Episódios
-
John is joined by Kevin Teruya, Partner in Quinn Emanuel’s Los Angeles office and Co-Chair of the firm’s Antitrust & Competition Practice and Adam Wolfson, Partner in Quinn Emanuel’s San Francisco and Los Angeles offices who specializes in antitrust law. They discuss the recent antitrust case filed by the U.S. Department of Justice against Ticketmaster and Live Nation. Kevin and Adam explain how Live Nation provides nationwide concert promotion services while its subsidiary Ticketmaster sells concert tickets on both the primary and on the secondary markets and secures multi-year exclusive arrangements with a large percentage of the concert venues in the U.S. They also explain the companies’ history with the DOJ, including the consent decree entered into in 2010, the conditions and independent monitor imposed in that decree, and the decree’s extension for five more years in 2020. They then discuss the DOJ’s newly filed case alleging that the companies failed to comply with the decree and also created anti-competitive effects in the market resulting in higher fees for consumers. The DOJ alleges that the companies monopolized: (1) the market for primary ticketing services, (2) the market for large amphitheaters, and (3) the concert promotion business. The DOJ also alleges that the companies engaged in “exclusive dealing” arrangements through long term exclusive contracts with venues, and illegally tied concert promotion services to the use of venues with exclusive contracts with the companies. Kevin and Adam also explain the defenses Ticketmaster/Live Nation are likely to assert including that the concert promotion business is local, so market power in one location does not flow to others, that venues ask for exclusive arrangements, and that there is sufficient competition whenever these exclusive deals come up for renewal. They also discuss the likely testimony from industry competitors, venue operators and any performing artists who are willing to risk their income by challenging Ticketmaster/Live Nation. Finally, they discuss the pending consumer class action case against Ticketmaster/Live Nation that the firm filed before the new DOJ case and the likelihood that the DOJ case will trigger additional piggyback private antitrust cases against the companies.
Podcast Link: Law-disrupted.fm
Host: John B. Quinn
Producer: Alexis Hyde
Music and Editing by: Alexander Rossi -
In this episode of Law, disrupted, John is joined by Lucas Bento, Of Counsel in Quinn Emanuel’s New York office. Bento is the author of The Globalization of Discovery: The Law and Practice under 28 U.S.C § 1782 (Section 1782), the first and only book to discuss the law pertaining to that Section. John and Lucas discuss how, under Section 1782, parties to proceedings outside of the US can invoke discovery procedures inside the US in aid of those foreign proceedings. John notes how many foreign lawyers he talks to complain about the relatively burdensome US discovery system. Yet they also envy it, especially if you’re a plaintiff. US law has a procedure to achieve US-style discovery of evidence or witnesses located in the US – Section 1782 of Title 28 of the United States Code.
The conversation begins by outlining what exactly Section 1782 is. Lucas notes it's a federal statute that allows a party to a foreign proceeding to gain access to US discovery procedures and evidence (including documents and depositions) for use in the foreign proceeding. Historically, one would need to use letters rogatory or go through the Hague Convention on the Taking of Evidence. But Section 1782 provides many advantages over those tools. For example, under the Hague Convention, US-style depositions are not available; however, under Section 1782, if there is a witness subject to the jurisdiction of the US courts, they could be served with a subpoena and get a complete US-style deposition. Lucas highlights how powerful a tool §1782 can be, working as a global evidentiary X-ray machine.
John asks how one invokes §1782, with Lucas highlighting the application process and the necessary requirements that must be met in order for the application to be processed successfully. If the court authorizes the application, the discovery target can be subpoenaed immediately, making it a very contentious issue. They dive deep into the logistics and Intel discretionary factors of Section 1782 and how these can impact the success of an application.
John notes how US discovery is not loved around the world – with foreign jurisdictions hostile to the US’s broad processes. In discussing the types of foreign proceedings that qualify under Section 1782, Lucas states that you can obtain US-style discovery as long as the foreign proceeding is pending or within reasonable contemplation – something you can’t typically do in the US. However, there are some limitations and boundaries in place, such as the fact that people can’t use §1782 to fish around and see if someone has a claim in the first place, or use it for private arbitrations.
