John Grisham’s ‘The Rooster Bar’ inspired by CU Boulder law professor’s article

University of Colorado Law Professor Paul Campos is pictured in 2012.

University of Colorado Law Professor Paul Campos is pictured in 2012. (Patrick Campbell / The Denver Post)

Bestselling author John Grisham’s latest legal thriller, “The Rooster Bar,” was inspired by University of Colorado Law Professor Paul Campos’s article on for-profit law schools, Grisham said.

In an interview with The Atlantic, Grisham admits Campos’s 2014 article, “The Law-School Scam,” also published in the The Atlantic, was the muse behind his 2017 law student-centered novel.

Grisham’s book details the experiences of three third-year law students, frustrated after taking out massive student loans at a for-profit law school failing at landing the students jobs.

“I didn’t know about it until actually a few days after the book came out,” Campos said.

A journalist from The Chronicle of Higher Education contacted Campos shortly after the end-of-2017 publication of Grisham’s book to see how the professor felt about the homage.

Campos was pleasantly surprised.

“It turned out, [Grisham] had sent me a copy of the book with a nice little letter, but the mail system at CU tends to be rather spotty, so I didn’t actually get it until a couple of days after I heard about it,” he said. “He certainly didn’t talk to me about it, but it was nice, needless to say, to have a story like that featured in a John Grisham novel, which is about 10,000 times more resonant than a standard academic setting.”


Advertisement


Campos’s article was an investigation into the world of for-profit law schools. After being tipped off about the matter and doing some digging, Campos discovered handfuls of American Bar Association-accredited schools were admitting underqualified students taking out hundreds of millions of dollars each year in loans they would likely be unable to repay, to the benefit of the school — some owned by private equity firms.

Although Campos admits he is a bit biased, he said he understands why this situation would catch the eye of a novelist.

“I think there is something inherently compelling about the narrative of the combination of the legal and the academic world and their relation to hot-button issues having to do with exploitation of young people by the system, which is, obviously, a very germaine topic, in general, right now,” he said.

In Grisham’s interview, the novelist said one aspect of Campos’s article that most captured his attention was Grisham’s own ignorance to the topic.

“I think one of the most charming things about Grisham’s statements in regard to the whole issue is the extent to which he admitted he was just basically unaware that any of this was going on,” Campos said. “I think it was material rich for mining.”

When Campos’s article came out, he received a good deal of positive feedback along with “an army of trolls,” he said.

“I think it has been very resonating,” Campos said. “The Grisham thing is a capstone to all that. You never know who you’re going to reach.”

Since Campos’s 2014 article, he’s seen a good deal of progress made in the for-profit law school realm.

One of three law schools discussed in Campos’s piece has since gone out of business, with two others “teetering on the brink,” he said. Campos added that the American Bar Association began more strictly enforcing its accreditation standards, too.

“It’s been the beginning of a real reckoning that has moved through the system in the last two or three years in terms of legal education,” he said.

As far as Campos’s book review, he admits he has yet to read “The Rooster Bar.”

“But I’m looking forward to doing so,” he said.

Elizabeth Hernandez: 303-473-1106, hernandeze@dailycamera.com

Go to Source

Barnier says UK firms won’t benefit from “single rulebook” after Brexit

The EU’s chief Brexit negotiator tonight doubled-down on his insistence that City firms will lose their passporting rights after Brexit, but said there was room for co-operation between the UK and the EU.

Highlighting the importance of financial stability, Michel Barnier said that there would be scope for the EU to consider UK rules as equivalent.

Read more: The three questions Farage will put to Barnier

Speaking in Belgium, Barnier said: “A country that comes out of this very precise framework and its consistent and integrated implementation by the national authorities has the opportunity to diverge but at the same time loses the benefits of the internal market.”

Meanwhile, the government made concessions in its EU Withdrawal Bill, tabling 25 amendments to the legislation after discussion with MPs.

As part of one of the amendments, the UK government has imposed limits on when it can use powers to change EU law once it has been transferred onto the UK statue books.

Minister for Exiting the EU, Steve Baker said: “In bringing forward these amendments today, we’re showing the seriousness with which we take parliament’s views. “

Go to Source

SHAREHOLDER ALERT: Pomerantz Law Firm Investigates Claims On Behalf of Investors of AZZ Inc. – AZZ

NEW YORK, Jan. 9, 2018 /PRNewswire/ — Pomerantz LLP is investigating claims on behalf of investors of AZZ Inc. (“AZZ” or the “Company”)

AZZ, -6.20%

   Such investors are advised to contact Robert S. Willoughby at rswilloughby@pomlaw.com or 888-476-6529, ext. 9980.

