Category: Blog

Go to Source

Go to Source

Go to Source

… mergers. Two Chicago law firms merged into other firms this year: 15-lawyer Baugh … ; in-house lawyers will encourage the law firms they use to improve their … corporate world sitting down their law firms for frank chats about e-discovery … that leaked from offshore law firm Appleby. Law firms have realized that …
Go to Source

Experienced workers’ compensation attorneys Will Cummings and Tray Middlebrooks were recently honored in the 15th edition of Georgia Trend Magazine’s Legal Elite.

ATLANTA (PRWEB) January 08, 2018

Atlanta lawyers Will Cummings and Tray Middlebrooks were recently recognized as members of the state’s Legal Elite in business magazine, Georgia Trend. This is the 15th edition of the popular legal section, which recognizes lawyers for excellence in the practice of law. The Legal Elite honor is unique in that inclusion is based entirely on the voting of other attorneys in the state of Georgia, and the number of recipients is a very small percentage of the practicing Bar.

Cummings used announcement of the awards as an opportunity to reflect on what makes the law firm he co-founded with Middlebrooks special. “In addition to a really strong commitment to personal service, our firm brings together a great mix of experience in and knowledge of the Georgia workers’ comp system,” said Cummings. “That’s a difficult combination to replicate, and it has a significant impact on our ability to achieve our clients’ goals.”

Middlebrooks agreed with his partner and long-time friend, while adding his thoughts about how a smaller law firm can meet the needs of clients involved in the complex process. “Being effective in the workers’ compensation system is largely dependent on having a superior understanding of each client’s unique situation, including what led to their injury and their personal financial needs moving into the future,” said Middlebrooks. “Making a personal investment in our clients and their families is a true differentiator between our practice and the larger law firms that handle a massive number of cases.”

About Cummings & Middlebrooks, LLP: The attorneys at Cummings & Middlebrooks, LLP bring over 35 years of combined experience to each client’s case. Conveniently located in the heart of Atlanta’s Buckhead community, the firm represents clients across the state of Georgia in cases involving serious work-related injuries and wrongful death. The firm has earned Martindale-Hubbell’s prestigious AV Rating, and is a recognized leader in the area of injured workers’ rights.

For the original version on PRWeb visit: http://www.prweb.com/releases/2018/01/prweb15064465.htm

Go to Source

Metropolitan News-Enterprise

 

Monday, January
8, 2018

 

Page 1

 

Court of Appeal:

Law Firm Improperly Used Privileged Memo, But Disqualification
Was Not Warranted

 

By a MetNews
Staff Writer

 

1100 Wilshire Boulevard

A law firm,
representing a defendant in a civil action, committed an ethical breach in
attaching to a trial brief a privileged document, lawfully acquired by its
client, in which legal advice was rendered to the plaintiff, the Court of Appeal
for this district has held, but that transgression did not compel its
disqualification.

Disqualification
of Winston & Strawn, an international law firm with a local office at 333
S. Grand Ave., was sought by 1100 Wilshire Property Owners Association (POA),
plaintiff in an action against 1100 Wilshire Commercial, LLC (WC).

The
document in question was a memo prepared by Susan M. Spitzer of the law firm of
Bovitz & Spitzer summarizing advice from three law firms to POA concerning
the 37-story residential developments covenants, conditions, and restrictions
and voting rights. It was distributed to all board members of the POA.

Those
members included John Mackey, who later became manager of WC, which owns lots
in the development. Mackey supplied the memo to his lawyers at Winston &
Strawn.

Meisinger
Strikes Memo

Retired
Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Louis M. Meisinger, acting as referee in the
case, struck the memo and references to it in the brief, but denied the POAs
motion to disqualify the defendants law firm.

In
an opinion for Div. Five, Acting Justice Kim Dunning, an Orange Superior Court
judge sitting on assignment, on Thursday affirmed in an opinion that was not
certified for publication.

She
pointed to the Court of Appeals 1999 decision in State Compensation
Insurance Fund v. WPS, Inc. There, the plaintiffs lawyers inadvertently
sent privileged documents to the defendants counsel.

