When Should You Start Looking For a New Job?

By Nicole “Nikki” Green

Imagine having  your dream job, where your management and team are amazing, you feel valued as an employee, and the perks and compensation are in line with what you think you are worth. Life is good … then, POP, your bubble bursts. You are suddenly informed that your firm is going to be restructured or your attorney decides to leave and join another firm.  Now what?

Read more

Articles of Interest: Cyberattack Suit, Horse Race Announcer’s Claim, Sponsorship Of Women’s Sports

Members of the Sports & Entertainment Law Section found the following recent third party articles to be of potential interest to the Section:

March Madness! Court Dismisses Lawsuit Over Massive Cyberattack After Basketball Game Loss – Higgins v. Kentucky Sports Radio

Horse Race Announcer Sues Over Bill Murray Film That Included His Trademarked Tagline

Sponsorship of women’s sport – the time is now

New center to train sports law lawyers, promote interdisciplinary research

Duke says it is ‘looking into’ lawyer Michael Avenatti’s claims Nike paid Zion Williamson’s mother

NCAA Considers Restrictions To Curtail Use Of Graduate Student Transfers

Trump Campaign Uses ‘Dark Knight’ Music In Campaign Ad, Warner Bros. Says It’s Looking At Legal Options

Dallas Mavericks Fail To Get Trademark For Its Star Player’s Nickname

U.S. and EU Publish Lists of Products That May Be Subject To Retaliatory Tariffs

By Stephen J. Orava, Bradford L. Ward, Rambod Behboodi, and Clinton R. Long

After more than a decade of World Trade Organization (“WTO”) disputes over aircraft subsidies, the United States and European Union have published preliminary lists of products that could face billions of dollars in retaliatory tariffs.  On April 12, 2019, and in response to WTO findings that the European Union has failed to bring its aircraft subsidies into compliance with WTO obligations, the U.S. Trade Representative (“USTR”) published a preliminary list of products – including aircraft and food, beverage, and other products – that could be subject to increased duties when imported from the European Union.  On April 17, 2019, and in response to similar WTO findings against the United States, the European Union published its own preliminary list of U.S. products – including aircraft, chemicals, and food and agricultural products – that could face increased duties when imported into the European Union.  The United States and the European Union have established upcoming deadlines for comments on their preliminary product lists.

WTO Litigation and Retaliation

For over 15 years, the United States and the European Union have been involved in multiple WTO disputes regarding alleged subsidies for commercial aircraft production.  In the two main disputes, the United States challenged alleged subsidies provided by the European Union and four EU member States (France, Germany, Spain, and the United Kingdom) in the dispute known as “DS316,” and the European Union challenged alleged subsidies provided by federal and state governments in the United States in the dispute known as “DS353.”  The WTO panels and the Appellate Body made findings and recommendations largely favorable to the complainant in each dispute, and they found in 2018 and in March 2019 that neither the United States nor the European Union have brought themselves into full conformity with their WTO obligations regarding subsidies.

In response to these rulings of non-compliance on the part of both the United States and the European Union, each party already invoked its right to retaliate against the other under WTO rules, and each party has sought WTO arbitration to determine the level of authorized retaliation.  The United States expects that the arbitrator will decide on the level of authorized retaliation by summer 2019, and a decision on the European Union’s authorized retaliation is not expected before the first quarter of 2020.  After each arbitration decision is released, the WTO’s Dispute Settlement Body will grant authorization for each party to impose countermeasures.

United States’ Preliminary List of Products

On April 12, 2019, USTR officially initiated an interagency investigation to determine whether and to what extent the United States should retaliate against the European Union for failing to bring its subsidies into conformity with its WTO obligations in DS316.  USTR proposed retaliating against the European Union and that the countermeasures include additional ad valorem import duties of up to 100 percent on a preliminary list of EU products.  Section 1 of USTR’s preliminary list includes certain helicopters, commercial aircraft, and aircraft-related products that – if originating in France, Germany, Spain, or the United Kingdom – would be subject to additional duties.  Section 2 of the list contains several food, beverage, and other products that would be subject to the duties if originating in any EU member State.

