Want to get this daily news briefing by email? Here's the sign-up.

WHAT WE'RE WATCHING

WHAT WE'RE WATCHING

COST CONTROL - In the decade-plus since the Great Recession, clients have gained considerable leverage in pricing negotiations with their outside counsel. But when a pandemic blindsides the business world like a meteor, who controls the conversation on legal costs? As Christine Simmons writes in this week's Law.com Barometer newsletter, firms were able to push through a remarkable 5% rate increase last year, thanks in part to increased demand (and desperation) from clients who sought urgent legal advice on unique COVID-era issues involving workplace laws, PPP loans, restructuring and data security. But, as Simmons notes, the circumstances of the pandemic also led to greater cooperation on pricing from both sides, as firms worked with their clients to develop innovative arrangements that both sides could feel decent about. And that spirit of collaboration is likely to become even more essential this year, especially once the pandemic begins to fade. To receive the Law.com Barometer directly to your inbox each week, click here.

OVER BEFORE IT BEGAN - In early December, we wrote in our Law.com Litigation Trendspotter column that state courts in Georgia and Philadelphia were aiming to resume in-person jury trials in January even as other courts across the country were being forced to shelve their own restarts thanks to new COVID-19 outbreaks in the fall and early winter. But now, with a vaccine being slowly rolled out as coronavirus cases surge at record levels, Georgia and Philadelphia have extended their moratoriums on in-person trials once again. Meanwhile, the Texas Supreme Court reversed course and halted an in-person jury trial in Houston this week after recently denying similar requests to continue trials amid rising infections in the state. In this week's Litigation Trendspotter, we look at the impetus for and impact of those decisions, as well as how the recent, COVID-related deaths of two Los Angeles court employees reinforced the very real dangers of pushing ahead with in-person proceedings at this stage of the pandemic.

BAD IMPRESSIONS - A new lawsuit against LinkedIn could be of interest to the growing number of law firms who have leaned heavily on the professional networking site for marketing and branding recently. Pomerantz LLP and Wohl & Fruchter filed a class action Thursday in California Northern District Court against the company. The complaint accuses LinkedIn of causing advertisers to pay higher prices for ads than they otherwise would have due to a flawed auditing system that inflated performance metrics for approximately two years. Counsel have not yet appeared for the defendant. The case is 5:21-cv-00513, Synergy RX PBM LLC v. LinkedIn Corporation. Stay up on the latest deals with the new Law.com Radar.

EDITOR'S PICKS