Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Legal Project Management has seen an explosion of interest from the legal industry in recent years. It has been touted as the key to efficient legal work and a cure-all for the woes of fixed fees, fee caps, and lawyers who blow budgets. However, I think there has become a disconnect with understanding why legal project management has been beneficial in creating efficiencies, to the point where it isn't understood why it doesn't or won't create efficiencies in certain situations.
Legal Project Management (LPM) consists of conducting legal matters with project management principles; Initiating, Planning, Managing/Monitoring, and Review. Initiating is focused on the opening of the matter and clearing identifying client goals as well as the scope of the matter. Planning focuses on both an initial timeline of work, what work will be done, and who will be doing it. Many lawyers get hung up on the idea that they can't have a plan because you can't see months, if not years, into the future of litigation. However, a plan is meant to be based on the best information available combined with reasonable assumptions, and should be updated and modified as more information is available. Managing/Monitoring is doing the work that was planned and monitoring that the plan is being followed as well as monitoring that the budget is on track. Last, Reviewing takes place at the close of a matter to see how the matter went in regard to how accurate the initial plan was, how closely the budget was followed, how satisfied the client is, and what can be done better next time.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.
Each stage of an attorney's career offers opportunities for a curriculum that addresses both the individual's and the firm's need to drive success.
A defendant in a patent infringement suit may, during discovery and prior to a <i>Markman</i> hearing, compel the plaintiff to produce claim charts, claim constructions, and element-by-element infringement analyses.