USTR seeks public comments on its proposal for retaliation, including the product list, and will hold a public hearing.  Requests to appear at the public hearing and a summary of testimony are due by May 6, and the public hearing will be held on May 15.  Written comments, including post-hearing rebuttal comments, are due by May 28.  Parties may comment on whether products should be retained, removed, or added to the list, the amount of any additional duties, and other topics.  After the release of the WTO arbitrator’s decision regarding the level of authorized retaliation, USTR plans to publish a final list of products taking into account the WTO arbitrator’s calculation and other information.

European Union’s Preliminary List of Products

On April 17, 2019, the European Union published its preliminary list of U.S. products that could be subject to additional ad valorem import duties of up to 100 percent in response to the U.S. failure to bring its subsidies into conformity with its WTO obligations in DS353.  The EU list covers a wide variety of U.S. products, including aircraft, chemicals, and agricultural and food products.  The European Union also initiated a public consultation on its preliminary list of products, and parties that may be affected by the additional duties may provide information by May 31.  The European Union’s notice did not mention a public hearing, and – similar to the United States – the European Union will not finalize its list until after the WTO arbitrator decides on the appropriate level of countermeasures.

Broader Context of U.S.-EU Relationship and Aircraft Subsidies

The U.S. and EU announcements come at a unique time in the U.S.-EU economic relationship.  On April 15, 2019, within days of the U.S. and EU announcements of potential tariffs, the European Commission announced that it received authority from EU member States to begin negotiations with the United States for two trade agreements.  The first agreement would focus exclusively on eliminating tariffs on industrial goods, and the second agreement would aim to make it easier for companies to conform their products to technical requirements from both parties.  However, negotiations might stall given that the United States is adamant that farm products should be part of the formal trade negotiations, and President Trump has suggested the possibility of additional tariffs on EU automobiles if agricultural products are not on the table.  Both the United States and the European Union are willing to discuss their retaliatory tariffs, and the possibility of increased duties likely will play a role in the broader trade negotiations between the parties.

Furthermore, considering the 15 years of WTO disputes between the two parties over aircraft subsidies, the objectives of the United States and European Union in announcing retaliatory tariffs may include establishing leverage to encourage discussions on an agreement to discipline subsidies to the aircraft sector.  USTR’s “ultimate goal is to reach an agreement with the EU to end all WTO-inconsistent subsidies to large civil aircraft.”

Let’s Make a Deal: Negotiation Science Workshop

By Amber Nimocks

Some people are born negotiators. And then there’s the rest of us.

Those of us who  have trouble bargaining on our own behalf — or on behalf of clients — usually fear negotiating because we lack experience in it — and we’re afraid of losing, says Jeff Langenderfer, who teaches marketing and law at Meredith College School of Business. His upcoming NCBA CLE course, Negotiation Science Workshop, aims to arm legal professionals with the tools and knowledge to help them bridge these gaps.

 

Negotiation Science Workshop
Live, North Carolina Bar Center, Cary
Tuesday, May 21, 2019
Find more information and register here.

He talked through a few of the topics he will focus on in a quick Q&A.

Read more

Racial Equity Institute Introductory Groundwater Training Set For May 9 At the Bar Center

,

By Niya Fonville

Imagine being asked “Hey girl, what attorney are you here for?” by a court official or having a client you have never met claim (in a phone consultation) that “all the N-word and Mexicans are taking over and I can’t get help.” Then imagine being expected to zealously advocate for clients and be confident in the judge’s decision in spite of these statements to you. Now imagine being a 25-year-old, newly minted attorney when these “conversations” take place.

Read more

Education Section Honors Murphy

By Chelsea Sutton

N.C. School Boards Association Assistant Legal Counsel Janine Murphy won the Ann L. Majestic Distinguished Service Award on April 12 from the North Carolina Bar Association’s Education Law Section.

Allison Schafer, NCSBA legal counsel and director of policy, presented Murphy with the award at the section’s annual meeting held at the NC Bar Center in Cary.

