Jillian Cho

In the world of law, where first impressions can seal deals and win cases, looking the part is paramount. The power suit is more than just clothing—it's your armor, your statement, and often, the difference between winning over a jury or losing a client. Knowing when to buy off the rack versus investing in a custom-fitted suit can transform your wardrobe from adequate to exceptional. This guide, crafted by Look Lawyerly, will walk you through the nuances of lawyerly attire, helping you make informed decisions that elevate your professional image. https://lnkd.in/gpem5Pbm

2

Probably 70% of my recruiting practice is for BigLaw. That may be lower than many of my MLA colleagues. Why do I do so much work with mid-sized and smaller firms? A few reasons. In California we are spoiled for choice when it comes to boutiques -- both subject matter focused firms, and full-service boutiques are local institutions here. So, there are a lot of options! A lot of people don't want to work in BigLaw anymore/again/ever. My job is candidate-focused, so it's my job to find a role that matches what people want. It's definitely not my job to wedge them back into BigLaw because I don't have other options to offer them. In the last week MLA has begun a relationship with 3 new boutiques in Northern California, and the list grows all the time. Smaller firms allow associates to broaden out their practices -- their litigation teams do ALL kinds of work, because they don't have critical mass to have specialist strike teams. This model exists across corproate too - smaller firms' corporate teams may include M&A, ECVC, funds, tech trans... Being a generalist is appealing on its face but is also a great path to an in house role. Many, but not all, smaller firms offer better work/life balance. They may also be a more comfortable format for lawyers who want to know their colleagues more closely. So, don't rule out a smaller firm -- you may be surprised if you speak to them at just how much it sounds like the right fit.

38

2 Comments

Starting July 1, those in California should expect: (i) clearer pricing, and/or (ii) a lot more consumer litigation. The new so-called "Honest Pricing Law" is designed to combat Drip Pricing, where the true price of a good or service is higher and not revealed upfront. Under the new law, businesses are prohibited from “[a]dvertising, displaying, or offering a price for a good or service that does not include all mandatory fees or charges” other than government-imposed taxes or fees or reasonable shipping costs. So what does "revealed upfront" mean? The new changes to the law do not specify. However elsewhere the statute requires for "Advertising that a product is being offered at a specific price plus a specific percentage of that price" (aka, we are offering it for dealer's cost plus 10%), the total price needs to be displayed "in a size larger than any other price in that advertisement."

1

🚀 From Corporate Law to Chief of Staff: Why Lawyers Thrive in Business Operations 🚀 As someone who transitioned from a corporate law background to a Chief of Staff role at a thriving Beauty and Personal Care Startup, I've come to appreciate the unique perspective that lawyers with a commercial mindset bring to the table in operating businesses. In the legal world, we're trained to meticulously analyze complex information, identify risks, and develop strategies to mitigate them. These skills are not only valuable in deal making but also in the dynamic landscape of business operations. Here's why I believe lawyers with a commercial bent of mind excel in business: 1️⃣ Analytical Prowess: Lawyers have a knack for dissecting intricate details and distilling them into actionable insights. Whether it's assessing market trends or navigating regulatory hurdles, our analytical skills are invaluable. 2️⃣ Negotiation Savvy: Negotiation is at the heart of business deals and partnerships. Lawyers, with their honed negotiation skills, can secure favorable terms and agreements that drive business growth. 3️⃣ Problem-Solving Acumen: Lawyers are natural problem solvers. We thrive in addressing challenges head-on and finding creative solutions that drive business success. 4️⃣ Strategic Thinking: Lawyers are trained to think strategically, considering both short-term objectives and long-term goals. This strategic perspective enables us to devise robust business plans and adapt to changing market dynamics effectively. 5️⃣ Communication Mastery: Effective communication is key to success in business. Lawyers excel in articulating complex ideas, whether it's pitching to investors or crafting compelling marketing messages. 6️⃣ Ethical Compass: Upholding ethical standards is paramount in both law and business. Lawyers bring a strong ethical framework to the table, ensuring that the company operates with integrity and earns the trust of customers and stakeholders. In my journey from being a transactional lawyer to the business, I've witnessed firsthand how lawyers with a commercial mindset can make a significant impact on business operations. The multidisciplinary nature of our training, strategic thinking, and ethical approach are invaluable assets in driving innovation and growth. Fellow lawyers often reach out to me to discuss the merit in considering a leap into the world of business. I cannot stress enough on the fact that it will be steep learning curve and if business is for you - you will have the time of your life. Embrace your commercial instincts and seize the opportunities that await. Let's continue to break barriers, challenge norms, and redefine what it means to be a lawyer in the business world. #LawyersInBusiness #LawyersnotLawyering #LegalMindset #BusinessOperations #Entrepreneurship #CorporateLaw

