Legal expense management news for April 20, 2012

Despite projections of increased class action activity, in-house leaders expect to reduce spending on defending class action lawsuits. Techniques cited include “manag[ing] outside counsel terms and expectations” and AFA’s. Go here for more details on the survey, which also has some interesting data on the benefits of proactive risk management, early case assessment and project management. The survey indicates that 57% of legal departments “have implemented tools and programs to help mitigate the risk and cost of class action lawsuits.”

A flat fee for a Supreme Court argument – and an expense cap as well.

For the latest U.K. panel news, click here and here.

The ABA announces it will not be changing its policy on non-lawyer ownership of law firms. In its statement, the 20/20 Commission said “that the case had not been made for proceeding even with a form of nonlawyer ownership that is more limited than the D.C. model.”

An “insider” view of Rambus’ patent litigation strategy – at a cost of at least $300 million in legal fees.

Can e-discovery costs be assessed against the losing party? Although some courts have found otherwise, the Third Circuit determined that the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure are “to be interpreted narrowly so as not to include e-discovery costs…”

A law professor’s essay on three generations of lawyers. In-house leaders, do you agree that we are “now in transition from the specialist to the project manager era”?

This entry was posted in High-tech and IP, In-house, Law department tools - e-billing, CMS, metrics, etc., Law firms, Legal expense management, Risk management. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>