NCSBA staff and Murphy’s family congratulate her as she receives the Ann L. Majestic Distinguished Service Award. Pictured from left: Rachel Vachon, Chad Anderson, Debbie Shinbara, Cynthia Moore, Chelsea Sutton, Jim Murphy, Janine Murphy, John Murphy, Allison Schafer, and Nancy Black.

“She is a great resource to everyone across the state — superintendents, board members, school attorneys, and to us in the association,” said Schafer, who received the award in 2008.

The Ann L. Majestic Distinguished Service Award honors individuals for their exceptional leadership in education law and is the namesake of a previous recipient who was known in the school law community both locally and nationally.

“We all remember Ann Majestic for her outstanding dedication to public education in North Carolina, so it was a great honor for me to receive this award,” said Murphy.

At NCSBA, Murphy plays a pivotal role in managing policy services and developing legal training, among many other duties. Prior to joining the association in 2007, she had a 22-year stint with the Principals’ Executive Program at her alma mater, the University of North Carolina, which provided executive training to public school administrators.

“I consider myself very fortunate to have been able to contribute to public education in North Carolina by working with school board members and school administrators for the past 30 years,” Murphy said.

Academic Freedom: Revival in the Fourth Circuit

By William Joseph Austin Jr.

In a case that was already topical, the Fourth Circuit recently rendered an opinion that renewed the concept of Academic Freedom as legal doctrine based in the First Amendment.

The case of Wood v. Arnold, 915 F.3d 308 (4th Cir. 2019), involved two statements concerning Islamic beliefs presented in a high school world history class.  The plaintiff argued that the statements endorsed Islam over Christianity and compelled her to profess belief in Islam.  The Fourth Circuit affirmed summary judgment against the plaintiff, holding that the statements did not impermissibly endorse Islam or compel the plaintiff to profess belief in it.

Read more

Tech Tip: Text Status Updates to Clients Using Your Email

,

By Alicia Mitchell-Mercer

Lack of communication is one of the most common complaints from clients. It is frequently the paralegal’s job to make sure clients are kept abreast of the latest developments in their cases. As the business world embraces various methods of communication, so must the legal field.

This idea was especially highlighted when I read a post on a legal forum about a paralegal who had mailed a notice of hearing to a client, but the client did not show up for the hearing. The paralegal was concerned that her supervising attorney was holding her responsible for the client’s no-show. She wanted opinions on whether it was really her responsibility or the client’s responsibility since she had sent the notice. She was also looking for ways to prevent this from happening again.

Read more

Protecting Your Practice: Tech and Security Tips for Small and Solo Firms

By Francisco Morales and Chris Michalec

The ever-evolving world of technology and cybersecurity present a unique set of challenges to businesses of all shapes and sizes. Security breaches are so commonplace these days that it’s no longer about “if” you will be hacked, but “when.” In an address at a major information security conference in 2012, then-FBI director Robert Mueller told the crowd: “I am convinced that there are only two types of companies: those that have been hacked and those that will be. And they are even converging into one category: companies that have been hacked and will be hacked again.” Remarks by Robert S. Mueller III at RSA Cyber Security Conference, San Francisco, CA, March 1, 2012.

Law firms are often viewed as “one-stop shops” for hackers given the enormous quantity of sensitive and confidential information stored in firms’ systems. Even more concerning, in general, law firms have lagged behind in adapting to the rapid changes in technology and cybersecurity, and many law firms (big and small) have been subject to well-documented cyber attacks in the last few years. For example, in 2015, a Panamanian law firm and corporate service provider Mossack Fonseca was the subject of a high-profile cyber attack, in which 11.5 million documents were exposed by an anonymous source.

Read more

Review of the Joint Annual Meeting for the IP and SEL Sections

By Angelica N. McDonald

On Friday, April 5, 2019, the Intellectual Property Law and the Sports & Entertainment Law sections of the NCBA combined forces for a special joint Annual Meeting. With parallel and overlapping tracks of law, the meeting covered the latest developments in patent, trademark, copyright, trade secrets, and sports and entertainment law.  The attendees were able to gain insight from both in-house and outside counsel on issues related to IP Law, Sports and Entertainment Law, and the intersection of the different practice areas.

Read more