LAWYER MONTHLY©2024 Universal Media Limited Lawyer Monthly is published by Universal Media Limited and is available on general subscription. Readership and circulation information can be found at: www.lawyer-monthly.com. The views expressed in the articles within Lawyer Monthly are the contributors’ own. All rights reserved. Material contained within this publication is not to be reproduced in whole or in part without prior permission. Permission may only be given in written form by the management board of Universal Media Limited. Approx. 302,000 net digital distribution. Stefan Thomas Bridging Law and Business: Stefan’s Innovative Approach at T I Law Group Stephen Jagusch KC A Journey Through International Arbitration: Insights from a Leading Counsel Trey Porter Exploring the Intricacies of Criminal Law in Texas 16 10 22 OCTOBER 2024 In this latest edition of Lawyer Monthly, we are thrilled to showcase a collection of compelling interviews with some of the most influential voices in the legal industry. From Stephen Jagusch KC's expertise in international arbitration to Luiz Carlos Aceti Junior's leadership in Brazil's environmental law, each article offers a deep dive into the unique challenges and insights these legal professionals bring to their fields. We also explore diverse legal landscapes, from criminal law in Texas with Trey Porter to innovative business law approaches by Stefan Thomas. Enjoy these insightful perspectives! Happy reading! Warm regards, Mark Palmer Editor, Lawyer Monthly
Production Team: Emma Tansey, Luke Ostle production@lawyer-monthly.com Sales Enquires: Jacob Mallinder Jacob.mallinder@universalmedia365.com @lawyermonthly @LawyerMonthly @lawyermonthly company/lawyer-monthly Universal Media Limited, PO Box 17858, Tamworth, B77 9QG, United Kingdom 0044 (0) 1543 255 537 CONTENTS AN INTERVIEW WITH... 10. Stephen Jagusch KC A Journey Through International Arbitration: Insights from a Leading Counsel 16. Stefan Thomas Bridging Law and Business: Stefan’s Innovative Approach at T I Law Group 22. Trey Porter Exploring the Intricacies of Criminal Law in Texas 26. Adam J. Krolikowski Discussing the Challenges and Complexities of Personal Injury Law in California 30. Luiz Carlos Aceti Junior Navigating Brazil’s Environmental Legal Landscape: Insights from Aceti Advocacia’s 31-Year Journey 4. Amazon Liable for $30.5M in Patent Trial with Acceleration Bay 5. Apple Face Narrowed Privacy Lawsuit over its Apps 6. The U.S. Justice Department Sues Visa 7. 23andMe Settles Data Breach Lawsuit for $30 Million 8. Manchester City’s Court Hearing Begins SPECIAL FEATURE 38. Menendez Brothers: Erik Menendez ‘Monsters’ Netflix Show branded lies by killer A Timeline of Events - NEWS - Adam J. Krolikowski Discussing the Challenges and Complexities of Personal Injury Law in California 26 TRANSACTIONS 44. AI-Tijari’s Issuance of Basel III Compliant Tier 2 Bonds 46. Indigo Capital acquires a stake in Delville Management 47. Volpi Capital’s EUR428m Closing of the Fund III 48. Oxford Online Pharmacy secures investment from Rockpool Investments
4 LAWYER MONTHLY OCTOBER 2024 network-communications patents, which were initially acquired from Boeing (BA.N). Amazon contended that its technology operates differently from that of Acceleration Bay and claimed to possess a license for the patents from the aerospace company. In a separate patent trial in May, Acceleration Bay was awarded $23.4 million after a jury found that the multiplayer features of Activision Blizzard’s (ATVI.MX) popular games, including “World of Warcraft,” “Call of Duty: Black Ops III,” and “Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare,” infringed on its patents. Both Activision and Amazon were found to have violated one of the same patents owned by Accelera Fisch Sigler. tion Bay. Case# The case is identified as Acceleration Bay LLC v. Amazon Web Services Inc, U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, No. 1:22-cv-00904. Legal Representation For Acceleration Bay: Aaron Frankel, Paul Andre, Lisa Kobialka, James Hannah, Kristopher Kastens, Michael Lee, Christina Finn of Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel. For Amazon: Alan Fisch, Bill Sigler, and Lisa Phillips of Fisch Sigler. The jury concluded that Amazon’s CloudFront content delivery system and Virtual Private Cloud virtual network violate two patents held by Acceleration Bay LLC. Furthermore, the jury found that Amazon’s infringement was willful, which may prompt U.S. District Judge Richard Andrews to consider increasing the damages award by as much as threefold. Representatives from Amazon did not provide an immediate response regarding the verdict. Joe Ward, president of Acceleration Bay, expressed the company’s enthusiasm about the jury’s decision. Acceleration Bay initiated legal action against Amazon in 2022 concerning the Amazon Liable for $30.5M in Patent Trial with Acceleration Bay NEWS A jury in the Delaware federal court has determined that Amazon Web Services (AMZN.O) is liable for $30.5 million in damages for infringing on the patent rights related to computer networking and broadcasting technology.