Vogels Opinion

Then-Presiding
Justice Charles Vogel of Div. Four (who is now back in law practice) wrote:

When
a lawyer who receives materials that obviously appear to be subject to an
attorney-client privilege or otherwise clearly appear to be confidential and
privileged and where it is reasonably apparent that the materials were
provided or made available through inadvertence, the lawyer receiving such
materials should refrain from examining the materials any more than is
essential to ascertain if the materials are privileged, and shall
immediately notify the sender that he or she possesses material that appears
to be privileged.

Dunning
said:

Winston
& Strawn obtained documents containing legal advice from attorneys retained
by its clients adversary. The law firms receipt of the documents triggered
its obligations pursuant to State Fund to notify the POA. That
obligation was not negated by the fact that Mackey legitimately received the
Spitzer memo in his capacity as a member of the Board before this litigation
ensued.

She
went on to say:

Mackey
could not take off his directors hat and provide a copy to WC for its use in
litigation against the POA. Winston & Strawn would have been denied access
to the Spitzer memo through formal discovery and could not surreptitiously
obtain it from a manager of its client who also happened to be a member of the
POAs Board.

Nonetheless,
she said, Meisinger did not abuse his discretion in declining to disqualify the
law firm. Disclosure of a single memo did not result in irreversible 
damage to the POA, Dunning observed.

The
referee struck those portions of WCs reply brief that referred to the POAs
attorney-client and work product privileged information and ordered Winston
& Strawn to destroy all copies of any POA privileged material, she
recited. This was a sufficient remedy.

The
case is 1100 Wilshire Property Owners Association v. Wilshire Commercial,
LLC, B281127.

Representing
the POA were Lisa Perrochet and Eric S. Boorstin of Horvitz & Levy and
Jeffrey M. Cohon of Cohon & Pollak. Saul S. Rostamian and Diana Hughes
Leiden of Winston & Strawn acted for WC.

 

Copyright
2018, Metropolitan News Company

Go to Source

Experienced workers’ compensation attorneys Will Cummings and Tray Middlebrooks were recently honored in the 15th edition of Georgia Trend Magazine’s Legal Elite.

ATLANTA (PRWEB) January 08, 2018

Atlanta lawyers Will Cummings and Tray Middlebrooks were recently recognized as members of the state’s Legal Elite in business magazine, Georgia Trend. This is the 15th edition of the popular legal section, which recognizes lawyers for excellence in the practice of law. The Legal Elite honor is unique in that inclusion is based entirely on the voting of other attorneys in the state of Georgia, and the number of recipients is a very small percentage of the practicing Bar.

Cummings used announcement of the awards as an opportunity to reflect on what makes the law firm he co-founded with Middlebrooks special. “In addition to a really strong commitment to personal service, our firm brings together a great mix of experience in and knowledge of the Georgia workers’ comp system,” said Cummings. “That’s a difficult combination to replicate, and it has a significant impact on our ability to achieve our clients’ goals.”

Middlebrooks agreed with his partner and long-time friend, while adding his thoughts about how a smaller law firm can meet the needs of clients involved in the complex process. “Being effective in the workers’ compensation system is largely dependent on having a superior understanding of each client’s unique situation, including what led to their injury and their personal financial needs moving into the future,” said Middlebrooks. “Making a personal investment in our clients and their families is a true differentiator between our practice and the larger law firms that handle a massive number of cases.”

About Cummings & Middlebrooks, LLP: The attorneys at Cummings & Middlebrooks, LLP bring over 35 years of combined experience to each client’s case. Conveniently located in the heart of Atlanta’s Buckhead community, the firm represents clients across the state of Georgia in cases involving serious work-related injuries and wrongful death. The firm has earned Martindale-Hubbell’s prestigious AV Rating, and is a recognized leader in the area of injured workers’ rights.

For the original version on PRWeb visit: http://www.prweb.com/releases/2018/01/prweb15064465.htm

Go to Source

Keppel scandal: Singapore govt ‘extremely disappointed’, warns firms to uphold integrity

Singapore’s senior minister of state for finance and law Indranee Rajah. — TODAY picSINGAPORE, Jan 9 — The Government is “extremely disappointed” with the conduct of Keppel Corp — whose offshore and marine unit was involved in an international corruption scandal — and stressed it does not condone improper conduct overseas by Singapore companies.

