The International Lawyers Network condemns in the strongest possible terms the reckless and unprovoked attack by Russia on Ukraine. We join with the International Bar Association in their statement against this blatant breach of international law and send our support to our member firm, PETERKA & PARTNERS Ukraine, and their families, as well as the citizens affected. We hope for an end to the war as soon as possible.
The International Lawyers Network (ILN) is a leading association of 91 high-quality, full-service independent law firms.
Since 1988, the ILN has helped its members keep pace with today’s global economy, through access to the tremendous strength and depth of the combined expertise of 5,000 lawyers in 66 countries on six continents.
ILN member firms are among the most respected and most experienced counsel in their jurisdictions. Clients’ increasing need for reliable foreign counsel is well-met by the personalized, high-quality and cost-effective legal services provided by ILN member firms. Unique to the ILN are the strong personal and professional relationships among its members and their clients developed over the past 30 years. Far from a mere directory, the ILN is an affiliation of lawyers who gather on a regional and worldwide basis annually and work routinely with each other to address client requirements and needs.
Each of the ILN’s member firms is international in outlook and staffed by highly trained senior attorneys, who are experts in a broad range of practice areas. ILN members have demonstrated experience in working successfully with international companies. They are independent, mid-sized firms within their jurisdictions, and are committed to the focus of the International Lawyers Network, admitted to the Network only after a rigorous application process. The ILN provides clients with high-quality service from experienced local counsel who work in firms that maintain excellent reputations in their own countries. This means that clients have immediate access to attorneys who are native, both linguistically and culturally, to the country of interest.
The ILN’s international directory app is available for iPhone, Android and BlackBerry smartphones. To access the app, click here or log on to ILNmobile.com from your smartphone. Request more information about ILN membership here.
Limerick Civic Trust’s New Chair Focused on Ambitious Plans for greater community engagement in Limerick
Over 50 Restoration & Improvement Projects Earmarked Reliant on Funding
29 September 2022: Donal Creaton, a leading Limerick solicitor, has recently appointed Chair of Limerick Civic Trust wants the voluntary organisation to play a bigger role in improving Limerick’s heritage and environment for its community, its citizens, visitors and tourists.
Speaking about his aspirations for the new role, Donal said, “My focus for the year ahead will be on attracting more contributing members and patrons so we have the financial support to embark and complete some of the very long lists of restoration and heritage improvement projects we have earmarked. In addition, I will be overseeing the development of stronger working and mutually beneficial relationships with partners and public bodies as we demonstrate our competency in delivering civil community projects.”
Latvia: Latvian companies, branches, associations, foundations registered in the Republic of Latvia, and other entities registered in the registers of the Enterprise Register need to immediately activate the official electronic address (e-address).
What is an e-address?
The official electronic address is a digital mailbox for communication between public administration institutions and individuals. One can receive and send letters, applications, documents, and request (often also receive) services there.
Rafael Salaberren Dupont is a founding partner of SyLS in Buenos Aires, Argentina, which is also a member firm of the ILN. In this episode, Lindsay and Rafael discuss the transition between starting a firm and its succession, the true role of a lawyer and their client, and the difference between Latin American law firms and law firms in other regions.
You can listen to the podcast here, or we’ve provided a transcript of the highlights below.
Leo the Lion has been the most regular star of MGM Pictures since it was founded on this day in 1924, and his roar is probably the sound most commonly associated with the studio.
–Kat Eschner, The Story of Hollywood’s Most Famous Lion (2017)
There’s no roar quite like a Nittany Lion’s!
–Penn State Football @PennStateFball on 12/7/2020
So, there you go— Metro Goldwyn Mayer and Pennsylvania State University are two different entities each associated with a distinctive roar connected to their institution. They are marketed through different, yet related, channels of trade (sports and entertainment, which were melded together as ESPN’s original name). The MGM roar and the Nittany Lion roar are certainly not identical, but they might be considered confusingly similar, should one ever need to distinguish or compare them. (I am unaware of any reported comparison, but I did find the latter compared to a toilet flushing and have seen the former’s trademark suffer indignities at times too). I start with MGM and Penn State, not because MGM’s registered trademark and Penn State’s common law one are at odds, but because they are two well-known acoustic, or sound (or auditory), marks that can help us understand those sounding off recently about such non-traditional trademarks. That noise includes this one, which is “the sound made by a drinks can being opened, followed by a silence of approximately one second and a fizzing sound lasting approximately nine seconds,” according to Ardagh Metal Beverage Holdings Gmbh & Co. Kg v. European Union Intellectual Property Office, T-668/19. The uproar also includes numerous articles by diverse scholars and various bloggers expressing a renewed interest in sound marks in many countries.
As featured in #WorkforceWednesday: This week, we look at a range of pay disclosure requirements that have come into effect in New York and New Jersey in the second half of 2022.
It’s almost the final quarter of the year and everyone I know has been swamped with work – which means you’re probably not thinking too much about where your next matter or case is coming from. We all know that’s the PERFECT time to be thinking about networking and business development!
Sorry, folks, I know it’s the last thing on your mind.
But, consider these four tips to shake things up and see what falls out of your networking tree – apologies, it’s fall and I can’t resist a good metaphor.
On Friday, September 23, 2022, the New York City Department of Consumer and Worker Protection (“DCWP”) released a Notice of Public Hearing and Opportunity to Comment on Proposed Rules related to its Automated Employment Decision Tool law (the “AEDT Law”), which goes into effect on January 1, 2023. As we previously wrote, the City passed the AEDT Law to regulate employers’ use of automated employment decision tools, with the aim of curbing bias in hiring and promotions; as written, however, it contains many ambiguities, which has left covered employers with open questions about compliance.
Pennywise and Pound Foolish: Default Judgment Entered Against Trade Secret Defendants as a Sanction for Inadequate E-Discovery
“The law is not a game, and . . . civil discovery is not a game of hide and seek. The decision in this case should encourage litigants to understand that it is risky business to recklessly or deliberately fail to produce documents, and perilous to disobey court orders to review and, if necessary, supplement prior productions. It is in the interests of the administration of justice to default [defendants] to send those messages.”
So said United States District Judge Mark L. Wolf in a 72-page decision in which he entered a default judgment as a sanction in a trade secret case against the defendants for what he referred to as “extreme misconduct.” Memorandum and Order on Plaintiff’s Motion for Sanctions, Red Wolf Energy Trading, LLC v. BIA Capital Mgmt., LLC, et al., C.A. No. 19-10119-MLW (D. Mass. Sept. 8, 2022).
On July 13, 2022, the Massachusetts Appeals Court signaled a victory for Massachusetts employers who rely upon independent contractors. In Tiger Home Inspection, Inc. v. Dir. of the Dep’t of Unemployment, the Appeals Court reversed decisions from the Department of Unemployment (“DUA”) and trial court, concluding that the inspectors were independent contractors under Massachusetts’s Unemployment Insurance statute (“Unemployment Law”) and, thus, ineligible for unemployment benefits. Focusing on Prongs A and C of the Unemployment Law’s “ABC” test for classifying independent contractors, the Appeals Court provided employers with excellent precedent and concrete guidance for navigating those elements of the test. Notably, the Unemployment Law’s ABC language largely tracks the Massachusetts Wage Act’s “ABC” test, with Prongs A and C using identical language. As a result, Tiger Home Inspection arguably provides employers with much-needed clarity for navigating both statutes.