Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The RED ZONE - Selecting Outside Firms
May 22, 2007
PERSONAL CONSIDERATIONS – This third criterion in the series identifies what you need to know beyond objective data on client retention of a prospective client, which we discussed in the last article. Red Zone strategies demand that you identify the maximum personal and subjective sensitivity of the man or woman across the table. What are their individual hopes, fears and how can your firm play to those, for the client's benefit as well as the firm's? For the red zone strategist, there are two alternatives. The first, if feasible, is to identify the true final hiring decision maker and spend more time with him/her. Alternatively, the firm may want to do the opposite and focus more on the in-house counsel either directly, or move subtly communicating an “I'm on your side” message.And there is a third possibility as well: do both. the firm could seek another sales target within the organization while helping the general counsel to, well, find another job. Your firm could wind up with two clients.Next time, we will discuss “selection.
PERSONAL CONSIDERATIONS – This third criterion in the series identifies what you need to know beyond objective data on client retention of a prospective client, which we discussed in the last article. Red Zone strategies demand that you identify the maximum personal and subjective sensitivity of the man or woman across the table. What are their individual hopes, fears and how can your firm play to those, for the client's benefit as well as the firm's? For the red zone strategist, there are two alternatives. The first, if feasible, is to identify the true final hiring decision maker and spend more time with him/her. Alternatively, the firm may want to do the opposite and focus more on the in-house counsel either directly, or move subtly communicating an “I'm on your side” message.And there is a third possibility as well: do both. the firm could seek another sales target within the organization while helping the general counsel to, well, find another job. Your firm could wind up with two clients.Next time, we will discuss “selection.
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Stranger to the Deed Rule
In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.