Negotiation

Typical Insider Trading Case

2008-12-19T11:03:00.000-08:00

Here is a typical insider trading case from today's New York Times...

December 19, 2008

Prosecutors Accuse Ex-Lehman Broker of Passing Tips on Mergers

By ANDREW ROSS SORKIN and MICHAEL J. de la MERCED

“Where has my goose gone? Come back little goose.”

So went an instant message from a day trader to his broker, seeking a tip as part of a $4.8 million insider-trading scheme disclosed by regulators on Thursday.

Prosecutors accused the broker, Matthew C. Devlin of Lehman Brothers, of illegally passing on inside information about at least 12 coming mergers — including InBev’s takeover of Anheuser-Busch and Dow Chemical’s acquisition of Rohm & Haas — that he surreptitiously obtained from his wife, a public relations executive whom he repeatedly referred to as his “golden goose.”

The United States attorney for the Southern District of New York charged four people, including Mr. Devlin, with conspiracy and securities fraud that took place over more than four years, during the latest takeover boom. Separately, the Securities and Exchange Commission filed civil charges against seven people and is seeking to reclaim trading profits from two others, including a Playboy playmate.

The case harks back to a case in the 1980s when Martin Siegel, of Kidder Peabody, and Dennis Levine, of Drexel Burnham Lambert, traded inside information ahead of big mergers using cryptic phrases like “Your bunny has a good nose.”

Mr. Devlin is accused of taking advantage of confidential information gleaned from his wife, Nina, who was employed by the Brunswick Group, a London-based public relations firm that has become a big player in the world of high finance.

Financial public relations firms like Brunswick are often as deeply embedded in deals as the bankers and lawyers who negotiate them. Employees like Mrs. Devlin are made privy to secret discussions as top executives shape the public strategies of the deals.

Prosecutors say the scheme began in March 2004, when Mr. Devlin began passing on tips about deals like General Electric’s purchase of InVision to Jamil Bouchareb, a friend who was a day trader and restaurateur. Mr. Bouchareb, in turn, passed on tips to his girlfriend, Maria T. Checa, a Playboy playmate; to his parents; and to his business partner, Daniel Corbin. Mr. Corbin passed on various tips to his father, Lee Corbin, a lawyer.

Mr. Devlin also tipped off a Lehman colleague, Frederick Bowers, on several occasions, who, in turn, tipped another client, Thomas Faulhaber. Mr. Devlin also tipped Eric Holzer, a friend and tax lawyer at Paul Hastings who regularly did the Devlins’ taxes. Mr. Holzer also tipped his father.

In return, prosecutors say, Mr. Devlin was given cash kickbacks, a Cartier watch, a Barneys New York gift card, a widescreen TV, a Ralph Lauren leather jacket and a lesson at a Porsche driving school.

Mr. Devlin has pleaded guilty to four counts of conspiracy and one count of securities fraud; Mrs. Devlin was not implicated, and prosecutors contend that she was unaware of her husband’s dealings. Indeed, Mr. Devlin told Mr. Bouchareb and Daniel Corbin several times that his wife would divorce him if she discovered his insider trading, according to the criminal complaint.

“She was completely unaware that confidential information about her job was being used as the basis for securities trading,” James J. Benjamin Jr., a lawyer for Mrs. Devlin, said in a statement. “She is devastated by this terrible situation.”

In a statement from Brunswick, the firm said, “Our employee was the victim of a criminal act by her spouse.”

Lilly Ann Sanchez, a lawyer for Jamil Bouchareb, said her client would plead not guilty. “The facts aren’t always as presented by the government,” she said. “We are surprised by the allegations and believe that once all the facts are revealed, Mr. Bouchareb will be exonerated.”

The Devlin case appears similar to some others filed in recent years. In 2006, a stockbroker pleaded guilty to insider trading after profiting from inside information gained from his girlfriend, a lawyer at Weil, Gotshal & Manges. And last year, a man who was a vice president at Oracle pleaded guilty to trading on information about potential acquisitions that he obtained from his wife, an executive assistant to Lawrence J. Ellison, the technology giant’s chief executive.