NEWS 5 In a 39-page decision late Thursday, Davila said Apple made clear to users that the “Allow Apps to Request to Track” setting applied to “other companies’ apps and websites.” He said that made it “implausible” for reasonable people to believe that by turning the setting off, they were withdrawing consent for Apple to collect their data through its own apps. But the judge said users plausibly alleged they withdrew such consent by disabling the “Share [Device] Analytics” setting, citing Apple’s disclosure that users may “disable the sharing of Device Analytics altogether.” The company located in Cupertino, California, has stated that it gathers data via that setting to enhance its products and services. restrict the collection, storage, and utilization of their data. However, the company reportedly disregarded these preferences and continued to gather, store, and use that information. The lawsuit, which seeks unspecified damages, is among numerous claims against technology firms, including Apple, Alphabet’s Google, and Meta Platforms’ Facebook, for permitting the collection of user data without obtaining proper consent. U.S. District Judge Edward Davila, located in San Jose, California, dismissed the majority of claims related to the “Allow Apps to Request to Track” feature on Apple mobile devices; however, he permitted certain claims to advance concerning the “Share [Device] Analytics” option. Mobile device users have alleged that Apple breached their user agreements and various privacy and consumer protection statutes by claiming that turning off certain settings would Apple Face Narrowed Privacy Lawsuit over its Apps NEWS A federal judge has narrowed a lawsuit that alleges Apple infringed upon the privacy of users of iPhones, iPads, and Apple Watches by gathering their personal information through its proprietary applications, including the App Store, Apple Music, and Apple TV. Read this news article online and more at: www.lawyer-monthly.com
6 LAWYER MONTHLY OCTOBER 2024 The U.S. Justice Department Sues Visa marketplace. Merchants and banks pass along those costs to consumers, either by raising prices or reducing quality or service. As a result, Visa’s unlawful conduct affects not just the price of one thing -- but the price of nearly everything.” The Justice Department filed Tuesday’s lawsuit to restore competition and to benefit the American public, alleging that Visa employed exclusionary tactics to protect its position in the debit market. Visa reports a global operating income of $18.8 billion as stated in the lawsuit and charges approximately $8 billion in network fees annually from U.S. debit transactions. Globally, Visa handles a total payment of $12.3 trillion. Principal Deputy Associate Attorney General Benjamin Mizer stated: “Anticompetitive conduct by corporations like Visa leaves the American people The U.S. Justice Department is suing Visa, accusing the company of dominating the debit card market through excessive fees and restricting competition. Antitrust Lawsuit A civil antitrust lawsuit was initiated on Tuesday in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, alleging that Visa has breached sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act. The complaint highlights that over 60% of debit transactions in the United States are conducted through Visa’s debit network, which generates more than $7 billion in fees annually for processing these transactions. DOJ Response Attorney General Merrick Garland stated: “We assert that Visa has illegally gained the ability to impose fees that significantly surpass what would be permissible in a competitive and our economy worse off. Today’s action against Visa reminds those who would stifle competition rather than competing on price or investing in innovation that the Justice Department will never hesitate to enforce the law on behalf of the American people.” Visa has faced legal challenges from the U.S. government in the past. Four years ago, the Justice Department initiated a lawsuit aimed at preventing Visa from acquiring the fintech firm Plaid. The lawsuit asserted that Visa’s $5.3 billion acquisition was a tactical effort to safeguard its debit card operations from potential competition posed by Plaid. Consequently, the companies abandoned their proposed merger. Visa Response Visa’s general counsel Julie Rottenberg responded with a statement: “Anyone who has bought something online, or checked out at a store, knows there is an ever-expanding universe of companies offering new ways to pay for goods and services. We are proud of the payments network we have built, the innovation we advance and the economic opportunity we enable.” NEWS Key Points • The U.S. Department of Justice on Tuesday sued Visa, the world’s biggest payments card network, saying it propped up an illegal monopoly over debit card payments. • The DOJ said Visa imposed “exclusionary” agreements on partners and smothered upstart firms. • Visa and its smaller rival Mastercard have surged over the past two decades, reaching a combined market cap of roughly $1 trillion.