The investigation concerns whether AZZ and certain of its officers and/or directors have engaged in securities fraud or other unlawful business practices. 

[Click here to join a class action]

On January 9, 2018, AZZ announced “that the Company historically should have accounted differently for certain contracts within its Energy Segment.”  Specifically, the Company reported that revenue for the contracts at issue “was historically recognized for the Energy Segment upon transfer of title and risk to customers or based upon the percentage of completion method of accounting for electrical products built to customer specifications,” but that “in the case of contracts for which revenue was recorded upon contract completion and transfer of title, the Company instead should have applied the percentage of completion method.”  AZZ advised investors that it “is currently reviewing whether . . . there are any significant impacts to the Company’s audited consolidated financial statements for the fiscal years ended February 28, 2015 and 2017, and the fiscal year ended February 29, 2016, as contained in its 2017 Annual Report on Form 10-K and the previously issued unaudited financial statements contained in its Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q for the quarters ended May 31, 2017 and August 31, 2017.” 

On this news, AZZ’s share price has fallen sharply $3.14, or 6.20%, to close at $47.50 on January 9, 2018.

The Pomerantz Firm, with offices in New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, and Paris, is acknowledged as one of the premier firms in the areas of corporate, securities, and antitrust class litigation. Founded by the late Abraham L. Pomerantz, known as the dean of the class action bar, the Pomerantz Firm pioneered the field of securities class actions. Today, more than 80 years later, the Pomerantz Firm continues in the tradition he established, fighting for the rights of the victims of securities fraud, breaches of fiduciary duty, and corporate misconduct. The Firm has recovered numerous multimillion-dollar damages awards on behalf of class members. See www.pomerantzlaw.com.

CONTACT:Robert S. Willoughby
Pomerantz LLP
rswilloughby@pomlaw.com

View original content:http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/shareholder-alert-pomerantz-law-firm-investigates-claims-on-behalf-of-investors-of-azz-inc—azz-300580453.html

SOURCE Pomerantz LLP

Copyright (C) 2018 PR Newswire. All rights reserved

Go to Source

Houston law firm adds named partner


At a time when law firms are shortening their names to just one partner, dropping their ampersands or using only initials, one Houston firm has gone the opposite direction.

Wright & Close expanded its identity by adding the name of one of its partners, trial and appellate lawyer Jessica Zavadil Barger. The firm is now known as Wright Close & Barger.

Barger handles commercial disputes including insurance defense, product and premises liability and personal injury defense.




Go to Source

‘America First?’ Not necessarily when it comes to the GOP tax law and booze


Enforcing the new liquor tax regime falls predominantly to the U.S. Alcohol and Tobacco and Trade Bureau, a Treasury Department agency. (Patrick T. Fallon/Bloomberg News)

The new Republican tax law counts on a small, little-known federal agency to ensure a tax provision aimed at helping small liquor producers does not become a loophole large foreign distillers can exploit.

At issue is the law’s tax cut for hard liquor producers, dropping a tax from $13.50 per proof gallon (a measure of the liquor’s quantity and alcohol content) to $2.70 per proof gallon. That bargain $2.70 rate is limited to the first 100,000 proof gallons, while companies pay a higher rate on booze produced beyond that.

The cap is aimed primarily at benefiting small distilleries, aiming to spark small-business expansion and hiring. But the lower tax rate is also available to importers buying from foreign producers, and some fear that has opened up a loophole that foreign firms could use to pay the lower rate on more liquor than the plan’s drafters intended.

The scramble to enforce these new alcohol taxes is one example of the federal bureaucracy’s daunting new task of implementing a Republican tax law that critics say was passed quickly through Congress and contains a host of provisions that took effect within days of the law’s passage. Much of the enforcement will fall to the Internal Revenue Service, which experts fear has been left unable to handle the burden due to steep budget cuts. But other agencies have been tasked with enforcement too, and their ability to shoulder that burden is up for debate.

Enforcing the new liquor tax regime falls predominantly to the U.S. Alcohol and Tobacco and Trade Bureau, a Treasury Department agency that even before the tax law was racing to keep up with a boom in new domestic distilleries and breweries. The agency, which employs about 500 people across the country, had an annual budget of $113 million in 2016.