The conversation moves on to discuss what the future of the law surrounding Section 1782 will look like in the future. Lucas believes its trajectory is on the assent, with more applications being made, which only gives the courts more issues to unpack and define. He argues that Section 1782 is now becoming a routine consideration across the entire legal industry, noting that the statute can be a bastion of truth in a world struggling with fake news and widespread disinformation. The use of legal tools, such as Section 1782, to discover facts can be a means to achieve fairer and more just decisions around the world.
Finally, John and Lucas discuss how foreign litigants must act fast and hire qualified US counsel to assist in the use of Section 1782. Lucas notes how relevance is important, although it is still a very broad term in general, and explains why the timing of the application is crucial.
Podcast Link: Law-disrupted.fm
Host: John B. Quinn
Producer: Alexis Hyde
Music and Editing by: Alexander Rossi -
Estão a faltar episódios?
-
John is joined by Kimberly Carson, Partner in Quinn Emanuel’s New York Office. They discuss the FTC’s recent rule banning contractual noncompete provisions in employment agreements nationwide. Kimberly explains that the new rule bans employers from enforcing existing noncompete provisions, entering new noncompete provisions, and representing that workers are subject to noncompete provisions. She also explains the exceptions to the new rule for existing noncompete provisions with senior executives who have final authority to make significant policy decisions, non-competes connected to the bona fide sale of a business, claims that have already accrued, and good faith mistakes about the applicability of the new rule. John and Kimberly also discuss the lawsuits that have been filed challenging the FTC’s new rule contending that the ban exceeds the FTC’s statutory authority, is impermissibly retroactive, and is supported by limited evidence and a flawed cost/benefit analysis. The court hearing these challenges has indicated it intends to rule on a preliminary injunction motion on July 3, 2024, before the rule would go into effect on September 3, 2024. Finally, they discuss some other avenues, other than non-competes, that companies have to protect their goodwill, trade secrets and investments including trade secret litigation, fixed duration contracts, provisions requiring employees to repay bonuses if they leave a company within a certain time, and “garden leave” provisions under which employees stay on the company payroll and are still subject to contractual and fiduciary duties for a time period after they are fired or resign.
Podcast Link: Law-disrupted.fm
Host: John B. Quinn
Producer: Alexis Hyde
Music and Editing by: Alexander Rossi -
John is joined by Michael K. Young, Professor of Law and Former President of Texas A&M University, the University of Washington and the University of Utah. They discuss Michael’s career in higher education, starting with his years at Columbia Law School, including the two and a half years that he was a visiting Professor at the University of Tokyo, his establishment of the East Asian Legal Studies Center at Columbia and continuing through his service at the State Department where he negotiated treaties involving trade, international environmental law, human rights, and the terms under which Germany was unified. They then discuss Michael’s tenure as Dean of George Washington Law School and the University of Utah and, later, President of the University of Utah, the University of Washington, and Texas A&M University. Michael describes his current role at a research center that is preparing the entire educational system, from primary school through university, for the futuristic megacity project in Saudi Arabia called NEOM. Michael explains how his training as a lawyer helped him perform in these leadership positions by always maintaining his focus on the ends he is trying to achieve, the purpose of the institution and seeing both sides of each issue. Michael also explains several leadership lessons he has learned including that leaders need to genuinely listen and convey that they have listened, keep everyone focused on the institution’s mission, spread credit generously and take blame when thing go wrong. Finally, John and Michael discuss the current controversies over free speech at American campuses. Michael shares his approach to handling volatile situations with controversial speakers.
