Lawyers for a Philadelphia securities litigation firm and a consulting company sparred Tuesday over who should suffer the losses when a payment arrangement between the two is deemed improper.
September 12, 2017 at 08:16 PM
1 minute read
Lawyers for a Philadelphia securities litigation firm and a consulting company sparred Tuesday over who should suffer the losses when a payment arrangement between the two is alleged to be improper.
Arguing before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in SCF Consulting v. Barrack, Rodos & Bacine, a lawyer for SCF Consulting said his client should not be punished for a fee arrangement if the nonlawyer was unaware of the limitations set by Rule of Professional Conduct 5.4.
Presented by BigVoodoo
The Legal Intelligencer honors lawyers leaving a mark on the legal community in Pennsylvania and Delaware.
Law firms & in-house legal departments with a presence in the middle east celebrate outstanding achievement within the profession.
The premier educational and networking event for employee benefits brokers and agents.
Atlanta s John Marshall Law School is seeking to hire one or more full-time, visiting Legal WritingInstructors to teach Legal Research, Anal...
Lower Manhattan firm seeks a premises liability litigator (i.e., depositions, SJ motions, and/or trials) with at least 3-6 years of experien...
Evergreen Trading is a media investment firm headquartered in NYC. We help brands achieve their goals by leveraging their unwanted assets to...
MELICK & PORTER, LLP PROMOTES CONNECTICUT PARTNERS HOLLY ROGERS, STEVEN BANKS, and ALEXANDER AHRENS