163

10 Comments

I’m so honored to be recognized by The Upside for Henries PLLC's reinvention of the law firm model so it works better for our team and our clients! When I started Henries PLLC, I intended to work as a consultant for the brands I had been connected with throughout my career in fashion, beauty, and media. I was adamant that I DID NOT want to build a law firm ❌. I hadn’t loved working in a law firm and when I hired law firms, as a client, I was often disappointed in the work product. It could be overlawyered, overpriced, and often missed the nuances that were critical to our business, because our budgets wouldn’t allow us to work together frequently enough for the law firm to know them 😔(e.g., shipping cadences, accounts receivables schedules, future business plans, insurance provisions, etc.). When my consulting business became too busy for me to handle solo 👩🏻‍⚖️, I had to make a decision. I decided to build a firm. But, the anti-firm. My intention was to solve for the pain points that I experienced as a law firm associate and as a law firm client. 🌟 TEAM SOLVE: All of our lawyers work part time and are paid hourly for their work. They tell ME whether they want to take on a project. If they work like crazy, they get paid like crazy. If they take four weeks off, they’re not paid during that time. What does that do? It allows mothers, fathers, moonlighters, caretakers, and people who are partially retired to stay in the game. Because we offer this structure, we get the most incredible talent. 🌟 CLIENT SOLVE: Because we are fully remote, we are a super-low-overhead law firm. This allows us to benchmark our rates at about 50% of what they would be at our prior big law firms. Because of this, our clients can afford to have us in the mix more often, which allows us to learn all of the ins and outs of a company. Better legal advice comes from more intimate knowledge of your client’s business. We also do cute (and helpful) brand books for all our clients, which document our clients’ preferences and standards. 📦 Operating outside of the box can be scary and a little unnerving at time, but I feel like this recognition indicates that we might just be on to something! Thank you again to The Upside and Erin Halper, CEO of The Upside for building the incredible Upside community. #TheUpsideTop100 #TheUpside #HenriesPLLC #WeCanHelp #SOSKits #LawFirm

188

59 Comments

The only type of legal complaint that has more Sturm und Drang in it than that of pro se litigants is when the lawyers are suing on their own behalf. Here we have one step above that: lawyers suing the American Bar Association (ABA)! The allegation is that, because the ABA had a data breach, it must mean that the ABA failed to take proper security measures. While plaintiffs cannot trace it to the breach, they believe the breach caused them to receive more spam emails and one had a credit card number stolen. The EDNY court was not sympathetic. It held that the plaintiffs failed to show what specific security measures were required but not instituted. The court also didn't buy the argument that salting and hashing passwords was sufficiently secure. One takeaway lesson for companies from the case is to not specify in your Privacy Policy or Terms of Service particular security steps you will take unless you are definitely implementing those. I am surprised there was less of a res ipsa loquitur perspective from the court due the admission by all parties that a breach occurred.

4

Bravissimo to the Seventh Circuit! Here we have a case alleging (with actual facts) that Walmart is repeatedly charging higher prices at the register than they list on their shelves. And apparently this is a systematic practice that Walmart has repeatedly engaged in across the United States, as evidenced by similar lawsuits and regulatory actions elsewhere. Somehow, the lower court thought this blatant deception was OK because, at the end of the transaction, Walmart gave customers a receipt: “where Walmart provides its customers with a receipt to compare the scanned price with the shelf price,” there is “no possibility for deception.” In other words - as long as you can later discover you were deceived by getting your receipt and revisiting every aisle and shelf to price-check what you were charged and then go stand in a long customer service line afterwards to return what you bought - or even worse - wait another 30 minutes while a Walmart staffer runs around to every aisle to re-check prices while you wait at the customer service counter - then no one is harmed and Walmart is free to systematically (and seemingly intentionally - more on that below) lie to its customers about pricing. The lower court's reasoning is Ridiculous! And why do I say that Walmart's pricing deception is likely intentional? Because I have seen firsthand and have immense respect for Walmart's technological, organizational, and logistical abilities. At one point in time, they had the largest VSAT network in the world to track trucks, stores, and suppliers for maximum efficiency. Walmart is the King of the Hill in physical retail efficiency and know-how. Yet somehow, even my local stores don't have incorrect shelf-pricing as much as is alleged here by Walmart, despite having far less organizational chops and tech investment than behemoth Walmart. Walmart would not be making this many "mistakes" unless they really wanted to - especially when they have been found to engage in this behavior in many other states and they promised to fix it. While this deceptive behavior benefits Walmart's bottom line by tricking people -- many of whom are carefully counting their pennies and on a tight budget -- into giving Walmart more money, I think it undermines Walmart's brand as an entity that can be trusted. I try to avoid businesses who have deception as a permanent component of their business model.