Some fear the fast adjustment to the new tax regime will stretch the agency’s ability to effectively monitor the industry, although others insist that the agency is well-prepared to meet the challenge.

“This whole thing is being accordioned into a short period. They don’t have time to consider everything that might happen, because they had to have rules as of January 1,” said David Dunbar, who spent decades at Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms and now works as a consultant to craft distillers nationally. “There’s a way in which rules are normally made that goes through a very formal process, in which agencies consider comments and make the changes necessary. I suspect that is not happening here.”

In its changes to liquor taxes, the GOP tax law drew heavily from an earlier, bipartisan proposal to revamp the federal tax system for booze. But while that previous version would have delayed the tax changes for about one year after passage to allow the agency time to craft an enforcement strategy, the law that passed gave the bureau about two weeks to do so.

TTB says that it is currently working on deciding how to implement the law, which could include issuing regulations. Typically, the bureau holds a months-long process to take public feedback and craft new regulations or guidelines for translating federal law into reality.

“We’re assessing [the new law] right now and will move on it as quickly as we can,” said Tom Hogue, a spokesman for the Alcohol and Tobacco and Trade Bureau. “It’s a pretty short run-up time, but we’re doing the best we can with the new statute. We’re hoping to issue guidance as soon as we can.”

But in the law as written, some see a loophole foreign firms could exploit.

If one foreign company were to act as if it were multiple companies selling different products to U.S. importers, its products might be eligible for the $2.70 tax rate on all sales, including those beyond the first 100,000 proof gallons, said Adam Looney, a former Treasury Department official now at the Brookings Institution.

Theoretically, U.S. companies could try the same scheme. But it would be easier to get away with abroad, where the TTB has less access and limited resources.

Foreign producers “will represent themselves as ‘craft’ producers even if they’re not,” Looney writes in a recent blog post. “Almost a third of distilled spirits is imported and the importers would have a strong incentive to claim the lowest rate. [The United States] will have little ability to stop them.”

Experts disagreed about the scale of the problem, with several in the industry dismissing the concern as baseless. Some noted that the agency would likely be able to enforce the law by overseeing importers, based in America, who they could hold accountable for the actions of their foreign producers.

“TTB has no extraterritorial reach, and they can’t go to France or German or South African to enforce this law. But they have an existing base of accountable importers, and the fallback is to say that they’re going to be held accountable,” said Bill Earle, president of the National Association of Beverage Importers. “It’s an issue that could be prickly, but it’s not something that’s irresolvable.”

“I don’t see where there will be an enforcement issue,” said Chuck Schumacher, a consultant for private companies who served as an investigator at TTB. “Fraud is rare and, for the most part, industry complies.”

Others former government officials said that it was hard to imagine how many foreign producers, if any, would be both big enough to have to evade U.S. law to claim the lower credit and willing to take the risk to do so. “Anyone who is doing 100,000-proof gallon has too much at stake to cheat,” said Dunbar, who predicted the TTB could craft the necessary regulations to ensure producers follow the new law.

Added Earle: “The United States has the benefit of being a market that has overwhelmingly reputable distilled spirits producers coming here, and that’s because it’s an expensive market to get into.”

Go to Source

UPDATED: Innovative Law Firms Embrace Technology as Industry Evolves

LONDON, Jan 09, 2018 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE via COMTEX) —

As sponsor of the Financial Times North America Innovative Lawyers report, HighQ congratulates each of the 25 law firms recognized as leaders in innovation, which is an honor earned by each firm for the ways in which they are “thinking differently about their businesses,” and “taking the long-term strategic view on technology, research and skills,” FT reported.

“The top legal firms in North America are tuned in to the importance of innovation in the legal marketplace, which continues to evolve as new technologies enhance and reshape the delivery of legal services worldwide,” said Ajay Patel, co-founder and chief executive officer of HighQ.

Evidence of this evolution is demonstrated by the fact that 16 of the 25 firms honored by FT are leveraging HighQ’s collaboration software as a service and content management solution with clients. HighQ was also pleased that Financial Times and candidate firms utilized a fully-branded, dedicated instance of its HighQ Collaborate to facilitate submission questionnaires using the iSheets module.