Podcast Link: Law-disrupted.fm
Host: John B. Quinn
Producer: Alexis Hyde
Music and Editing by: Alexander Rossi -
John is joined by Christine Lehman, Managing Partner of the Washington, D.C. office of Reichman Jorgensen Lehman & Feldberg LLP and an accomplished trial attorney focusing on patent litigation. They discuss the $525 million verdict Christine and her team recently won against Amazon Web Services (AWS) for infringing tech company Kove’s patent rights in data-storage technology. Christine describes how she presented to the jury the journey of the inventor, John Overton, from his troubled youth in Kentucky, to majoring in religion in college, to developing a method to efficiently organize and index all the photographs he took on a yearlong bicycle trip across the country. He and co-inventor Stephen Bailey ultimately implemented this method in a way that allowed users to search millions of data items quickly and formed the basis for Kove’s patented technology. Christine also describes the extensive pretrial proceedings that occurred over the six years that the lawsuit against AWS was pending. John and Christine then discuss the ten-day trial itself, including the defendant’s last-minute decision to abandon its invalidity defense, the judge’s procedure for allowing jurors to submit questions to each witness, and how those questions informed her team about how well the jury understood the technical issues in the case. Finally, they discuss the different approaches taken by the two sides in presenting their experts and how Christine presented her client’s damages case leading to the $525 million verdict.
Podcast Link: Law-disrupted.fm
Host: John B. Quinn
Producer: Alexis Hyde
Music and Editing by: Alexander Rossi -
John is joined by C. Dabney O'Riordan, partner in Quinn Emanuel’s Los Angeles and DC offices and longest-serving leader of the SEC's Asset Management Unit, who left the agency last year. They discuss the actions an asset manager can take if it identifies a potential issue to minimize its risk of an SEC investigation or enforcement action. Among the actions they discuss for consideration include stopping the conduct and implementing remedial measures such as updating internal policies and procedures, providing additional training to staff, considering hiring a compliance consultant, and making remedial payments if appropriate.
Podcast Link: Law-disrupted.fm
Host: John B. Quinn
Producer: Alexis Hyde
Music and Editing by: Alexander Rossi -
John is joined by Jesse Bernstein, Partner in Quinn Emanuel’s New York Office and Co-Chair of the Securities Litigation Practice. Jesse explains that the term “securities” applies not only to stocks and bonds, but arguably to any situation where a group of investors place their resources into a common entity where they expect to make profits from the efforts of others. He describes the sources of securities law, including state blue sky laws, the Securities Act of 1933 (which focuses on initial issuances), the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (which focuses on intentional misrepresentations in securities transactions and the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (which sought to curb perceived abuses in securities litigation by raising the pleading standards required to establish scienter and creating a safe harbor for forward looking statements). They discuss the Supreme Court’s recent ruling in Moab Partners v. Macquarie Infrastructure that pure omissions of material fact are not actionable under Rule 10(b)(5) because the rule only covers affirmative misstatements. Jesse then explains how a Quinn Emanuel team obtained a jury verdict last year in Elon Musk’s favor in a rare securities class action trial on a $12 billion claim based on Mr. Musk’s tweet about taking Tesla private. He describes the arguments made concerning materiality and loss causation that ultimately led to the victory. Finally, they discuss upcoming issues in securities law including how the Macquarie decision will impact cases.
Podcast Link: Law-disrupted.fm
Host: John B. Quinn
Producer: Alexis Hyde
Music and Editing by: Alexander Rossi -
John is joined by Dr. Hamed Merah, Chief Executive Officer of the Saudi Center for Commercial Arbitration (SCCA) and Nasser Alrubayyi, Managing Partner (KSA), Co-Chair Middle East & North Africa Practice . They discuss commercial arbitration in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the recent impact of the Saudi Center for Commercial Arbitration. Dr. Hamed explains SCCA’s mission to establish a world class center with full case management services where foreign parties will feel comfortable submitting their disputes to a diverse roster of accomplished, impartial independent arbitrators. Although almost half of the SCCA’s caseload is construction related, it also adjudicates cases involving banking, capital markets, intellectual property, media, and the pharmaceutical industry. They discuss how legislation in the last five years has removed restrictions on Saudi governmental entities submitting disputes to arbitration to the point that arbitration with the SCCA is now the default option in contracts between governmental entities and foreign parties. Nasser explains that parties are increasingly moving from ad hoc stand-alone arbitration procedures to institutional arbitration through the SCCA because the SCCA is the quicker and more cost efficient option. Dr Hamed also describes a recent study concluding that more than 90% of the SCCA’s awards have been upheld when challenged in annulment proceedings. Finally, they discuss how arbitration with the SCCA is becoming more popular in technical cases, IP cases and construction disputes.