The scheme nearly fell apart in April 2006, when Brunswick received a notice from Finra, the securities industry’s own watchdog. The notice showed Mr. Holzer on a “watch list” for trading. It appears Mrs. Devlin communicated that information to her husband. Nonetheless, the group continued to trade in various other deals like Electronic Arts’s bid for Take-Two Interactive.

Prosecutors contacted Lehman Brothers earlier this year, before the firm filed for bankruptcy, notifying them that they were investigating Mr. Devlin and Mr. Bowers. Lehman was told not to take any action against the two.

In a statement, Barclays Wealth, which absorbed the Lehman unit that Mr. Devlin and Mr. Bowers worked for, said: “Barclays Wealth — and Lehman Brothers prior to its acquisition — cooperated fully with law enforcement authorities to assist them in their investigation into this alleged insider trading ring.”

By the fall, Mr. Devlin began cooperating with federal investigators, including by secretly taping conversations with Mr. Bouchareb, Daniel Corbin and Mr. Holzer. He persuaded Mr. Bouchareb to acknowledge on tape that they might need a back story for their earlier trading.

“Right, right, right,” Mr. Bouchareb said. “Don’t worry, we’re on it.”

2008-08-21T05:47:00.000-07:00

Fossil Faculty

Don't you just love open minded faculty?

Here's an example from today's New York Times:

Robert S. Summers, who has taught at Cornell Law School for about 40 years, announced this week — in a detailed, footnoted memorandum — that he would ban laptop computers from his class on contract law.

“I would ban that too if I knew the students were using it in class,” Professor Summers said of the iPhone, after the device and its capabilities were explained to him. “What we want to encourage in these students is active intellectual experience, in which they develop the wide range of complex reasoning abilities required of the good lawyers.”

I guess the good professor just can't seem to figure out how to use technology to offer his students an ""active intellectual experience, in which they develop the wide range of complex reasoning abilities required of the good lawyers.” Move over, fossil faculty... some of us can actually do that without the need to ban anything. In fact, in my experience, it works in just the opposite way. Technology actually enhances the learning process, and does not detract from it. But this professor doesn't appear to realize that. Makes you also wonder if this guy actually changed his lecture notes over those 40 years.

My bet is that he knows a lot about contracts... but very little about technology. Notice that the iPhone and its capabilities had to be explained to him.

While he is in the mood to ban things, maybe he would consider banning himself as a legal resource that is definitely obsolete and out of touch with today's law practice realities.

After all, how does he expect contract lawyers to communicate in the 21st Century? Using pens? Maybe even quills?

Or maybe it's just that this professor teaches the HISTORY of contract law and just want to be left alone to be part of it!

2008-08-04T15:42:00.000-07:00

Privacy Lost

Here is what may be happening when corporations know too much about YOU!

2008-07-30T08:47:00.000-07:00

Judge Judy Deals with Earthquake

Classic moment in American television history!

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2008/07/29/vo.quake.judge.judy.cnn

(The look on the defendant's face is priceless!)

2008-07-29T06:02:00.000-07:00

ALWAYS Have an Attorney Present

Should you discuss matters with a policeman without an attorney present?

NO!

Need further convincing?

In a brilliant pair of videos, Prof. James Duane of the Regent University School of Law and Officer George Bruch of the Virginia Beach Police Department present a forceful case for never, ever, ever speaking to the police without your lawyer present.

Any questions?

2008-05-29T14:49:00.000-07:00

Dispute With Neighbor

Are you having a dispute with your next door neighbor?

You definitely might want to see this...

Feuding neighbors halve tree 1:42

An Omaha man said he was forced to split a tree down the middle to satisfy a neighbor, KETV reports.

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2008/05/29/pkg.ne.tree.cut.in.half.ketv

2008-05-11T05:35:00.000-07:00

U.S. Legal Work Booms in India
New Outsourcing Industry Is Growing 60 Percent Annually

Interesting article in the Washington Post on Sunday, May 11, 2008, on page A20...

