giving
The approach to philanthropy is evolving, with an increasing focus on strategic giving and measurable impact. Family enterprises have the opportunity to leverage their wealth for social good, which requires careful consideration of how funds are allocated.
The rise of social welfare organizations, such as 501(c) (4)s, offers a new avenue for advocacy and partnership, allowing enterprises to contribute to societal change more directly and meaningfully.
Moving into the future
Family enterprises and offices must evolve from a risk avoidance mindset to risk resilience. By understanding and preparing for megatrends, family enterprises can turn potential disruptions into opportunities for growth.
Family enterprises should incorporate the following action steps into their strategic planning:
Develop a proper risk management framework: Establish a comprehensive risk management framework that goes beyond simply identifying risks and includes strategies for managing and mitigating those risks effectively.
Get smarter about generations and human behavior: Enhance your understanding of different generations within the family enterprise and their behaviors. This knowledge can help you tailor approaches that resonate with each generation and manage family dynamics.
Think globally: Avoid being insular and recognize the importance of thinking as a global citizen. Even if the enterprise or office does not operate internationally, global events and trends can have local impacts, and it’s crucial to be aware of and plan for these.
Anticipate regulatory changes: Stay informed about potential regulatory changes and understand how they may affect the enterprise. Large organizations often struggle to keep up with regulatory changes, so thinking ahead and preparing for these shifts is essential.
Support better regulation through public-private partnerships: Engage in public-private partnerships to address issues collaboratively rather than relying solely on regulation. Both sectors will develop more effective and targeted solutions than regulations that may not fully address the underlying concerns.
Let us embrace these trends not as threats but as the path forward to a more robust and dynamic future.
Summary
Traits like resiliency, agility and proactivity are paramount in navigating the speed at which the world moves in terms of technology, regulations and demographics. Family-owned firms should strive to be forward-thinking and focused on harnessing the opportunities for success that come through megatrends.