Podcast Link: Law-disrupted.fm
Host: John B. Quinn
Producer: Alexis Hyde
Music and Editing by: Alexander Rossi -
John is joined by Professor Song Sang-Hyun, retired Professor of Law at Seoul National University and former President of the International Criminal Court. Professor Song explains the origins of the Korean civil justice system which is based upon the German system by way of Japan. He discusses how after World War II, American Army officers drafted many of Korea’s statutes and, in the past two decades, American law in fields such as corporate law, shipping and aviation law, antitrust law, securities regulations, intellectual property, and class action lawsuits have increasingly influenced Korean law. They then discuss Korean pretrial practice which does not involve voluminous document discovery or any depositions and often involves the trial judge also acting as a mediator. Professor Song explains some of the unique aspects of Korean trial practice including Korea’s recent adoption of juries that render advisory decisions on disputed facts and that cases average less than a year from filing through trial. They also discuss that the loser must pay the winner’s attorneys’ fees, although, in practice, courts tend to award less than all the fees incurred. Finally, they discuss some of the emerging issues in Korean law including labor, environmental and privacy law as well as the protection of personal information.
Podcast Link: Law-disrupted.fm
Host: John B. Quinn
Producer: Alexis Hyde
Music and Editing by: Alexander Rossi -
John is joined by Eytan Liraz, the Principal of Eytan Liraz & Co. Law Offices, one of the foremost business litigation firms in Israel. Eytan explains some of the unique aspects of business litigation in Israel, including that Israel has more lawyers per capita than any other country on earth, that aggressive litigation is a common and accepted business strategy, and that Israel has far more class action lawsuits than other countries, including lawsuits where the complaints are literally copies of class action complaints that have been filed in the U.S. He also explains the three phases that each lawsuit goes through: (1) the initial phase in which the claimant files a statement of claim raising its main arguments and elements of proof and the defendant files a statement of defense containing its arguments and proof, (2) the pretrial phase in which limited discovery and any preliminary motions take place and all evidence and expert opinions are filed with the court, and (3) the interrogation phase in which the parties are allowed to conduct cross-examinations of the adversary’s witnesses. Cases are usually decided within one year and four months of the first filing. Finally, they discuss the impact the events of October 7 have had on litigation in Israel including the number of lawyers who are not available due to military service, the entire court system shutting down for two months and the general effect, now dissipating, of people being unusually reluctant to litigate.
Podcast Link: Law-disrupted.fm
Host: John B. Quinn
Producer: Alexis Hyde
Music and Editing by: Alexander Rossi -
John is joined by Courtney Bowman, the Global Director of Privacy and Civil Liberties at Palantir, one of the foremost companies in the world specializing in software platforms for big data analytics. They discuss the emerging trends in AI regulation. Courtney explains the AI Act recently passed by the EU Parliament, including the four levels of risk it assesses for different AI systems and the different regulatory obligations imposed on each risk level, how the Act treats general purpose AI systems and how the final Act evolved in response to lobbying by emerging European companies in the AI space. They discuss whether the EU AI Act will become the global standard international companies default to because the European market is too large to abandon. Courtney also explains recent federal regulatory developments in the U.S. including the framework for AI put out by the National Institute of Science and Technology, the AI Bill of Rights announced by the White House which calls for voluntary compliance to certain principles by industry and the Executive Order on Safe, Secure and Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence which requires each department of the federal government to develop its own plan for the use and deployment of AI. They also discuss the wide range of state level AI legislative initiatives and the leading role California has played in this process. Finally, they discuss the upcoming issues legislatures will need to address including translating principles like accountability, fairness and transparency into concrete best practices, instituting testing, evaluation and validation methodologies to ensure that AI systems are doing what they're supposed to do in a reliable and trustworthy way, and addressing concerns around maintaining AI systems over time as the data used by the system continuously evolves over time until it no longer accurately represents the world that it was originally designed to represent.