Key points:

In the past three years, the US legal outsourcing industry here has grown about 60 percent annually. According to a report by research firm ValueNotes, the industry will employ about 24,000 people and earn revenue of $640 million by 2010.

The explosion of opportunity here was triggered by what are known as "e-discovery laws," a set of U.S. regulations established in 2006 to govern the storage and management of electronic data (any kind of electronic document or file) for federal court actions. Overnight, the volume of information to be stored, archived, filtered and reviewed for litigation swelled. But there were not enough affordable lawyers or paralegals to do the work in the United States.

Because of the sensitive nature of legal work, Indian outsourcing companies have tried to allay the concerns about confidentiality. They have installed closed-circuit televisions, network safeguards and hack-proof servers. Many outsourcing companies in India already have those security measures in place because they have been handling the credit card and banking operations of global companies for more than a decade. Industry members say that outsourcing of legal work to India is a natural next step.

An interesting sign of the times!

However... consider this... at the time of this writing, I could not make even ONE of the email addresses listed for one Indian firm, Quatrro Legal Services (Quatrro BPO Solutions Pvt Ltd) work... even though one of their executives lives up the street from me. This, of course, would not provide me with a very high degree of comfort with the quality of their services.

2008-05-10T11:55:00.000-07:00

Roadblocks and Stops Inside the United States

This stop was supposedly recorded 50 miles INSIDE the United States border.

Notice the driver repeatedly asks two questions:

"Am I being detained?"

"Am I free to go?"

What are your thoughts and comments?

2008-03-17T09:04:00.000-07:00

A Sign of the Times...

"I'm so, so happy!"

2008-02-29T11:35:00.000-08:00

Court orders couple to chop down the trees...

Redwoods planted before neighbor's solar panels installed...

SUNNYVALE, California In an environmental dispute seemingly scripted for eco-friendly California, a man asked prosecutors to file charges against his neighbors because their towering redwoods blocked sunlight to his backyard solar panels.

But the couple next door insisted they should not have to chop down the trees to accommodate Mark Vargas' energy demands because they planted the redwoods before he installed the solar panels in 2001.

Experts say such clashes could become more common as California promotes renewable energy and solar systems become more popular.

"Five or ten years ago, you wouldn't have seen this case because there weren't that many systems around," said Frank Schiavo, a retired environmental-studies professor at San Jose State University. "I can almost guarantee there are going to be more conflicts."

After more than six years of legal wrangling, a judge recently ordered Richard Treanor and his wife, Carolyn Bissett, to cut down two of their eight redwoods, citing an obscure state law that protects a homeowner's right to sunlight.

The couple does not plan to appeal the ruling because they can no longer afford the legal expenses, but they plan to lobby state lawmakers to change or scrap the law.

The Solar Shade Control Act means that homeowners can "suddenly become a criminal the day a tree grows big enough to shade a solar panel," Treanor said.

The case marks the first time a homeowner has been convicted of violating the law, which was enacted three decades ago, when few homeowners had solar systems.

The law requires homeowners to keep their trees or shrubs from shading more than 10 percent of a neighbor's solar panels between 10 a.m. and 2 p.m., when the sun is strongest. Existing trees that cast shadows when the panels are installed are exempt, but new growth is subject to the law.

Residents can be fined up to $1,000 a day for violations, though the judge did not impose any fines against the Treanors.

Vargas says the law protects his $70,000 investment in solar power, and he believes it should be strengthened.

"I think it's unfair that a neighbor can take away this source of energy from another neighbor," he said.

Treanor, a retired engineer, said he and his wife are not against solar power, "but we think there's a rational way to implement it."

Solar power is growing rapidly in California, which is by far the nation's biggest generator of solar energy. In 2007, more than 30,000 California homes and businesses had rooftop solar panels, with the capacity to generate 400 megawatts of electricity.

That's as much as eight power plants, according to the nonprofit Environment California.