Responding to parliamentary questions filed by several Workers’ Party (WP) Members of Parliament on the bribery scandal, Senior Minister of State for Finance and Law Indranee Rajah told the House yesterday that the Government has zero tolerance for corruption, and warned firms not to “import” corrupt practices into Singapore. She reiterated that state investment firm Temasek Holdings, which holds stakes in large companies such as Keppel under its portfolio, holds board members of these government-linked firms responsible for doing the right thing, and they could be replaced if they fall short of the required standards.

On the Government’s tough stance against graft, she said: “This has always been our position and will continue to be so…Incorruptibility is a foundational value for Singapore, we must keep Singapore clean.” However, the Republic “cannot be a global policeman”, she pointed out.

Singapore companies have to operate in all kinds of environments, she noted. Still, as a matter of principle, they are expected to “(keep) their systems clean”, and they “cannot lower their own standards of integrity”. The Government expects all Singapore companies, their offices and employees to comply fully with the laws of Singapore and laws in the jurisdictions they operate in, she said.

About a fortnight ago, Keppel Offshore & Marine (KOM) said in a press statement that it has agreed to pay US$422 million (RM1.6 billion) in fines as part of global resolution with authorities in Singapore, Brazil and the United States. The US Justice Department said that from 2001 to 2014, KOM had engaged in a scheme to pay US$55 million in bribes to win contracts.

The Republic’s Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) and Attorney-General’s Chambers have issued a conditional warning, taking into consideration that the company had volunteered its findings on the matter in September 2016 and cooperated with all three jurisdictions.

Among other things, WP chairman and Aljunied GRC MP Sylvia Lim asked for the Government’s response to a perception that KOM got away with “lenient treatment” and a “slap on the wrist”.

Indranee said that as far as the company is concerned, it was a “heavy price to pay” given that the total penalty was almost eight times the bribes which the KOM paid. She also emphasised the distinction between companies and individuals, when it comes to prosecution of graft cases.

In the case of the KOM scandal, its employees are still being investigated by the CPIB, and the Public Prosecutor will determine whether to prosecute them after investigations are completed, she said. She pointed out that irrespective of status, senior corporate figures, politicians and government officials have been brought to task for corruption in the past. There is “no doubt about CPIB’s record”, Indranee stressed.

People’s Action Party Nee Soon GRC MP Lee Bee Wah asked whether KOM’s US$422 million fine will come out of the Government’s pockets, should the firm be unable to cough up the sum. Indranee made it clear that Keppel will have to pay the fine, and there will be “no impact on the Government’s fiscal position”. Temasek, which holds a stake of about 20 per cent in Keppel, contributes its long term returns to the Government, and not cash contributions from its portfolio companies, she noted.

In light of the scandal, Jurong GRC MP Tan Wu Meng asked whether KOM should claw back bonuses from ex-employees implicated in illegal behaviour.

Indranee said the Government does not “intervene” in internal corporate disciplinary actions, but she noted that KOM has imposed US$8.9 million in financial sanctions on 12 former or current employees as part of the disciplinary process.

Dr Tan also asked how government tenders can be crafted to minimise the risk of illegal activities. For example, punitive liquidated damages could be written into a tender in the event that the contractor was found to breach the law either in Singapore or overseas, he suggested.

Indranee said government tenders explicitly state that tenderers can be debarred, if for instance they are convicted of corruption by Singapore courts.

Debarred businesses and their directors will be ineligible to participate in any tender by government agencies for a period of time.

Indranee added that a supplier’s track record will typically be one of the criteria used in government tenders. Any known information on the supplier’s commercial integrity will be taken into account, she said.

Dr Tan wanted to know how the Government or Temasek can send a “clear signal” to Singaporeans and Singapore companies operating overseas not to engage in corruption.

Indranee said Temasek holds the respective boards and managements responsible and accountable for the day-to-day decisions, but it does not direct the daily business decisions. These are the responsibilities of the board and management members. If the board does not perform, Temasek can, “collectively with the shareholders”, change the board, she added.

Temasek also conducts regular roundtables and educational programmes, among other things, aimed at encouraging companies to uphold clean systems and avoid corrupt practices, she said. — TODAY

Go to Source

Mumbai: The two Mistry family investment firms on Monday argued that the articles of association of Tata Sons Ltd are being misused to oppress minority shareholders and compromise the concept of a board-managed company.