NEWS 7 23andMe has agreed to pay $30 million and offer three years of security monitoring as part of a settlement for a lawsuit that alleged the genetics testing firm did not adequately safeguard the privacy of 6.9 million customers whose personal information was exposed in a data breach last year. 23andMe Settles Data Breach Lawsuit for $30 Million reasonable. Approximately $25 million of the expenses will be financed through cyber insurance coverage. The security breach started in April 2023 and continued for about five months, impacting nearly half of the 14.1 million customers in 23andMe’s database at that time. 23andMe revealed this information in a blog post in October 2023. A hacker gained access to 5.5 million DNA Relatives profiles, allowing users to share information among themselves, and also obtained data from an additional 1.4 million customers who utilized a feature known as Family Tree. The attorneys representing the plaintiffs stated that the settlement met their clients’ primary concerns and took into account the considerable risks associated with continuing litigation, especially considering 23andMe’s challenging financial situation. 23andMe lost lost $69.4 million on revenue of $40.4 million in the quarter ending June 30. Anne Wojcicki, the co-founder and CEO of 23andMe, has been working to take the company private again, three years after its initial public offering at $10 per share. Since mid-December, the stock has been trading for less than $1. The attorneys representing the plaintiffs may request legal fees that could reach as high as 25% of the total settlement amount. The agreement addresses allegations that 23andMe failed to inform customers of Chinese and Ashkenazi Jewish descent that they were specifically targeted by a hacker, who listed their information for sale on the dark web. A preliminary settlement regarding the proposed class action was submitted to federal court in San Francisco late Thursday evening, pending the approval of a judge. The settlement includes cash payments for customers whose data was compromised and allows them to participate in a program called Privacy & Medical Shield + Genetic Monitoring for a duration of three years. In a court filing submitted on Friday, 23andMe described the settlement as fair, adequate, and NEWS Read this news article online and more at: www.lawyer-monthly.com
After several years of collating evidence, the hearing began yesterday and will continue for the next few months as both sides present their evidence. Whilst the hearing has now started, it is not expected that any findings from the independent commission will be heard until next spring and with the legal world’s proclivity for delay, there is a chance it could be even later than that. There is also a strong likelihood that should Manchester City be found guilty of any breaches that they would appeal any outcome, which could extend the process of punishment. How did this case come about? In 2018, a German outlet called Der Spiegel published a series of articles in which they had conducted an investigation which was based on the work of a Portuguese computer hacker Rui Pinto. Pinto had hacked into the email accounts of various football clubs and agents. UEFA then conducted their own investigation based on this. It was after this investigation that the Premier League announced in February 2023 that it was bringing a case as well. What are the potential punishments? There is much discourse on this, as the alleged breaches are on a scale that is Manchester City’s Court Hearing Begins 8 LAWYER MONTHLY OCTOBER 2024 NEWS On Monday 16th September, the hearing began for Manchester City Football Club’s alleged 115 breaches of Financial Fair Play (FFP). Manchester City have been alleged to have breached the Premier League’s FFP rules resulting in 115 charges being levied against them. These alleged breaches took place over nine years from 2009 until 2018. Throughout this process, Manchester City have denied all charges against them and has organised a strong legal team in order to provide a defence.
NEWS 9 There could be serious ramifications and further cases should the breaches be found to be true. City’s Case As mentioned, Manchester City have professed their innocence ever since their alleged breaches were made public and in their statement at the time said that: “Manchester City FC is surprised by the issuing of these alleged breaches of the Premier League rules, particularly given the extensive engagement and vast amount of detailed materials that the EPL has been provided with,” they said in a statement at the time. unlike any other case previously brought forward. The main context we have is points deductions for Everton and Nottingham Forest, both of which were reduced following appeals. We also have the recent outcome of Leicester City managing to avoid a point deduction on a technicality. All of these incidents are related to single violations of Profit and Sustainability Rules (PSR), whereas Manchester City are potentially dealing with 115, which is why the case has taken such a long time to begin. This means that their punishment could be anything from fines, points deductions, exclusion from certain competitions, relegation from the Premier League and maybe the scrapping of title wins from that period of which there were three. All of which could vary in severity depending on the scale of guilt. The wider view Lots of clubs will be watching very closely to see the outcome of this case, there are potential butterfly effects throughout the English Football world as a result of this. Manchester City are a successful club, who have won trophies in the period in which they are charged, that means teams lost out on winning titles, it means financial remuneration has been higher for them as a result of higher finishes in the league, where other clubs have lost out on money. “The club welcomes the review of this matter by an independent commission, to impartially consider the comprehensive body of irrefutable evidence that exists in support of its position. “As such, we look forward to this matter being put to rest once and for all.” They are also launching their own legal case against the Premier League for the tightening of the rules on associated party transactions (APT). APT is a mechanism that allows club owners to sponsor their teams through their other businesses. This allows the club more revenue to spend, making it easier to comply with the Premier League’s Profit and Sustainability Rules (PSR), which have plagued the league this year with Nottingham Forest and Everton being punished with points deductions for not complying. In their 165 page legal document, Manchester City claim to be victims of “discrimination”. They argue that the rules were approved by rivals to “stifle” their success, and call it “a tyranny of the majority”. We’re in a holding pattern now until further details emerge from the hearing, but it seems a long series of legal cases are due to ensue regardless of the outcome. The US Secretary of State has stated his plan to take legal action against the ICC and the warrants.