The boom is being fueled by the California Solar Initiative, which offers homeowners and businesses more than $3 billion in rebates over the next decade to install solar-electric systems.

Both sides say they want to do what's best for the environment.

Treanor and Bissett, who drive a hybrid Toyota Prius, argue that trees absorb carbon dioxide, cool the surrounding air and provide a habitat for wildlife.

Vargas, who recently bought a plug-in electric car, counters it would take two or three acres of trees to reduce carbon dioxide emissions as much as the solar panels that cover his roof and backyard trellis.

Bernadette Del Chiaro, clean energy advocate for Environment California, says the solar shade law might need to be revised to prevent similar disputes.

"We want to make sure we are protecting individuals who have invested a lot of money in solar power, which is an important resource for the state," she said. But lawmakers might want to "take a look at the policy and make sure it's written in a way that's fair to everybody."

Sunnyvale homeowners told to cut redwoods that block solar panels

LAW: TREES BLOCKING NEIGHBOR'S SOLAR PANELS MUST BE CUT

By Paul Rogers
Mercury News

Article Launched: 01/24/2008 03:33:12 AM PST

Richard Treanor and Carolynn Bissett

US woman sues IT retailer for 54 million over lost laptop

54 million must be a popular number in law firms these days!

2008-01-30T07:25:00.000-08:00

Baby in Laundry...

We must always remember that there are real people involved in every legal case that we read. Sometimes this can be forgotten.

Take for example the recent case of a stillborn baby accidentally sent to a laundry in Texas.

This exactly parallels a Florida case...

Crenshaw v. Sarasota County Public Hosp. Bd.

466 So.2d 427, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 880


District Court of Appeal of Florida,Second District.

Sheryl CRENSHAW, Appellant,

v.
                             
SARASOTA COUNTY PUBLIC HOSPITAL BOARD
a/k/a Sarasota Memorial  Hospital
and Willie Williams, Appellees.
 
No. 81-2020.
                                   
April 3, 1985.

Mother of stillborn child whose body was mutilated 
after being inadvertently placed with hospital's 
laundry brought action for mental and emotional
distress.

The Circuit Court, Sarasota County, Frank T. Schaub,
J., dismissed  complaint, and mother appealed. 
The District Court of Appeal, Campbell, J., held
that:
 
(1)mother had no cause of action for mental distress, 
and (2) she had no  breach of contract action for 
mental distress caused by alleged breach.

Affirmed.                                    

Mother who did not see mutilated body of stillborn
child and was not  involved in the events leading 
to body's mutilation, except the birth itself, and
who did not suffer discernible physical injury as a
result of her psychological  trauma, had no cause 
of action against hospital for mental and emotional
distress  suffered as a result of alleged negligence.

*428 Harold R. Busch;  and James R. Dirmann of 
Dirmann & Scott,  Sarasota, for appellant.

Lewis F. Collins, Jr. of Dickinson, O'Riorden, 
Gibbons, Quale, Shields  & Carlton, P.A., Sarasota,
for appellees.

CAMPBELL, Judge.

   Appellant, Sheryl Crenshaw, seeks review of the
final order  dismissing her amended complaint against
appellees, Sarasota County Hospital Board, also 
known as Sarasota Memorial Hospital, and Willie
Williams.

   In September 1977, appellant delivered, at thirty
-two weeks, a  stillborn child. The child's body was 
wrapped in a green linen sheet and taken to the
hospital morgue. Shortly after the body arrived
at the morgue, it was placed  in a  laundry bin 
and taken to a commercial laundry. Several days
later, the  child's body was discovered in a 
commercial washing machine mutilated from the 
action of  the machine. Appellant apparently
never saw the child.

   Appellant filed suit to recover damages for 
the purely mental and  emotional distress she 
suffered as a result of the negligence of appellees.
 
 Appellees argued that there is no cause of action
for emotional distress absent  physical contact
or impact to appellant.

