Law Firm News

---

Law Firm News

Firm Name

News Title

News

News Date

25383 matches |  20420-20426 displayed

1  2916 2917 2918 2919 2920  3627

---

Quarles & Brady

Health Care Associate Joins Quarles & Brady Streich Lang LLP
Quarles & Brady Streich Lang LLP is pleased to announce that Amy R. Gobster has joined the firm as an Associate in the firm’s growing Health Law Practice Group.

Ms. Gobster's practice includes advising clients on regulatory issues and defending clients before professional boards. She has experience with issues such as federal and state pharmaceutical laws and regulations, compliance with Medicare and Medicaid programs and compliance with HIPPA and state health privacy laws. Ms. Gobster received her undergraduate degree, cum laude, from Truman State University and her law degree from Pepperdine University. She also has her master's degree in physic cal therapy from A.T. Still University.

08-08-2006

---

Quarles & Brady

Quarles & Brady Streich Lang LLP Adds White Collar Crime Associate
The law firm of Quarles & Brady Streich Lang LLP is pleased to announce that Melissa S. Ho has joined the Phoenix office as an Associate in the White Collar Crime Group.

Prior to joining Quarles, Ms. Ho served as a Deputy County Attorney with the Maricopa County Attorney's Office where she handled misdemeanor and felony matters in the Preliminary Hearing Bureau, Early Disposition Court, Juvenile Court and various Justice Courts. She received her undergraduate degree from Arizona State University where she was an Arizona Board of Regents Scholar and her law degree from the University of Arizona, James E. Rogers College of Law. While attending law school, Ms. Ho was Treasurer of the Asian American Law Students Association and a Judge Thomas Tang Scholarship recipient. She is currently a commissioner for the city of Phoenix Pacific Rim Advisory Council and Treasurer for the Arizona Asian American Bar Association.

08-08-2006

---

Kirkpatrick & Lockhart Preston Gates Ellis LLP

Small Business Non-Manufacturer Rule Given New Life
A recent (and lengthy) decision by the U.S. Court of Federal Claims provides, for the first time, judicial guidance on the applicability of the small business non-manufacturer rule. See ROTECH HEALTHCARE INC. v. THE UNITED STATES, COFC No. 06-303 C, July 24, 2006. The non-manufacturer rule requires small business concerns to supply the products only of small businesses under small business set-aside contracts. In Rotech HealthCare Inc., the Court made three critical findings.

First, the Court overturned previous Small Business Administration decisions and held that the non-manufacturer rule applies to contracts that required the delivery of both goods and services. Second, the Court follows prior precedent and utilizes a dollar test to determine whether the primary purpose of a contract is for the delivery of goods or services with the result being that any contract where the price of goods exceeds 50 percent of the value of the contract will be subject to the non-manufacturer rule. And third, the Court held that the contracting agency committed an error when it failed to investigate whether the small business awardee would actually provide products manufactured by small business concerns.

This last finding is of particular interest because matters of contract compliance have generally been a gray area as to whether a protestor has standing to protest a suspected future failure of an awardee to comply with a material term of the solicitation. The Court clears this hurdle by citing an obligation on the part of the agency to investigate compliance prior to award.

The small business non-manufacturer rule, enacted by Congress to assist legitimate small businesses and avoid small business fronts, is a rule that has not always been well-enforced. This decision breathes new life into that rule and provides new opportunities for both small and large businesses to ensure that competitors are in compliance with it.

08-08-2006

---

Foley Hoag LLP

SEC Announces Decision to Forego Further Review of Decision of U.S. Court of Appeals
In a statement issued Monday, August 7th, SEC Chairman Christopher Cox announced the agency’s decision not to appeal the June 23, 2006 ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, which struck down recent SEC regulations that required managers of hedge funds to register as investment advisers pursuant to the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, as amended (the “Advisers Act”), noting that “further appeal would be futile and would simply delay and distract from [the agency’s] goal of advancing investor protection.”

Chairman Cox’s statement went on to state that the agency will be advancing several new proposals in the near future aimed at regulation of hedge funds, including a new anti- fraud rule under the Advisers Act that will feature a look through provision to extend anti- fraud provisions under the Advisers Act to individual investors in hedge funds and possible amendments to the qualification standards for individual investors in hedge funds. At present the form and effect of any such new proposals remains unclear. In addition, the adoption of hedge fund legislation by Congress remains a possibility. Foley Hoag will continue to monitor the situation and advise its clients on any further developments.

08-08-2006

---

Pepper Hamilton, L.L.P.

Pepper Hamilton Celebrates Diversity at African American Museum in Philadelphia
"African American Museum in Philadelphia. The Honorable James T. Giles of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania was the guest speaker at the July 12, 2006, event.

Kassem L. Lucas, vice chairman of Pepper’s Diversity Committee, welcomed the 125 lawyers, summer associates, paralegals and senior managers gathered for the cocktail reception and outlined the firm’s ongoing diversity initiatives. In Pepper’s 2006 summer associate program, 32 percent of the law students were minorities, and 47 percent were women.

Robert E. Heideck, Pepper’s executive partner, then introduced Judge Giles, who offered remarks commending the firm for its efforts to increase diversity representation and encouraging the audience to be vigilant in continuing to do so.

Judge Giles was a lawyer at Pepper Hamilton before he was appointed to the bench, and, in 1974, he was the first person of color to be elected to Pepper’s partnership.