“We see some common characteristics amongst the most innovative firms – they are redefining their service models to meet client expectations, they are leveraging technology to become more efficient in the delivery of legal services, and most importantly, they are investing in and embracing a culture of change and innovation,” Patel said. “These law firms are leading the way with clients who are becoming increasingly focused on embracing technologies and systems to drive outcomes that improve their businesses.”

“Innovation is critical for the legal industry’s future,” Patel continued. “We congratulate the winners for their leadership in this important area and are proud to sponsor these prestigious awards.”

FT Innovative Lawyers North America 2017 is a rankings report and awards for North America-based lawyers. The Financial Times uses a unique methodology to rank innovation by lawyers and law firms. More than 500 submissions and nominations were received this year and the entries were judged for originality, leadership and impact in innovation.

About FTIL

The FT Innovative Lawyers Report, compiled by the FT and its research partner RSG Consulting, has become one of the top legal rankings in Europe, North America and the Asia-Pacific region and the accompanying awards are widely regarded as the best researched in the market. Shortlists for the awards comprise the top ranked submissions in each section of the report.

It presents a unique analysis of the legal industry and is the only ranking of lawyers by innovation. Both the report and awards are based on thorough research and robust journalism. The awards are now held annually in London, New York and Hong Kong, bringing together the top legal minds from across the profession in each region to celebrate the year’s standout innovations.

About HighQ

HighQ provides innovative enterprise collaboration and content publishing solutions to the world’s leading law firms, corporate legal teams and banks. Our secure file sharing, client extranet, matter collaboration and content marketing solutions uniquely combine enterprise-grade technology with the best ideas and user experience from consumer tools.

 Beau Wysong HighQ 913.998.6216 beau.wysong@highq.com 

Copyright (C) 2018 GlobeNewswire, Inc. All rights reserved.

Go to Source

Law firms lose millions of dollars to simple email scam: MailGuard

Fraudsters used scam emails to steal millions of dollars from Queensland law firms in December, according to security firm MailGuard.

The company says it was noteable that the fraudsters didn’t attack the law firms by hacking into their networks or infecting their computers with a virus – they just sent them an email.

“It was textbook social engineering. The lawyers who fell for this scam were targeted with phone calls from people who said they were seeking legal representation. The phone calls seemed legitimate; after explaining their problems the callers promised to email the lawyers with ‘important documents related to their cases,” said MailGuard’s Emmanuel Marshall in a blog on the security firm’s website.

“When the lawyers received the emails they found links to a file-sharing site. They clicked on the links and were required to enter their email account passwords to gain access. This whole process was a trick designed to collect the lawyer’s email login passwords.


“Lawyers are smart people, right? Not the sort who easily fall for scams. But the criminals who executed this fraud gained their trust by speaking to them on the phone so that when the scam email arrived, the victims were primed and waiting to click on the malicious link it contained.”

Marshall said that once the scammers gained access to the lawyer’s email accounts, they moved to phase two of the scam, monitoring the firm’s email traffic for invoices requesting payment.

“When they saw a suitably large invoice arrive in the firm’s inbox they sent a bogus message with false bank account details so that the payment went into the bank account of the scammers instead of the law firm.”

Speaking to the Brisbane Times — which originally broke the story about the law firm scam — Christine Smythe, president of The Queensland Law Society, said, “They are quite cunning… They are people who speak good English, answer in a convincing away and come with a backstory… The precise method of attack varies, but the essence is that the criminals obtain access to the firm’s email accounts and use this to misdirect funds.”

“People are not machines. We make a lot of decisions based on emotional responses and social cues. We haven’t got the mental bandwidth to parse every communication and verify its authenticity. Like the lawyers who fell for the email scam in Queensland, we’re all prone to making errors of judgement and that’s the security gap cyber criminals can most easily exploit,” says MailGuard’s Marshall.

“Social engineering is a booming crime category because cyber criminals understand that it’s easier to deceive a person than a machine. TechBeacon’s ‘2016 Cyber Security Trend Report’ reveals that 65% of professionals identify social engineering as the most serious security threat to their business.

“Human beings are still the gatekeepers of valuable data. Bank accounts, file storage, credit card details; they are all protected by passwords and those passwords can be obtained with trickery because they are stored in human brains.

“Hacking into a company using social engineering techniques is as simple as sending a cleverly worded email to people who work there. If criminals can trick one person into clicking on a malicious link or logging into a compromised website, they can use that person as an access point to the company’s most valuable data.”

Go to Source