   At the suggestion of the parties, this case was 
stayed pending the  outcome of Champion v. Gray, 
No. 62,830, (Fla. Mar. 7, 1985) [10 FLW 164]. In
 Champion,  the court addressed the certified question:
 "Should Florida abrogate the  'Impact Rule' and 
allow recovery for the physical consequences 
resulting from  mental or emotional stress caused
by the defendant's negligence in the absence of
physical impact upon the plaintiff?" 

   To a limited extent, the court answered the
question in the  affirmative. However, the outcome
of Champion provides no relief to appellant.

   In Champion, the complaint alleged that a 
drunk driver ran off the  road striking and 
killing Karen Champion.   Her mother, Joyce Champion
heard  the accident and immediately went to the scene.
Upon seeing her  daughter's body, Joyce Champion
collapsed and died.

The Florida Supreme Court found these allegations
stated a cause of  action.

The court stated:

   [T]he price of death or significant discernible
 physical injury,  when caused by psychological 
trauma resulting from a negligent injury imposed
upon a  close family member within the sensory 
perception of the physically injured person, is
too great a harm to require direct physical 
contact before a cause of  action exists. 
We emphasize the requirement that a causally 
connected clearly  discernible physical impairment
must accompany or occur within a short time of the
psychic injury.

   Further, the court noted that the psychically
injured party should  be "directly *429 involved
in the event causing the original injury. If such
a  person sees it, hears it, or arrives on the scene
while the injured party is still  there that person
is likely involved."  Champion, 10 FLW 160, 166. 

   In Brown v. Cadillac Motor Car Division, 
468 So.2d 903 (Fla. 1985), the court stated that
Champion does not abolish the requirement that a
demonstrable physical injury must flow from the
accident before a cause of action exists.

  "We hold there is no cause of action for 
psychological trauma alone when resulting from
simple negligence."

   [1] Here, appellant did not allege that she
saw the mutilated body  or that she was involved
in the event, except for the birth of the stillborn
child,  in any way. Nor did she allege that 
she suffered a discernible physical injury as a
result of her psychological trauma. Thus, 
appellant did not allege a  cause of action
under the requirements of Champion.

   [2] Appellant also sought recovery on the basis
that appellees' negligent breach of their contract
caused appellantmental and emotional distress.

   We do not believe there may be recovery for
mental distress caused by a  breach of contract
in the absence of an independent willful tort.

Gellert v.  Eastern Airlines, Inc., 370 So.2d 802
(Fla. 3d DCA 1979), cert. denied, 381  So.2d 766
(Fla.1980);  cf. Kirksey v. Jernigan, 45 So.2d 188
(Fla.1950).

   For the reasons stated above, we affirm the 
dismissal of appellant's amended complaint.


RYDER, C.J., and SCHOONOVER, J., concur.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

West Headnotes


[1] Damages 115 k 57.28


115 Damages

     115III Grounds and Subjects of Compensatory Damages

          115III(A) Direct or Remote, Contingent, or Prospective
 Consequences or
Losses

               115III(A)2 Mental Suffering and Emotional Distress

                    115k57.26 Injury or Threat to Another;   Bystanders

                         115k57.28 k. In Utero and Childbirth. Most
 Cited  Cases

     (Formerly 115k56.20, 115k51)

[2] Damages 115 k 57.42


115 Damages

     115III Grounds and Subjects of Compensatory Damages

          115III(A) Direct or Remote, Contingent, or Prospective
 Consequences or
Losses

               115III(A)2 Mental Suffering and Emotional Distress

                    115k57.41 Breach of Contract or  Warranty

                         115k57.42 k. In General. Most Cited  Cases

     (Formerly 115k56)

There is no recovery for mental distress caused by breach of contract
 in the
absence of an independent willful tort.

2008-01-22T10:37:00.000-08:00

Police Searches...