Stephen Jagusch KC An Interview with... A Journey Through International Arbitration: Insights from a Leading Counsel 10 LAWYER MONTHLY OCTOBER 2024 eventually moved to Paris to work with Jan Paulsson, a doyen of international arbitration. He introduced me to the field and many renowned arbitrators and arbitration lawyers. I built lasting friendships and developed a reputation for handling significant cases while expressing often provocative but forthright views on international arbitration. In 2000, I returned to London to work with David Sutton and Judith Gill (now KC) at Allen & Overy (now A&O Shearman). I went on to become their Global Head of International Arbitration. After a decade as a partner at Allen & Overy I was drawn to an incredible opportunity to lead the international arbitration practice at Quinn Emanuel. I joined as Global Chair in 2013 and focused on expanding its worldwide presence by recruiting top practitioners in key jurisdictions. In just a few years we became recognised as a leading practice globally. I became Queen’s Counsel in 2016 and am now celebrating over a decade at Quinn Emanuel. My journey to taking silk began with my qualification as a barrister and solicitor in New Zealand. Wanting to be a disputes lawyer, I entered a litigation practice. By the end of my first week I was in Stephen Jagusch KC’s journey through the world of international arbitration is a testament to the power of adaptability and ambition. From his beginnings as a law student in Auckland to becoming a celebrated King’s Counsel in London, Jagusch has built a remarkable career defined by high-stakes cases and groundbreaking achievements. With over thirty years of experience, he has not only represented some of the most influential clients in global business but has also contributed to the evolution of arbitration practices. In this article, we explore Jagusch's insights, the challenges he’s faced, and the pivotal moments that have shaped his extraordinary career in international arbitration. Describe your journey to becoming a King’s Counsel and specialising in international arbitration? Growing up in Auckland, New Zealand, I never imagined I would become a lawyer, let alone a London-based international arbitration counsel and arbitrator. My initial interest was in business and management, and I applied to law school on a whim, inspired by my best friend. Once accepted, my parents encouraged me to pursue law, as I was the first in the family accepted into law school. To my surprise, I enjoyed it. I won an advocacy prize, qualified, and worked in the litigation practice of a leading local law firm and mentored by a masterful Senior Litigation Partner, Michael Cole. Five years and a Master’s degree in Commercial Law later, I left New Zealand with my best friend to explore the world, never expecting I wouldn’t return as a resident. I fell in love with London and decided to seek employment. My father lent me £400 to buy a suit which I needed to interview at Clifford Chance and Freshfields. I chose Freshfields, where I
As an arbitrator, I have sat on many cases, both commercial and investor-state. Perhaps the most notable ongoing case involves a claim to a share of the value of the largest treasure cache ever found at sea. WWW.LAWYER-MONTHLY.COM 11
bankruptcy courts then frequently arguing civil and criminal matters across New Zealand’s courts. I have the rare distinction of arguing a case in the District Court, appealing to the High Court, and then to the Court of Appeal—and losing all three times! Thankfully, those losses were outweighed by enough successes to sustain my passion for courtroom advocacy. When I arrived in London in 1994, I quickly qualified as a solicitor advocate. It was after joining Freshfields’ arbitration group that advocacy truly became my passion, and my efforts were highly-regarded by clients, arbitrators, and peers. Soon, I was the lead advocate in major billion-dollar international disputes and began serving as an arbitrator alongside many respected figures in the arbitration world. Of course, this recognition and these success have only been possible with the incredible support of my team over very many years. Key among them in almost all of my big cases have been my friends and partners Dr Anthony Sinclair and Epaminontas Triantafilou, both of whom are among the finest strategists and advocates of their generation and well worthy of taking silk. I have been ranked among the top five international arbitration counsel globally and as one of the top 20 most sought-after arbitrators. At one point, I was recognised as one of the world’s notable “double-hatters,” a dubious accolade given the rising concerns over conflicts in the investor-state arena. Few experiences hone advocacy skills better than sitting as an arbitrator and deciding cases argued by esteemed contemporaries. My growing docket of case wins as well as my leadership roles at Allen & Overy and Quinn Emanuel led many to believe my skills would impress the (then) Queen’s Counsel Appointment Selection Panel, and I was encouraged to submit for consideration. Initially I resisted but as some peers took silk before me I worried people might assume I had been rejected. To avoid that speculation I took silk in 2015, with a memorable ceremony in 12 LAWYER MONTHLY OCTOBER 2024
