Nearly every founder or executive considers selling their company at one point or another.
There’s a flurry of discussion going on across the net about who is going to have the best publishing platform.
Are you worried about the threat posed by prior-salary-question-askers?
The folks over at the Legal Marketing Association recently combined interviews of a small group of opinion leaders with an online survey conducted by the research team at American Lawyer Media to answer the question: “Are traditional law firms resistant to hiring client-facing business development (i.e. “sales”) staff at a time when competition for and delivery of legal work continues to intensify?”
The US Deputy Attorney General, Sally Quillian Yates, recently released a memorandum (Yates Memo) in which she outlined a new strategy to help combat corporate fraud and other wrongdoing.
In contrast to the Dollar Shave case we wrote about recently, NAD and NARB recently gave us an example of a case they found to be falsely disparaging, notwithstanding the humor and hyperbole throughout.
This case may have some problems, but it’s a good illustration of why employers need to be careful, post-Young v. UPS.
Let’s start with the fact that there is no such thing as a one-size-fits-all Non-Disclosure Agreement (“OSFA NDA”).
These days, the chatter is all about “big data,” “data,” “metrics,” and other buzzwords, which can sound like a lot of fancy talk about things you can’t be bothered with (Spoiler alert: in general, it’s not).
The Federal Government is Not Messing Around When It Comes to Title IX Compliance: What OCR’s University of Virginia Investigation Can Teach Us
Over the past several years, mainstream media has become increasingly fixated on issues of sexual violence on college campuses, with major state universities like the University of Montana, Michigan State University, the University of Virginia (UVA), and the University of California at San Diego receiving the brunt of the attention and corresponding criticism.