Legal expense management news for March 14, 2014

Shanghai’s Pilot Free Trade Zone may expand options for sourcing legal services in China.

Highlights from Harvard Law’s Disruptive Innovation Conference, including “disruptive imitation.”

If you have an IP litigation docket, keep an eye on the two cases regarding the standards for attorneys’ fee awards in patent cases currently before the U.S. Supreme Court. In related news, the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s denial of additional fees beyond its original award.

U.K. firm seeks to bolster “New Law” credentials with low-cost legal services center, “lawyers on demand” and “managed legal services.”

U.S. sporting goods giant selects alliance of independent firms for EU needs, rather than a single international firm. Firms agreed “to offer a flat-fee rate to Nike across the jurisdictions, as well as consistent working procedures.” Sounds like a swing and a miss for BigLaw, and a win for SmallLaw.

From our “how much does it cost” files: U.K. BigLaw and PwC share £5m for investigation into allegations of false billing practices by security firm. (sub. req’d)

Problems with law department knowledge management initiatives can include “too much” communism, freedom, ambition and information.

Finally, from our own backyard, “patent trolls” come under fire at South by Southwest.

This entry was posted in In-house, Law department tools - e-billing, CMS, metrics, etc., Law firms, Legal expense 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Your email address will not be published.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>