early 2016 at Westminster Hall, attended by my amazing and supportive wife Rachel, my totally awesome daughters Annabel, Clara and Miranda, and my ever supportive parents-in-law John and Carr. It was undoubtedly the proudest moment of my professional career, made even more special by sharing it with my family who have endured the sacrifices of an often-absent and overworked international arbitration advocate. Can you highlight some of the most notable cases you have worked on in international arbitration? Choosing specific cases from over 30 years of practice with countless cases as counsel and arbitrator is challenging. Some cases stand out as ‘firsts,’ like the first arbitration I ever argued which was in Cyprus, concerning whether sanctions against Iraq terminated obligations under a substantial contract or merely suspended them. Another early case involved advocating claims before the esteemed Karl-Heinz Bockstiegel, before whom I would later argue many cases and eventually sit with him as a coarbitrator. I will never forget successfully defending the UAE in treaty proceedings by demonstrating that the claimant did not possess the Italian nationality he claimed, despite Italy continuing to issue him passports. I also defended Azerbaijan in two cases with a combined claim value exceeding $2 billion. These cases settled after my cross-examination of the claimants’ trust director revealed he was operating the claimants’ investment companies illegally. This case also led to a unique dispute about whether the settlement was binding, requiring me to give evidence before the same tribunal where I was lead counsel—an extraordinary development. Another notable achievement was commencing the first-ever arbitration under the Energy Charter Treaty in 2001, and I have since conducted many of the subsequent 160 or so ECT cases. In one instance for a sovereign client, I successfully settled a substantial claim, only to later face allegations from a new government claiming I had conspired I will never forget successfully defending the UAE in treaty proceedings by demonstrating that the claimant did not possess the Italian nationality he claimed, despite Italy continuing to issue him passports. with the former administration to procure an illegal compromise. Surprisingly, the new government shortly thereafter appointed me as an arbitrator in an investor-state claim. In two high-value ICSID mining claims I initiated under an investment treaty, I was particularly pleased to convince a distinguished tribunal that “may” in an arbitration agreement meant “must,” based in part on a previous commercial case where I had also been counsel. No list of notable cases would be complete without mentioning my claims for a Ukrainian bank against Russia for expropriation following Russia’s 2014 invasion of Crimea. This was the first claim that resulted in an award finding Russia liable under the Ukraine-Russia bilateral investment treaty, ultimately awarding my client over $1.1 billion in compensation. All of these cases presented unique challenges, but none more so than a commercial arbitration against one of Russia’s largest banks. Despite numerous contracts we could not identify any specific breach, so we pleaded breach of an implied term and succeeded. Several billion dollars were at stake. I have been appointed as arbitrator on many cases both commercial and investor-state. Perhaps the most notable ongoing case involves a claim to a share of the value of the largest treasure cache ever found at sea. How do you handle the challenges posed by differing legal systems and jurisdictions in international arbitration? The practice of international arbitration is fascinating due to the many challenges presented by differing legal systems. In a typical case, there are parties, counsel, arbitrators, witnesses, and experts trained in diverse legal systems and accustomed to various dispute resolution practices. Experienced participants quickly adapt to the needs of the key WWW.LAWYER-MONTHLY.COM 13
decision-makers, the arbitrators, and this also requires careful client management to align their expectations with the processes and procedures the tribunal is likely to require. Legal and cultural differences can be categorised as substantive or procedural. Striking the right balance in approach is crucial for effective strategy and advocacy. Misunderstanding procedural nuances can lead to missed opportunities that enhance or weaken a case before and during the final hearing, as well as in post-hearing submissions. Failing to grasp the details and nuances of the governing law will very likely be fatal. With experience in hundreds of cases involving various laws, I have developed keen instincts. In cases where the applicable law is not English law, I often co-counsel with qualified foreign lawyers or engage them as expert witnesses on the governing law. How do you manage client expectations, especially in highstakes international disputes? Clients rarely enjoy the process of litigating international disputes, which can take years and cost millions in legal fees while demanding significant time from management and witnesses. The best way to manage client expectations is to be open and honest about the process, outlining the likely path to an award while explaining the timing and magnitude of expected demands based on the specific circumstances of their case. Clients appreciate understanding the various interlocutory measures available, how they might benefit from them, and the likely strategies of their opponents. Routine scheduled meetings with clients to discuss the case’s progress and what’s on the horizon (so they know who is doing what and why) is critical to ensuring client buy-in. These meetings should involve key decision-makers and those responsible for the case’s conduct, minimising what clients dislike most—surprises. How do you anticipate the field of international arbitration evolving in the next decade? I believe international arbitration will continue to thrive due to its unmatched advantages. It produces final awards that are generally unchallengeable (except in limited circumstances) and widely enforceable globally as if they were 14 LAWYER MONTHLY OCTOBER 2024 The best way to manage client expectations is to be open and honest about the process, outlining the likely path to an award while explaining the timing and magnitude of expected demands based on the specific circumstances of their case.