Pepper Hamilton LLP is a multi-practice law firm with 400 lawyers in six states and the District of Columbia. The firm provides corporate, litigation and regulatory legal services to leading businesses, governmental entities, nonprofit organizations and individuals throughout the nation and the world. The firm was founded in 1890.

08-08-2006

---

Miller, Canfield, Paddock & Stone, P.L.C.

Miller Canfield Attorneys Discuss "Selling the Venture-Backed Company"
Miller Canfield high-technology ventures and business attorneys David N. Parsigian and Phillip D. Torrence recently participated in DealLawyers.com’s M&A Boot Camp. They presented “Selling the Venture-Backed Company” on July 17, discussing the issues typically present in a sale of a venture-backed company with multiple class of stock and varying liquidation preferences.

Listen to the podcast at www.deallawyers.com or directly at http://www.deallawyers.com/Member/Programs/Podcast/2006/07_17_Torrence.htm. A subscription is required.

Parsigian is leader of Miller Canfield’s High-technology Ventures Group and is currently advising emerging technology-based businesses, and individuals and entities that invest in those businesses. He has extensive experience counseling new ventures on locating sources of capital and structuring financings ranging from seed capital to initial public offerings. In 2005, he represented more than half of the awardees in the commercialization category of the MEDC’s Life Sciences and Technology Tri-Corridor funding program. He resides in the firm’s Ann Arbor, Mich. office.

Torrence has extensive experience in private and public securities offerings, public company representation, mergers and acquisitions, venture capital financing, executive compensation planning, corporate restructuring, going-private transactions, various regulatory and compliance matters, entity formation, and shareholder relations. He also represents issuers and investors in life science companies in connection with transactions involving intellectual property or product rights. He resides in Miller Canfield’s Kalamazoo, Mich. office.

DealLawyers.com is an educational service that provides practical guidance on legal issues involving public and private mergers and acquisitions, joint ventures, private equity, and restructurings.

The 350-attorney law firm of Miller, Canfield, Paddock and Stone, P.L.C. was established in Detroit in 1852 and has offices in Ann Arbor, Detroit, Grand Rapids, Howell, Kalamazoo, Lansing, Monroe, Saginaw, and Troy, Michigan. Other offices are located in New York City, Naples and Pensacola, Florida, Windsor, Ontario, and in Gdynia, Warsaw, and Wroclaw, Poland.

08-08-2006

---

Kirkland & Ellis

Kirkland & Ellis LLP Captures Jury Trial Win for Client NL Industries in Closely Watched Case
On Friday, Aug. 4, 2006, an eight-person federal jury in Oxford, Miss., returned a unanimous verdict for Kirkland & Ellis LLP client NL Industries following a three-week trial. The plaintiffs were 14 children who alleged brain damage and increased risk of cardiovascular disease, kidney disease and peripheral neuropathy as a result of lead poisoning by NL Industries’ lead paint in their apartments.

Plaintiffs sought in excess of $25 million in compensatory damages and had retained an economist to testify in an expected punitive damages phase, where plaintiffs were expected to seek $75 to $100 million in punitive damages. As to each of the 14 plaintiffs, the jury responded “no” to the question whether NL Industrieswas liable as a result of a design defect and/or negligence. Accordingly, the jury awarded no damages, including on plaintiffs claim for medical monitoring.

In light of the importance of the case to the entire industry, a number of former manufacturers of lead paint and lead pigment assigned lawyers to attend and monitor the trial. Pre-trial news reports focused on what lawyers for the plaintiffs called the “gene defense,” a reference to the expert testimony that a family history of learning problems and disabilities explained learning disabilities mild mental retardation among some of the plaintiffs.

The Mississippi case was only the second personal injury trial against a former manufacturer of lead-based paint. In the first such trial, also tried by Kirkland, a Baltimore jury in 2000 returned a verdict in favor of NL Industries in what The National Law Journal chronicled as a Defense Win of the Year.

Then, as in Mississippi, the trial team was led by Kirkland partner, Michael D. Jones, a fellow in the American College of Trial Lawyers. The Kirkland team also included Alicia Johnson, Nicole Goldstein, and Susan McGuire. Local counsel during the trial was James E. Upshaw and Ewin F. Henson III of Upshaw, Williams, Biggers, Beckham & Riddick, LLP.

Mr. Jones and his team presented evidence that showed the children were likely to have been exposed to lead from other sources. Soil samples near the Dewey Street Apartments in Greenwood, Miss., where they lived, contained lead from automotive materials such as car batteries and welding activity. Medical experts also testified that the children's learning disabilities, which plaintiffs alleged were caused by lead poisoning, were consistent with a family history of learning problems.

Noted Mr. Jones, “we were able to show through a balanced consideration of all of the evidence including the history of NL and science, that a finding for NL was both the right and legal thing to do. This task was made all the more challenging by the unrestrained appeal of sympathy for children that we all possess.”

U.S. District Judge Mike Mills presided over the trial.

Kirkland & Ellis LLP is a 1,100-attorney law firm representing global clients in complex litigation, dispute resolution and arbitration, corporate, restructuring, tax and intellectual property and technology matters. The Firm has offices in Washington, D.C., Chicago, London, Los Angeles, Munich, New York and San Francisco.

08-08-2006

---

25383 matches |  20420-20426 displayed

1  2916 2917 2918 2919 2920  3627