The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) was hearing a plea by Cyrus Investments Pvt. Ltd and Sterling Investments Pvt. Ltd, which have been battling Tata Sons since Cyrus Mistry’s ouster as the holding company’s chairman in October 2016.

Their counsel Aryama Sundaram argued that the articles of association oppressed minority shareholders on four grounds. One, the board agenda of Tata Sons and group companies need prior approval of nominee directors of Tata Trusts, the majority shareholders in Tata Sons. Second, an affirmative vote by the trustees is needed to pass board agenda items. Third is a restriction on transfer of shares in Tata Sons and fourth, the articles compromised minority holders’ economic rights.

The Mistry firms are seeking that these oppressive clauses be struck off the articles of association. 

“Articles need to be struck down that are oppressive . Affirmative vote to trustees compromises the concept of a board managed company. If two directors are be all and end all, then board management is compromised,” said Sundaram. 

A Tata Sons spokesperson declined to comment.

The NCLT Mumbai bench was hearing the investment firms’ plea after they were granted a waiver from the minimum shareholding requirement (of 10%) for suing Tata Sons by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) on 21 September. Cyrus Investments and Sterling Investments together own a combined 18.4% of ordinary equity shares of the Tata group holding firm; their holding fell to 2.17% when both equity and preference shares were taken into account.

Sundaram said that the articles made the Tata Sons board a dummy board and was against the minority shareholders, the Companies Act, 2013 and the concept of a board-managed company.

“All decisions cannot be left to two trustees,” Sundaram argued. “If it (Tata Sons) is a large conglomerate then it cannot function as a private limited company and cannot go by principles applicable to small companies.”

Shareholders of Tata Sons on 21 September voted in favour of the Tata group holding firm becoming a private firm. NCLT had ordered for status quo on the conversion last year. 

Go to Source

US oilfield service firms dust off IPO plans

HOUSTON: U.S. oilfield service companies are gearing up for initial public offerings, according to regulatory filings and analysts, after several shelved equity sales last year during a weak period for oil prices.

Oil is trading near its highest level since early 2015, fueling demand for service firms to bring new shale wells to production. Energy executives surveyed last month said they would increase drilling sharply at prices above $60 a barrel.

Crude recently traded at about $61.50 a barrel. Investors´ appetite for the shares will be tested soon. Liberty Oilfield Services, which provides hydraulic fracturing services to shale producers, last week filed to raise about $160 million by selling 10.7 million shares at about $15 a share.

If its IPO performs well, it could open the gates for several other companies aiming to raise funds for new expansion or to buy rivals.

Since August, the Van Eck Vectors Oil Services ETF is up nearly 28 percent, behind the 32 percent gain in the SPDR S&P Oil and Gas Exploration and Production ETF .

Denver, Colorado-based Liberty was one of four oilfield firms that shelved IPOs last year after producers trimmed spending budgets as crude dipped to $45 a barrel.

Liberty did not respond to requests for comment. Other service firms also have updated their filings, signaling they may try again.

“We could see a quick ramp up (in IPOs) because there are so many in a good position to go quickly once market conditions improve,” said A. J.

Ericksen, a partner with law firm Baker Botts who focuses on mergers and acquisitions and capital markets.

His firm represents the underwriters in Liberty´s public offering. Underpinning the improving market for fracking services, there are some 7,300 drilled-but-uncompleted wells across the United States as of November, the U.S. Energy Information Administration recently reported.

Those are wells that have yet to be hydraulically fractured.

BJ Services, FTS International and Nine Energy Service, all of which offer hydraulic fracturing of shale wells, last year filed registration statements with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission but did not proceed.

Fracking involves pumping sand and liquids at high pressure into a well to release trapped oil and gas.

Representatives from the three companies did not respond to requests for comment.

In late October, FTS amended its registration filing and said its average pricing was up by more than 50 percent since late 2016. It also said it expects to reactivate six pressure-pumping fleets through mid-2018, suggesting strong demand for hydraulic fracturing.

Nine Energy Service in late December also filed an amended registration form, a possible sign it is positioning itself to go public this year.

BJ Services, which named a new chief financial officer in November, has not updated its filing since July.

“Everyone that filed in 2017 but took no additional action is probably a candidate (to go public) in 2018,” said Richard Spears, vice president of oilfield service research firm Spears & Associates.

He estimates as many as five oilfield service companies could go public in the first quarter of this year.

Go to Source