ILN Today Post
The ILN is pleased to publish the latest roundtable from the ILN Marketing Specialty Group, focused on the topic of Social Media. Marketers from around the world addressed questions surrounding their firms’ social media efforts, their greatest successes and challenges, and more.
Please click on the link to see the full roundtable.
TARK GRUNTE SUTKIENE assisted EQT Infrastructure Fund, part of a leading private equity group in Northern Europe, in the purchase of shares in Fortum Termest AS’s parent company Fortum Alpha B.V. As a result of the transaction, EQT Infrastructure Fund also acquired a 100 per cent indirect holding in Fortum Termest AS. The total value of the transaction was about EUR 200 million.
Fortum Termest AS provides district heating services in several regions in Estonia, offers tailored energy solutions to industrial and service sector clients, and supplies both companies and individuals with natural gas.
So yesterday, we had the chance to take a look at some of the higlights from the Superbowl commercials of 2012. Now, it’s time to see which spots failed, why, and what lessons law firms can take from them.
We’ll start with my pick for the worst commercial of the night…Go Daddy’s Body Painting Commercial (which is pretty much tied with their Cloud commercial for worst in my book).
When governmental or quasi-governmental agencies formulate a chemical risk assessment, it is part of their legitimate exercise of public health, policy-oriented regulation. Regulators often develop risk assessments due to scientific uncertainty concerning the toxicity of a particular compound and utilize conservative risk models in the interest of protecting public health and the environment. Thus, when a substance is labeled “possibly carcinogenic” or even “probably carcinogenic” by an agency, it may have little or no bearing on general and specific causation issues.
.png)
Millennium Partners Sports Club Management operates The Sports Club/LA and Reebok Sports Club/NY, premier fitness and sports clubs across the country, with locations in Boston; Washington, DC; Miami; New York; and San Francisco
While I know that most people watch the Superbowl for the sports (myself included, I do like the game!), the biggest football game of the year is also the Superbowl for marketers – because of the commercials.
I’ve heard mixed reviews of last night’s spots from people via my social networks, but I have to say that unlike recent years, I was very pleased with this year’s ads. As I did last year, I’ll give you my thoughts on the good, the bad and the ugly, starting with the good…
Overall, I’d say that humor won out this year. To me, the commercials that did “funny” right were the real winners…and also the most memorable. However, one funny, expensive ad spot doesn’t change a lot, but it’s fun to see where they went right and the lessons that law firms can take from them.
Last week, we looked at the question of firms’ biggest social media successes, but this week, it’s time to look at the other side of the coin – challenges.
The question we posed was “What has been your greatest social media challenge thus far, and how did your firm tackle it?”
John L. Ropiequet
Arnstein & Lehr Chicago Partner John L. Ropiequet was prominently mentioned in a recent opinion by the Illinois Supreme Court, In re Thomas, where an opponent of his was disciplined by the court and given a one-year suspension from the practice of law. The opponent continued to represent his clients in a case that Mr. Ropiequet was handling for a banking client of the firm by representing his clients in depositions that Mr. Ropiequet took of them and then appearing in court for them after he was given an earlier eighteen-month suspension from practice for failing to report drunk driving convictions to the Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission.
Mr. Ropiequet reported this unauthorized practice of law to the ARDC and testified against the attorney at an evidentiary hearing. The ARDC’s Hearing Board recommended that the attorney be suspended for two years because of this and other charges, but the Review Board held that the charges against the attorney did not constitute misconduct and voted to dismiss all charges. The ARDC’s Administrator appealed from this determination and the Supreme Court reversed the Review Board’s decision, ordering a one-year suspension. The court held that the attorney’s unauthorized practice involved dishonesty or misrepresentation because he willfully ignored John’s attempts to notify him that he could no longer practice law. The court noted Mr. Ropiequet”s affidavit attached to the disciplinary complaint quoting the attorney as threatening to “punch your teeth down your throat” for telling his clients that they were no longer represented following the suspension.
To view the article in full, click here.
On January 31, 2012 decision, the Appellate Division, First Department, adopted the federal Zubulake standard for spoliation of electronic evidence in Voom H.D. Holdings v. EchoStar Satellite, LLC, 600292/08. Voom is the first New York state appellate decision to apply the standard for spoliation of electronic evidence set forth in Southern District Judge Shira Scheindlin’s decision in Zubulake v. UBS Warburg, LLC, 220 FRD 212. Brendan Pierson wrote an article about the case in the New York Law Journal on February 1, 2012.
We have discussed the heightened sensitivity to E-discovery spoliation in state courts in this space previously. See blog post titled, “New E-discovery ‘Best Practices’”, (January 5, 2012).
Chuck Pautsch
Jesse R. Dill
Arnstein & Lehr Milwaukee Partner Chuck Pautsch and Associate Jesse R. Dill authored the article “Court cases are shaping social media law,” which appeared in the January 24 issue of BizTimes.com, which covers Milwaukee and southeastern Wisconsin business news. The article describes how companies can protect their social media accounts and online assets when employees leave employment.
To view the article in full, click here.
Robert E. McKenzie
Chicago Partner Robert E. McKenzie was quoted in a January 24 article in USA Today. The article titled “Tax lawyers question Gingrich’s 2010 return” discusses presidential contender Newt Gingrich’s tax strategy to avoid paying Medicare tax on most of his 2010 income. Mr. McKenzie comments on the issue of Gingrich’s tax return being of the type that would be flagged for an IRS audit. He was also quoted in similar articles regarding Gingrich’s tax returns in the January 23 issue of Accounting Today and the January 23 issue of Market Watch.
To read Mr. McKenzie’s comments and the USA Today article in full, click here.
Welcome to ILN-terviews, a series of profiles of ILN member firm attorneys, designed to give a unique insight into the lawyers who make up our Network. For our latest interview, we chose ILN member, Dimpy Mohanty of our member firm LexCounsel Law Offices in New Delhi, India.
In one sentence, how would you describe your practice?
Responsive and business-oriented.
Who would be your typical client?
One looking for advice which is well-rounded and covers diverse practice areas.
What would you like clients and potential clients to know about you?
That we at LexCounsel offer practical solutions based on, but not bogged down by a narrow reading of, law. Read full interview
Connect with ILN
ILN Members Twitter Feed
2 months ago
2 months ago
2 months ago
2 months ago
2 months ago
2 months ago
2 months ago
2 months ago