Podcast Link: Law-disrupted.fm
Host: John B. Quinn
Producer: Alexis Hyde
Music and Editing by: Alexander Rossi -
John is joined by Christopher Bogart, CEO, Director and Co-Founder of Burford Capital, the largest litigation funding firm in the world. They discuss the use of AI and data science in litigation funding decisions. Chris explains that while AI is currently not advanced enough to make decisions on whether to fund a case, advances in data science now allow litigation funders to improve their decisions by examining enormous amounts of public data to find meaningful facts such as accurate damage ranges that are often buried deep in individual case dockets. Chris also identifies the key data points used to evaluate whether to fund a case, including the legal theory of the case, the counsel representing the parties, the judge or arbitrator presiding over the case, and the likely time to reach an outcome. Finally, John and Chris also discuss other ways that AI is impacting the legal profession including the use of AI to provide real time assistance in cross examination, the use of AI by courts in Singapore and Connecticut to adjudicate low value routine matters and traffic violations, and how AI has enabled smaller firms to expand into areas of litigation they previously could not handle such as large antitrust cases by automating the review and processing of millions of pages of documents.
Podcast Link: Law-disrupted.fm
Host: John B. Quinn
Producer: Alexis Hyde
Music and Editing by: Alexander Rossi -
John is joined by Bethany W. Kristovich, Partner and Co-Chair of the Professional Liability Defense Group at Munger, Tolles & Olson, LLP. They discuss some of the unique aspects of legal malpractice cases, including how often they arise from collection cases, how a plaintiff must prove not only malpractice but that without the malpractice, the case would have had a different result, the importance of expert testimony in malpractice cases, and the difficulty of mastering damages theories from both the underlying case and the malpractice action. Bethany explains some of the worst things that can happen in a malpractice case, including the lawyer criticizing the former client so much it provokes a backlash by the jury, internal emails in which lawyers on the same team criticize each other’s work, and lawyers who appear arrogant because they don’t know their own rates. Finally, Bethany explains several ways lawyers can protect themselves from malpractice claims, including making sure the client is worthy of the firm before taking their case, getting a retainer and staying current on billing and collections, creating short agendas for telephone conversations to document the topics being discussed, and including the client in all decisions about the case.
Podcast Link: Law-disrupted.fm
Host: John B. Quinn
Producer: Alexis Hyde
Music and Editing by: Alexander Rossi -
John is joined by Júlio César Bueno, Partner and Head of Litigation at Pinheiro Neto Advogados, one of the most highly regarded law firms in Brazil. Júlio explains some of the unique characteristics of the Brazilian civil justice system, including the ability of lawyers to have ex partecommunications with the judge and the severe limits on pretrial discovery. They discuss the burdens imposed by Brazil’s enormous docket (over 83 million pending cases) on the system, including the lengthy delays, the extremely short time allocated for oral argument or witness examination and the resulting importance of winning cases through written submissions. They also discuss how these burdens have led to an increase in arbitration, particularly in infrastructure and merger and acquisition disputes, as well as the increasing digitalization of the entire court system. Finally, Júlio explains that disputes over mergers and acquisitions, corporate shareholder disputes and environmental litigation are the most rapidly growing areas in Brazilian civil disputes.
Podcast Link: Law-disrupted.fm
Host: John B. Quinn
Producer: Alexis Hyde
Music and Editing by: Alexander Rossi -
Guests: Robert Zink, former head of the U.S. Justice Department’s Criminal Division, Fraud Section and partner in Quinn Emanuel’s Washington, D.C. office and Steve Madison, former federal prosecutor and partner in Quinn Emanuel’s Los Angeles office.
John, Robert, and Steve follow up on their August 2023 podcast about the four pending criminal actions against former President Donald Trump. They discuss how events might play out if , as seems likely, Trump is convicted in one or more of the cases. They discuss the current timeline of each case and which will likely go to trial before the November election. They also discuss the consequences of possible convictions in each case, including the range of potential sentences, the procedures involved in sentencing, and the likelihood that he would remain free on bond. They also discuss the impact any potential convictions would have on his ability to remain on the ballot, possible challenges to enforcing any sentences should he win the election, and the possibility of obtaining pardons, whether by himself or President Biden for the potential federal convictions or by the Governors of New York or Georgia in the state cases. They also discuss a potential Constitutional crisis if he were to refuse to report to prison and potential solutions such as a special sentencing to home detention or delayed prison time until after presidential term.