domestic court judgments. It is private, flexible, and allows parties to choose their arbitrators. Its popularity is evident in the fact that almost every law firm now boasts specialist international arbitration practitioners, unlike when I began when only a few firms were involved. There is always room for improvement in international arbitration, which is influenced by both local laws and international treaties, and conducted by lawyers from various jurisdictions with differing backgrounds and preferences. This complexity, coupled with the parties’ ability to seek court support varying by jurisdiction, presents opportunities many for enhancements. What international arbitration needs now is participants who are honest and respect basic ethical norms, of which there are none that are codified and binding. The system is vulnerable to abuse by indifferent or lazy actors—be they parties, counsel, witnesses, or arbitrators. I often witness the erosion of integrity in international arbitration and have frequently written about it and addressed audiences about the dangers of bad faith conduct. It’s concerning that instances of misconduct are now emerging in courts at an alarming rate. Given that many abuses are hidden, we must question how many cases are wrongly influenced by undiscovered bad faith conduct. I believe this issue will gain increasing attention, leading to efforts to create binding and enforceable standards for participants that are transparent and capable of being policed. What do you find most rewarding about working in international arbitration? It is rewarding to play a role in preserving and enforcing clients’ rights and defending them against unmeritorious claims. Winning complex, high-value, or prominent cases in the public domain is particularly gratifying. I also find it fulfilling to manage teams of exceptionally talented young lawyers in my firm. Clients are often highly intelligent and masters Navigating bad facts is a skill in itself, and every case has them. Delivering strategy through written briefs and presenting to experienced arbitrators is stimulating and satisfying—it’s where the adrenaline and excitement kick in. I love it. of their respective industries, making interactions rewarding. Many cases involve domain-specific experts from whom I can learn about new subjects and industries—a bonus in my practice area. Perhaps the most rewarding aspect is strategising with clients on how to win their cases, considering the many moving parts and pressure points that often lie outside the arbitration. Navigating bad facts is a skill in itself, and every case has them. Delivering strategy through written briefs and presenting it orally to experienced arbitrators is stimulating and satisfying—it's where the adrenaline and excitement kick in. I love it. How do you balance the demands of high-profile arbitration cases with personal life and wellbeing? I wish I could say I have mastered the balance between work and family pressures, but I haven’t. Few understand the pressures of representing or opposing sovereigns, blue-chip corporations, or ultra-high-net-worth individuals. I’ve faced threats and challenging situations more times than I would like. High stakes often lead individuals to stop at nothing for an advantage, creating corrupting influences that international arbitration could do without. These pressures are often overlooked by those not regularly engaged with the most complex and challenging cases in this relatively unregulated field. To maintain some balance I employ coping mechanisms such as doublepartnering my largest cases to ensure clients have access to partners even when I’m unavailable. I also rely on the younger team members who consistently rise to the occasion. A sense of humour helps alleviate stress and I find that developing personal connections with clients is crucial. Enjoying their personalities and building strong teams fosters a collaborative environment, significantly enhancing my job satisfaction. WWW.LAWYER-MONTHLY.COM 15
16 LAWYER MONTHLY OCTOBER 2024
Stefan Thomas An Interview with... What inspired you to take on the role of both legal advisor and business strategist for your clients, and how do you balance these dual responsibilities? First, it’s been an honor to support clients in these versatile roles. Honestly, my affection for learning led me here. I spend a lot of time reading case studies and literature for the purposes of learning and intentionality. I have always liked business; in law school, my track focused on business. So, when an opportunity arose to formally diversify and sharpen my business skillset, I felt the time was right. I considered how I was engaging with clients, boards on which I sit, and volunteer functions, and I noticed I was often flowing beyond law. I was engaging more heavily in business considerations, operational efficiencies, target attainment, and the like. Functioning in that manner was invigorating. Additionally, I wanted to be more intentional about how I could engage in the business ecosystem. Expanding capacity to enhance experiences is an important factor in growth along any path. Identifying an innate ability within myself, being open to providing value, and taking the initiative to build on that was a natural course of action for me—not only to learn for myself but to support current clients and hopefully create space and opportunity for new clients, ventures, and experiences. I balance these responsibilities logistically by keeping the legal advising separate from strategy consulting. The two run through different offices, with different offerings and models. Attention to volume and standard operating procedures helps maintain high quality for both. The firm is a full team, equipped with skill sets to ensure our client experience is consistent from front to end. While strategy consulting is more intimate, allowing for direct engagement on a limited basis with simplified processes, I keep open the transference of knowledge and intuitive spirit from the strategy work, which I believe allows me to offer more comprehensive support to legal clients. WWW.LAWYER-MONTHLY.COM 17 In this exclusive interview with Lawyer Monthly, Stefan Thomas, founding director of the Thomas Ingram Law Group (T I Law Group), shares his insights on the evolving role of legal counsel in today’s dynamic business landscape. As a multifaceted attorney and business strategist, Stefan Thomas discusses his approach to bridging law and business, addressing the unique challenges faced by entrepreneurs and corporate leaders in Columbus, OH. Through his innovative strategies, he aims to empower clients to navigate complex legal landscapes while fostering sustainable growth and long-term success. Join us as we explore Stefan’s journey and the invaluable contributions he makes to his clients and the broader business community. Bridging Law and Business: Stefan’s Innovative Approach at T I Law Group
What are the most common legal challenges faced by entrepreneurs and startups in Columbus, and how do you help them navigate these issues? I can’t say that I know all the common challenges, but I can share observations of a few recent consistent challenges coming through our firm: optimal business structure; economic development considerations; and financing and capital access. When I speak about business structure in this article, I include formation, workforce, and operational models. Clients are determining, during this shifting climate, which form, or forms, is most advantageous for their current sustainability, long-term, or exit strategies. Considerations are intensified by funding determinations, succession planning, and the fight for talent. Now that Ohio, especially the central region, has become a hotbed of business and population growth, we find our office dealing more with economic development considerations. This includes considerations such as determining where to hold or sell real property, when, what, and where to develop commercial ventures, and how to protect assets situated in areas targeted for renewal and development amid competing socioeconomic realities and aspirations. NFPs, public entities, investors, and investor groups are bringing more considerations around accessing, securing, and making available capital. As the landscape continues to change, so do interests. Navigating these interests requires a delicate balance of knowledge, access, motivations, compliance, coupled with public perception, political uncertainty, and a vacillating marketplace. 18 LAWYER MONTHLY OCTOBER 2024 How do you work with governing boards to ensure that both legal and business objectives align smoothly within an organization? Working with boards is enjoyable because it is multifaceted. You get the chance to engage and balance multiple personalities, ambitions, understandings, and both personal and corporate targets. Considering the matter at hand while balancing those considerations and attempting to bring about unified action feels more like an art than a transaction. At a high level, my work begins with understanding the business objectives. If the organization has a defined organizational strategy or set of business objectives, I can undertake diligence to understand the organization.