Police Officers' Can Search Your iPhone Following Arrest For A Traffic Violation

from Techdirt by Mike Masnick

Adam Gershowitz writes "I am a criminal law professor from Houston, Texas and I have recently finished an article about the ability of police officers to search the contents of a person's iPhone at a traffic stop. In brief, under what is referred to as the "search incident to arrest doctrine," police can search through any container found on the body of a person who has been arrested. It does not matter that the arrest was for running a stop sign, or speeding, or some other seemingly minor traffic infraction. Regardless of the reason for the arrest, police can search through every container on the person's body, even if the police have no suspicion that there is anything illegal in it. A few courts have concluded that this doctrine permits police to search text messages found on cell phones. My article explores the circumstances under which police can now search not only text messages, but also the email, pictures, movies, calendar entries, and internet browsing history found on iPhones and similar devices -- even if the police have no suspicion that there is anything illegal on the iPhone. In short, the article explores ways in which the police can search through the thousands of pages of data on individuals' wireless technology even if there is no probable cause or other suspicion of illegal activity."

The Fifth Circuit's recent case in 2007, United States v. Finley, is representative. Police arrested Finley after a staged drug sale. The police then searched Finley incident to arrest and found a cellphone in his pocket. One of the investigating officers searched through the phone's records and found text messages that appeared to relate to drug trafficking...the court explained that "police officers are not constrained to search only for weapons...they may also, without any additional justification, look for evidence of the arrestee's crime on his person in order to preserve it for use at trial.

2008-01-17T12:15:00.000-08:00

North Dakota Judges

They probably don't get a lot of computer law cases up there in North Dakota... which is why lots of people are scratching their heads trying to figure out the logic of a recent case.

You be the judge!

Sierra Corporate Design, Inc., v. David Ritz

Comments about the case here and here!

2008-01-10T07:56:00.000-08:00

Medical Malpractice

It's a common occurrence... submit to some medical procedure... and then suffer some adverse consequence as a result.

What SHOULD you do?

What CAN you do?

CNN today carried an interesting article about a patient who suffered an adverse consequence from a medical procedure.

Many assume a lawsuit would be the obvious path.

But medical malpractice lawyers consulted by CNN said that the costs to bring a suit (to say nothing about appeals, etc.) could far exceed any potential court judgment. In other words, the system is too costly, slow and cumbersome for all except for the most grievous and obvious medical malpractice errors (the big dollar "moon shot" type case with a corresponding big pay day for the lawyer).

Christine (ironically a physician herself) visited a malpractice attorney recommended by a friend. But he wouldn't take the case. A different lawyer contact by CNN said he wouldn't have either, partly because he wouldn't make much money off it.

"What are her losses -- maybe $50,000? I can't afford to take a case that recovers $50,000," says Wayne Grant, an Atlanta malpractice attorney. "My expenses would likely be more than the recovery. She's out of luck."

Plus, he said, it would be a very difficult case to win, because it would be tough to show the injury was the result of the doctor's negligence.

"Just because you have a bad outcome doesn't mean you can sue," he says.

A physician consulted by CNN said that maybe the doctor and hospital would settle with the patient voluntarily. But what would cause them do that?

Isn't there something a bit wrong with a legal system like this?

P.S. In a separate development, the St. Petersburg Times carried an article today about a dispute between an attorney and one of the two USF students accused of making terrorist bombs in August.

According to the Times, the attorney, John Fitzgibbons, said that the Eqyptian Embassy agreed to pay him a $500,000 trial fee, plus $200,000 for expenses. He received a $50,000 advance on expenses.

With prices like this, how much justice can YOU afford?

2007-11-01T20:05:00.000-07:00

Law Blogs

Here are some of the best!

Directory of Law Blogs (click on the arrows)

Another Directory

Yet Another Directory

Florida Law

Florida Asset Protection

Sports Law

Inter Alia

Judges

Legal Reader

Legal Sanity

Law Pundit

May it Please the Court

Future Lawyer

Blogger's Legal Guide

Anonymous Lawyer

and... how about grammar?

The Office

2007-10-29T08:51:00.000-07:00

Justice Delayed is Justice Denied...

How long do you think it takes a case to wind through the legal system to get to the U.S. Supreme Court?

How about the Exxon Valdez oil spill, which occurred on March 24, 1989 and just reached the U.S. Supreme Court today (October 29, 2007)?

