Welcome to your Tuesday morning round-up of stories in today’s edition of The Legal Intelligencer, which also includes this week’s edition of Pennsylvania Law Weekly. All of the links below will take you directly to today’s stories, or you can head straight over to The Legal’s homepage. (Some stories may require registration or a paid subscription.)
The top story in today’s Legal is a look at labor and employment work, which is one of the few bright spots in an otherwise low-demand market for legal work. As reporter Gina Passarella writes, labor and employment work rose 4.7 percent in the second quarter and is one of the only practice areas that has been consistently positive in terms of demand over the last year-and-a-half.
Also above the fold on Page 1, reporter Saranac Hale Spencer writes that the Third Circuit has ruled an employment-test maker must share information with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in a dispute sprouting from a discrimination case in which Kroger’s used the company’s test in its hiring practices.
Below the fold on Page 1, reporter Zack Needles writes that an Allegheny County trial court has found that statements made by an assignor prior to an assignment of a mortgage are admissible under the party-opponent exception to the hearsay rule.
In more Regional News on Page 3, reporter Amaris Elliott-Engel writes that the Superior Court has granted en banc arguments over appellate rights.
As always, our People in the News section is on Page 2, and the top stories from our sibling publications across the country make up the Page 4 National News section.
In a Law Firm Management column on Page 5, Kristin Sudholz and Jennifer Smuts write about process improvement in a changing legal landscape.
In a Legal Marketing column on Page 7, Jamie Mulholland writes that there is no wiggle room when it comes to your personal touch in associating with clients.
Today’s lead story in PLW is the state Supreme Court mulling emotional distress coverage under an automobile insurance policy. As Zack Needles writes, the policy at issue provides coverage for “bodily injury to a person and sickness, disease or death which results from it.”
Below the fold on Page 1, reporter Ben Present writes that an attorney has challenged before the Supreme Court the removal from the bench of a magisterial district judge who missed court more than 100 times over two years.
On Page 3, Ben Present writes that lawyers debated the constitutionality of Megan’s Law at Supreme Court oral arguments last week.
There’s much more inside this week’s PLW, including Samuel C. Stretton’s Ethics Forum, in which he writes about the use of social media to discuss upcoming jury trials; Daniel E. Cummins’ Insurance Law column on Superior Court guidance regarding the Koken case; and Frank G. Murphy’s Civil Practice column on the interplay between arbitration clauses and superseding injunctive relief.
If you have questions or comments about any of today's stories, or our coverage as a whole, we invite you to e-mail any of the reporters directly. We hope you'll enjoy today's Legal.