Once that understanding is established, the next step is to grasp board dynamics, consensus, individual concerns, and decision-making processes. Reconciling these understandings with the strategy or objectives allows me to identify various things such as legal needs, methods for establishing alignment, and appropriate deliverables. I work with the laws, regulations, and authorities that govern the organization and the board to ensure constant monitoring of organizational activity and board actions. I manage within business relationships to ensure obligations are fulfilled by all parties, while also tracking best practices to support relevant actions and policy development. Together, these elements support alignment. Can you share an example where you identified a critical business issue for a client and developed a successful legal solution? Certainly. I have learned that what is considered critical is relative. I see issues that go unnoticed but that I think a business or leader will find crippling, and issues that cause panic but do not necessarily have a long-term detriment. We have clients who self-identify issues and others who, through our collaboration, come to realize them. An NFP client recognized the potential that certain activities could impact its longevity. We spent extensive time researching, developing, and educating on models and creative structures that offered compliance, distinction, and the desired sustainability for the NFP. Spending time with leaders to determine what mattered most and their long-term goals allowed leadership and our team to collaboratively identify and develop the optimal structure compromised of multiple entities, a suite of agreements and auxiliary documents, and clarified practices. A for-profit client had an incredible vision for helping other firms achieve preferred financing events, where typically they drop off. This client had clearly defined desires and returns. After sessions with the client, we identified areas of opportunity within the envisioned structure and stepped back to identify potentially more suitable structures and create a framework that would protect the client, foster healthy long-term relationships with other firms, meet the goals of the client, and bring the firms to a mvp and further along in their finance lifecycle. What strategies do you employ to keep C-suite executives informed of potential legal risks without overwhelming them with technical details? Great question. First, I maintain a constant diverse stream of real-time learnings and historical/static learnings. With real-time learnings, I keep a pulse on industries, markets, and geographies. Historical and static learnings help develop depth of concept, allowing me to study past happenings to guide present and future considerations, recommendations, and actions. Second, I stay attuned to what is relevant to the executive or leader and what might be inconspicuously relevant. For those Balancing what I think is important with what truly matters to leadership and what has a real impact on the organization is critical to the information being received. willing, we openly discuss concerns of the company and the leader, which allows me to note what matters and what is a priority. I also observe. When on-site, in meetings, or reviewing correspondence, I listen for the unspoken. By tracking industry and market trends, I identify unspoken matters that could have positive or negative impacts and track them to determine the optimal time to share or engage. Third, I determine appropriate timing, frequency, and output. As one client CEO says in leadership meetings, not all things are a 5-alarm fire. Balancing what I think is important with what truly matters to leadership and what has a real impact on the organization is critical to the information being received. Translating information into a consumable form specific to the receiving executive is equally important; this can range from a general report to a late-night call. Some may need a long-form memo, while others may only require a bulleted summary. How has the role of legal counsel for businesses evolved, especially with the increasing importance of compliance and regulatory issues? I’m sure it varies for each practitioner. For me, the role has evolved from being WWW.LAWYER-MONTHLY.COM 19
20 LAWYER MONTHLY OCTOBER 2024 demand; and the operational efficiencies that exist, don’t exist, are developing, or are being ignored. The mindset of leadership also plays a crucial role. Questions that I may engage in may look like the following: Is there room in the market? Is the client an incumbent or a new entrant? Is the client creating a niche? Is the market flourishing? Has a target within the market been identified? Does the product or service have longevity? Do barriers to entry make it easier to compete? Are existing barriers weakening market position? How can we prepare now to defend or advance if barriers come down? Can we leverage compliance to more fully energize ideation and development? Is there a problem that is being solved? Has a problem been considered at all? Is the problem being solved the right problem to solve? Have they discovered the job to be done? Has this problem, job, and the solve been effectively communicated, trained on, bought in? Is the product or service desired? For how long? Can the product or service be fortified, diversified, or further differentiated? Is there demand? Is there enough demand? Can demand be created? Does OE exist? Is the OE developed based on sound considerations? Is there any correlation between the OE and the desired growth? Does the OE positively impact revenue? that stands out to me comes from Sutton and Rao: “Effective scaling depends on believing and living a shared mindset throughout your group, division, or organization. Scaling is analogous to a ground war rather than an air war because developing, spreading, and updating a mindset requires relentless diligence. It requires stating the beliefs and living the behavior, and then doing so again and again. These shared convictions reduce confusion, disagreements, and unnecessary dead ends—and diminish the chances that excellence will fade as your footprint expands.” With that in mind, I believe supporting scaling from a legal or