That's 18+ years...

And remember... it isn't over yet!

2007-08-28T06:05:00.000-07:00

Interested in reading a great book about the psychological side of negotiations?

Have a look at:

Covert Persuasion: Psychological Tactics and Tricks to Win the Game (Hardcover)
by Kevin Hogan and James Speakman.

Hardcover: 223 pages
Publisher: Wiley (September 18, 2006)
Language: English
ISBN-10: 0470051418

It offers a wealth of information about how to frame your words in any negotiation setting.

Must not be missed!

2007-05-31T19:18:00.000-07:00

Salary Negotiation Strategy

We all negotiate... but salary negotiations are one of the toughest skills employees have to master.

Military.Com just published an interesting article about salary negotiations.

Perhaps you should have a look?

2007-05-10T08:41:00.000-07:00

Litigation as a Negotiation Tactic

Almost all the time... especially for "little people"... filing a lawsuit is a sure way to END negotiation. At that point, the lawyers take over, and you are normally in for an expensive, time consuming... and very public spectacle. Maybe sometime down the road, the lawyers themselves will settle the matter using negotiation, but the litigation expenses (lawyer's time, depositions, interrogatories, requests for production, requests for examination, court motions, etc.)... the time wasted... and the public records... all will remain. Given human nature, the chances of these parties ever voluntarily doing business again in the future is pretty much nil.

So, as a general rule, if you NEVER want to do business again with someone, file a lawsuit!

But there can be exceptions...

Sometimes major corporations, with extremely deep financial pockets, can USE lawsuits as part of their negotiation tactics and strategy. The idea (if you have plenty of money) is to use litigation to pressure your opponent into settling or into getting a better deal than you otherwise would get without the litigation. In this case, you are using litigation as an adjunct to your normal negotiation tactics. In essence, you are running two tracks in parallel... an ongoing negotiation track.... and, of course, a separate litigation track.

See for example... Google Decides To Fight Back Rough Against Viacom.

All this is fine, but when two financial giants do battle in a public court of law, should taxpayers subsidize the filing fees and other court expenses in this contest of giant corporate egos? (Court filing fees, in the US, are generally the same for everyone, rich and poor alike.) Or should the rules be amended so that when a giant corporation files a lawsuit, it has to pay proportionately higher court filing fees based upon its market capitalization?

What do YOU think about this?

2007-05-03T16:16:00.000-07:00

The Granddaddy of All Negotiation Books

If you haven't read it yet, you simple MUST read "Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In " by Roger Fisher and William Ury.

Not that this is a perfect book in any way. It simply won't help you in a situation like negotiating one time for a used car... a situation where you'll never see the other person again and have absolutely no interest in maintaining a relationship with them.

But in any situation where you DO have an interest in maintaining an ongoing relationship, like between a manufacturer and a supplier, the ideas in this book can be extremely helpful!

The book introduces the concept of BATNA... Best Alternative To a Negotiated Agreement. The idea is that you should go into any negotiation with your best alternative in mind, should this negotiation fail. If the present negotiation starts heading in the wrong direction, you certainly have an idea of what your best alternative is, and thus you should be prepared to choose it, if the current negotiation does not provide the prospect of something even better.

A classic... well worth your time and attention!

2007-04-26T09:39:00.000-07:00

Introducing... Negotiation!

I have a large personal library on the subjects of negotiation... mediation... and arbitration.

As a lawyer myself, I know that involving courts in disputes is extremely costly... time consuming... and (most distressing if you are unaware that virtually all court files are open to public inspection, by anyone, at any time) publicly on file forever.

That's why I have been involved with alternative dispute resolution... principally acting as an arbitrator settling disputes quietly and privately.

I have come across some great books and want to share them with you... so I created this blog!

I will be highlighting some of the best reading in this field... so... if you negotiate at anytime, for anything (and who among us doesn't?), you might want to see what I have to say about great books that can substantially improve your own negotiation skills and results!

More soon...