10

5 Comments

Earlier today, the FTC voted unanimously (5-0) to block Tempur Sealy—the world’s largest mattress supplier and manufacturer—from acquiring Mattress Firm—the nation’s largest mattress retailer—in a $4b vertical transaction. As the complaint alleges, this proposed transaction would give Tempur Sealy the ability and incentive to suppress competition and raise prices for mattresses for millions of consumers once it acquires Mattress Firm. The proposed vertical acquisition would merge Tempur Sealy’s manufacturing and supply operations with Mattress Firm’s vast retail footprint, giving the combined company enormous power at multiple parts of the mattress supply chain. As the complaint describes, this concern is not speculation. Multiple emails, presentations, and other deal documents show in clear terms that Tempur Sealy’s acquisition of Mattress Firm is about crippling the competition. This deal would thus raise prices on an essential good and could lead to layoffs for good paying American jobs throughout the country. Congratulations to FTC staff in the Bureaus of Competition and Economics on their incredibly thorough investigation and tireless dedication.

126

14 Comments

🚫 Avoid These Common Pitfalls in Work-for-Hire Agreements! 🚫 As someone who's navigated the legal landscape of California, I've seen my fair share of work-for-hire agreements gone awry. Let's chat about some pitfalls you'll want to steer clear of when diving into these agreements. 1. Unclear Scope of Work: One major misstep is not clearly defining what work is covered under the agreement. Without a crystal-clear scope, misunderstandings can arise about what tasks are expected and what falls outside the contract. 2. Vague Payment Terms: Don't leave the financials up in the air! Unclear payment terms can lead to disputes down the line. Make sure you outline payment amounts, schedules, and any additional expenses upfront. 3. Fuzzy Intellectual Property Rights: Ah, the big one! Make sure it's crystal clear who owns the intellectual property created under the agreement. Without clarity here, you could end up in a messy legal battle over ownership rights. 4. Lack of Confidentiality Protection: Your secrets are your currency, right? Don't forget to include robust confidentiality provisions to safeguard sensitive information shared during the project. 5. Missing Termination Clause: Life happens, and sometimes agreements need to end prematurely. Without a proper termination clause, you could find yourself stuck in a never-ending commitment. 6. Forgetting About Independent Contractor Status: Be sure your agreement accurately reflects the working relationship. Misclassifying workers as independent contractors when they're actually employees can lead to serious legal headaches. 7. Ignoring California-Specific Regulations: Every state has its own rules, and California is no exception! Be sure your agreement complies with all relevant state laws to avoid potential legal issues. Don't let these pitfalls trip you up! Take the time to craft a solid work-for-hire agreement that protects both parties and sets clear expectations from the get-go. Got any horror stories or tips to share? Drop them in the comments below! #law #legal #legaltips #legalinsights #contracts #contractlaw #contractdrafting

14

In this week’s compliance update, we’re leading with a unique area of privacy legislation protecting the personal information of judges, public officials, and their families. These privacy laws are often referred to as Daniel’s law in memoriam of Daniel Anderl, the son of Federal Judge Esther Salas and Mark Anderl, who was murdered at the hands of an individual targeting Judge Salas. Since that tragic event, dozens of bills have been filed across the United States, with Congress passing federal legislation and a handful of states enacting separate measures. What employers may not realize is that as a result of these critical judicial privacy laws, background checks, including those for regulated positions such as transportation, finance, or healthcare, for covered individuals, such as family members, may not be able to be completed because their personal information has been protected. Therefore, employers may need to establish alternate processes for individuals covered by judicial privacy laws. You can learn more about current and pending Federal and State Daniel’s laws in my Forbes post: https://lnkd.in/gbdEScmm In other legislative news: - New York S1731D, limiting the consideration of a candidate’s credit history for employment, was passed by the Senate and advanced to the Assembly. - Illinois HB4834, expanding the scope of criminal offenses eligible for automatic sealing, has also progressed. As always, I’ll monitor this and other legislation impacting background screening. #privacy #creditscreening #backgroundchecks