compliance perspective involves asking questions followed by development based on client responses. In my role as outside counsel, I don’t look for specific factors to scale a business or identify potential clients. Every business looks and functions differently, including if, when, and how to scale. At our firm, we leverage our knowledge and experience to contribute to our clients’ scaling considerations when the opportunity arises. It can be difficult to determine scalability based on initial or limited interactions with clients. However, some key factors stand out: the market in which the client operates; the product or service being offered; the problem being solved; a responder to an anticipator. Going back to your earlier question about keeping C-suite informed, I carry with me what matters to our clients or what is happening in relevant industries that could impact them. I then attempt to anticipate the issue and prepare our clients and team to either be proactive or effectively responsive. I also consider the temperament and bandwidth of our clients to ensure we handle matters with appropriate care and make interactions as efficient and actionable as possible. Additionally, the role has evolved from being a doer to a collaborative creator. Initially, requests were for direct support on specific projects. Now, calls are expansive, encompassing evaluations of pending C-suite members for corporations, support on business decisions impacting company strategy, collaboration with PR professionals on corporate matters and crisis management, and ideation around workplace culture. This evolved role requires significant time spent digging into materials, studies, literature, and governmental actions, all aimed at providing counsel focused on business and compliance. What are the key factors you consider when helping entrepreneurs scale their businesses, particularly from a legal and governance perspective? This is an interesting question. When I use “scale,” I generally refer to the ability to increase revenue while maintaining or reducing input. For me, I continuously work to keep scaling distinct from other tools such as strategy, operational efficiency, or even economies of scale. Scaling is intentional work. A principle It’s been an honor to support clients in these versatile roles. Honestly, my affection for learning led me here.
Whether the entrepreneur and one FTE or a suite of business leaders and hundreds of FTEs, is the mindset across all in sync? Do people understand their significance to the company or organization? Is there a people strategy? Is the people strategy effective? Are guardrails clear? I believe various factors exist requiring deep analysis. Determining what is relevant for each is critical to scaling the specific business in question. How do you approach long-term partnerships with clients, and what makes your relationship with them different from a more transactional legal service? Interestingly, we approach all relationships with the same intentionality. I view each as a valuable exchange, with value defined per relationship. We discussed strategy earlier; I focus on strategy at our firm. I track data, market activity, and competitive forces to continually uncover and capture our emergent strategy. Each partnership has the potential for long-term impact, directly or indirectly. We dedicate time to refining components of strategy execution to continuously zero in on our target partnerships and their cultivation. We refer to all our client relationships as client-partnerships to emphasize the importance of nurturing these connections in our competitive legal landscape. Differentiation is key to success in the legal field. However, to differentiate, one must understand their own strategy to avoid replicating competitors’ actions. The legal market is facing new competition from AI, online legal services, and nonlegal ownership, prompting incumbents to explore work that wasn’t previously considered. This reinforces the need for a sound strategy to ensure resources are effectively deployed to attain and maintain targeted partnerships. WWW.LAWYER-MONTHLY.COM 21 About Stefan Thomas Stefan is a founding director at Thomas Ingram Law Group, affectionately called T I Law Group. Founded in 2016 alongside Attorney Ashley Ingram, T I Law Group is a Black-owned transactional legal services firm situated in Columbus, OH. A Columbus native, Stefan converges his roles as an attorney, business strategist, author, and singer-songwriter to advise C-suite executives, business and political leaders, entrepreneurs, artists, athletes, and personalities. Focusing on corporate structuring and business transactions, commercial real estate, education, and arts & entertainment, clients have described his support as “invaluable,” noting it is provided with “generous care and magnificent professionalism.” When describing the partnership with Stefan and T I Law Group, executives of multimillion-dollar enterprises share, “They always present options for me to choose from so that decisions are made in a thoughtful and comprehensive manner,” and “allow me to focus on the business.” Notable in 2023/2024, Stefan has supported corporate clients with acquiring commercial property throughout Ohio, assisted former OSU and NFL players with business ventures, protection, and expansion, and provided counsel on music licensing deals involving recording and platinum-status musical artists. Contact Stefan T. E. Thomas Attorney | Thomas Ingram Law Group 98 Hamilton Park, Columbus, Ohio 43203 Tel: 614.340.9570 | Email: iamstefan@tilawgroup.com www.tilawgroup.com
22 LAWYER MONTHLY OCTOBER 2024 About Trey Porter Trey Porter is a Texas Criminal Defense Lawyer, known for his powerful advocacy in the courtroom and track-record of winning cases. Having successfully resolved thousands of criminal matters from DWI to Intoxication Manslaughter, Mr. Porter is a go-to authority in the legal community, recognized by SuperLawyers, The National Trial Lawyers Association, and Forbes. Mr. Porter leads a team of high-powered professionals with formidable experience in criminal law, a steadfast commitment to customer service, and a hard-earned reputation for success across Texas.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy Mjk3Mzkz