A retired lawyer was among the 23 who died in the terrorist attack in Tunisia last week… International law firm hires team in Hong Kong… Law firm reduces litigation team… Read the ruling, not just the title…
Tributes paid to lawyer killed in Tunis tragedy
A retired lawyer was among the 23 who died in the terrorist attack in Tunisia last week. Sally Adey, who was 57, was on a last-minute Mediterranean holiday with her husband Robert, who is a partner at Shakespeares Legal based in Birmingham, UK. The firm has opened a books of condolence at its offices. The attack at the Bardo museum in Tunis also claimed the life of Australian Javier Camelo.International law firm hires team in Hong Kong
Berwin Leighton Paisner has announced that it has hired nine lawyers from independent boutique firm Haley & Co for its Hong Kong office. Three partners – Glenn Haley, Ilan Freiman and Geoff Shaw – will move to BLP from the start of May and will give the firm its first arbitration capability in Hong Kong. Joining the partners will be four associates; Patrick Daley, Mike Docherty, Sheona Campbell and Kenny Tam; plus one locum, one trainee and one paralegal, as well as up to five business services staff.
Law firm reduces litigation team
A large, Boston-based law firm has laid off 21 of its litigation team amounting to around 9 per cent of the group’s total. Goodwin Procter has also made 17 staff redundant. It’s believed the layoffs are the result of earlier settlements and more in-house teams handling disputes. The international firm has said that it is growing in other practice areas but that litigation work is declining.
Read the ruling, not just the title
A law firm has learned the hard way that it’s important to read the detail of a ruling and not just its title. In the US courts telecoms firm AT&T was in a patent dispute and was being represented by Sidley Austin. Bloomberg reports that lawyers filed four motions requesting a “judgement as a matter of law” where the judge can over-rule a jury. It also requested that the motions be filed under seal, due to their confidential nature. The motions extended the time that AT&T had to lodge an appeal. When the electronic court dockets appeared and were sent electronically to lawyers and the client, they were labelled “orders granting the motions to seal”. However the dockets also included a denial of the motions for the judgement as a matter of law. According to the court 18 lawyers who were sent the court dockets failed to read the full judgement and so missed the denial – and the deadline to appeal.