36

Thanks to Law360 for publishing our article on the new privacy litigation trend in California -- Song-Beverly Credit Card Act claims based on online transactions. And thanks to Desirée Hunter-Reay for helping write it. Hopefully, we can nip this trend in the bud before it turns into another CIPA Pen-Trap situation. https://lnkd.in/gvgyrFMz

11

SCRAPE THE WORLD. If you want to prevent scrapers from collecting publicly accessible user data on your site, your job just got harder. In a decision last week (link in comments), the Northern District of California’s Judge Breyer dismissed X’s claims against scraper Bright Data, stating: “Our court of appeals has held that giving social media companies “free rein to decide, on any basis, who can collect and use data — data that the companies do not own, that they otherwise make publicly available to viewers, and that the companies themselves collect and use — risks the possible creation of information monopolies that would disserve the public interest.” hiQ Labs, Inc. v. LinkedIn Corp., 31 F.4th 1180, 1202 (9th Cir. 2022). With that in mind, this district court carefully considered each of the claims asserted. It now concludes that none of the claims passes muster.” Judge Breyer held that X hadn't sufficiently alleged damages from Bright Data accessing the site and that claims based on selling scraped data were preempted by the Copyright Act. On the latter, the judge provided a spicy take: “X's state-law claims based on Bright Data's scraping and selling information would allow X — as a nonexclusive licensee of its users' content — to prevent others from doing the same, despite that its users gave X a license to make their content publicly available. ... X Corp. is happy to allow the extraction and copying of X users' content so long as it gets paid. To the extent X Corp.'s state-law claims are based on scraping and selling of data, they 'amount[] to little more than camouflage for an attempt to exercise control over the exploitation of a copyright.'" (hat tip to Ahmed Eissa for flagging)

37

6 Comments

For a lean in-house legal team, keeping an eye on wage and hour issues may seem technical and out of reach. But this can be an area of major liability for the company. Here are some high-level questions a generalist can ask to mitigate pay-related risk • Have we sufficiently trained our employees on our policies? Policies are table stakes. Poorly written policies can create major headaches. But policies aren't worth the paper they're written on if no one knows how to use them. Legal can support Payroll and HR by being a second set of eyes for training materials and policies. • How do the time and pay records look, at a high level? Don't assume HR and your payroll provider have scrutinized the records. Spot-checking time and pay records at a high level can go a long way. While having a proper audit by employment counsel is ideal, you can show value by taking a critical eye and asking whether the records would make sense to a lay person. • Arbitration Agreements Even the most seasoned payroll teams sometimes make a mistake. Arbitration agreements can be a powerful strategic tool in defending against wage and hour claims. They're not airtight and the law changes frequently (especially in CA) so these need to be reviewed and revisited often. And review other employment agreements (like confidentiality agreements) to be sure they are aligned with the arbitration agreement (you'd be surprised at how often this gets botched) • Review offboarding materials to be sure they address sleeper wage and hour issues If you have employees in several states, HR and payroll need to keep on top of laws requiring timely pay upon termination. Make sure there's a process for HR to check this before jumping into terminating employment. This gets particularly tricky when there are outstanding bonus or commission payments. • Record retention By the time a company hires its first in-house counsel, many HR and payroll practices are already set. And a company that was primarily in-person in 2019 and now has hybrid or remote workers all over the country may have a new set of multi-state recordkeeping obligations that hasn't been accounted for. A high-level review of record retention policies can have outsized impact.

15

5 Comments

What does the square below remind you of? A Rothko piece? Preferred apparel for going hunting with Dick Cheney? How about a particular brand of champagne: Veuve Clicquot? (For those who tune into the amelia project podcast, this name will ring a bell). I was inspired to read this relatively recent opinion after chatting about color marks with Shannon King at an International Trademark Association (INTA) event about non-traditional marks yesterday. The European Court of Justice's holding: Veuve Cliquot did not successfully demonstrate that this shade of orange acquired distinctiveness as a sign that a champagne originated from Veuve Cliquot. Why read the opinion? 1. To learn about the criteria for proving that an otherwise indistinct mark has acquired EU-wide distinctiveness with respect to a particular group of goods or services. 2. To read an insult of Luxembourg, where coincidentally the CJEU is located: "In the case of Luxembourg, the applicant submits that the Board of Appeal considered, in essence, that that country is part of Belgium and the Netherlands despite the language difference and that it was irrelevant because it has only 424,000 inhabitants." 3. To see why the best lawyers are those who can logically connect the facts to the law. And how counsel for the Veuve Cliquot failed to do so here. The opinion explains how the evidence proferred by Veuve Cliquot repeatedly failed to prove the key requirement: that distinctiveness was acquired. a. evidence showing that Veuve Cliquot entered the Greek market in 1845 doesn't prove the bottles were marked as orange at that time. b. sales volume alone does not show that the average person -or even the consumer of those bottles - associate this shade of orange with Veuve Cliquot. c. articles about the brand are not relevant if they "do not relate to the perception of the mark at issue by the public of those countries" - especially when it's unclear whether the articles are from an informative vs. a promotional publication. d. A Belgian court decision about brand-color association among French speakers is not dispositive of how other EU consumers perceive the color mark. e. Showing the brand's use of the color has gone on for years does not prove that consumers associate the color with the brand. So what would have been helpful here? "relevant, direct evidence of distinctive character acquired through use, such as that provided by surveys or market studies as well as by statements from professional bodies or statements from the specialised public." And who was opposing Veuve Cliquot here? Lidl in Germany! So be on the lookout for some discount orange-bottled champagne (or maybe just sparkling wine) at a supermarket store near you.

3

You know summer is here when a federal court opinion is full of song lyrics related to ice cream and color photos of various flavors. Worth a read. You can tell the judge found a lot of (Good) Humor in the topic. The crux of the case is that plaintiff felt mislead when purchasing Pistachio ice cream from Cold Stone Creamery and later discovered it had no pistachio in it. The court considered whetehr it was fair for the consumer to expect Pistachio Ice Cream to have actual pistachio in it. Some arguments: 1. Cold Stone pointed out that their ingredient list was available online. The court found that unconvincing because the ice cream is being sold in-person. 2. Lots of competitors offering pistachio ice cream actually have pistachio on their ingredient list, thus consumers might expect the same at Cold Stone. The court found a bit of merit in the argument, but weighted it less. In passing, the plaintiff took a dig at Thrifty's Ice Cream and called it "a less premium brand than Cold Stone Creamery." I disagree. Thrifty has good ice cream. Cold Stone has poor quality ice cream. 3. A survey of 400 consumers revealed that 85% expected pistachio to be an ingredient in pistachio ice cream. The court found this to be sufficiently compelling evidence to prevent dismissal of the case. The result: the case will move forward. Some other important learnings. 1. Just because the food does not contain the ingredients you expected, your implied claims of merchantability will fail (in NY) if the food is still edible: "“Where the sale of a food or beverage is concerned, courts have ruled that the product need only be fit for human consumption to be of merchantable quality.”" 2. There is an entire line of cases in NY called "The SDNY Vanilla Cases," litigating about "disaffected purchasers of vanilla products that were derived from substances other than vanilla bean." 2. In the dictionary, "pistachio" is also an adjective - however it refer to the "green colour of the kernel of the pistachio nut," rather than the nut itself.

4

🚘 A partner once asked me to drive her to a hearing in her very large Mercedes Benz so she could prep on the way. I packed the boxes of documents and exhibits that I'd pulled an all nighter preparing into the trunk before leaving the office. When we arrived to court, I was to go park the car and she was to get out and get the boxes. 🤭 As soon as she got out of the car and she closed the door, I started driving away. She exclaimed for me to stop so she could get the boxes. OOPS. I watched as she got the boxes out of the trunk and when she was done, I started to drive away. Only the trunk wasn't fully closed. OOPS again. I parked the car, ran back to court, and none of my exhibits got used or even referenced. Our motion was rubber stamped. 🧠 I reflect back on how scattered I seemed driving this partner's car and it took me years to realize this: when you are constantly afraid that you are doing something wrong, you perseverate on that possibility, rather than on the task at hand. Then you end up doing something imperfect. It's not because you didn't try hard, but because the conditions didn't allow you to focus on the right thing. 🎇 Do your conditions allow you to focus on the right thing? If not, you may not be doing your best work. This is why psychological safety matters. Not because it's a nice to have or a creation of the 'softer' generations, but because without it, you end up driving down Shore Line Drive with the trunk of a Mercedes Benz open and a lady screaming at you to stop while you are busy reciting the facts in the exhibits you prepared so you could answer every possible question that may come your way. 🌅 My career took off once I started focusing on how good I was, not on how bad I *might* be. What about you?

382

36 Comments