.
Podcast Link: Law-disrupted.fm
Host: John B. Quinn
Producer: Alexis Hyde
Music and Editing by: Alexander Rossi -
John is joined by Dennis Hranitzky, partner in Quinn Emanuel’s Salt Lake City, New York and London Offices, Head of the firm’s Sovereign Litigation practice and Co-Head of the firm’s Global Asset Recovery Practice. They discuss various kinds of litigation, arbitration and collection actions against sovereign states. They discuss collection cases against sovereign states resulting from those states’ default on debt instruments, the challenges faced by creditors who hold out after most creditors agree to a debt restructuring arrangement with the sovereign, recent proposed legislation any other government actionsfavoring sovereigns, the current sovereign debt crisis, and concerns about opportunistic funds who seek profit by collecting on devalued sovereign debt. They also discuss investor state arbitration generally, for example, after a company has invested in a project in a country and the country fundamentally changes the terms under which the investment was made, such as radically raising taxes as Spain did with respect to renewable energy projects after 2008. They discuss the position taken by the EU that EU courts cannot enforce arbitration awards against EU nations even when the nation entered voluntarily into an arbitration treaty and recent indications that the United States government supports the position of the EU. Finally, they discuss litigation against sovereigns unrelated to sovereign debt, such as litigation against state sponsors of terrorism including the lawsuit Quinn Emanuel recently filed against Iran on behalf of victims of the October 7, 2023 Hamas attacks.
Podcast Link: Law-disrupted.fm
Host: John B. Quinn
Producer: Alexis Hyde
Music and Editing by: Alexander Rossi -
John is joined by David A. Nelson, a partner in the Chicago office of Quinn Emanuel & co-chair of the firm’s National Intellectual Property Litigation Practice. David is widely recognized as one of the most successful patent trial lawyers in the United States. They discuss how trying patent cases is different than trying other commercial cases.
They also discuss how to win patent cases at trial including the importance of developing common sense explanations for technical arguments, developing a consistent narrative from the beginning, and using fact witnesses to bring life to your technical arguments.If you enjoy this episode, please leave a like, review, or comment on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or any major podcast platform.
Podcast Link: Law-disrupted.fm
Host: John B. Quinn
Producer: Alexis Hyde
Music and Editing by: Alexander Rossi -
John is joined by Jim Wilkinson, Executive Chairman of TrailRunner International and Former White House Director of Communications. They discuss the art of preparing witnesses to testify before congressional committees which is very different than testifying in court. This includes the importance of researching the members of Congress who will question the witness, knowing the discussions occurring in online forums each member frequents, and the four to six categories of questions they are likely to ask. Using specific examples, they also discuss the importance of knowing and using “megatrends” in public opinion, the advantages of having a few key metaphors or “haymakers,” and the importance of preparing three or four “pivot points” to turn the force of an aggressive question away from the witness. Finally, they discuss the role counsel can play in preparing the witness including researching evidence that makes the witness’s points, helping the witness to make their key arguments cogently, and providing confidence that their testimony will not create any legal jeopardy.
Podcast Link: Law-disrupted.fm
Host: John B. Quinn
Producer: Alexis Hyde
Music and Editing by: Alexander Rossi -
John is joined by Major Ben Wahlhaus who serves in the International Law Department of the Israel Defense Forces. They discuss the application of the international law of armed conflict to the current operations in the Gaza Strip, including the sources of that law and the role that the International Law Department of the IDF plays in trying to assure compliance. They also discuss the three cardinal principles of targeting: distinction (which prohibits intentionally targeting civilians or civilian objects), precautions (which requires taking all feasible measures to mitigate civilian harm), and proportionality (which for each individual attack requires balancing the anticipated military advantage against the expected civilian harm) and the rules, procedures, and policies the IDF has in place to follow these principles in every attack. They also discuss the distinction between war crimes and crimes against humanity and apply both legal standards to the actions of Hamas and the IDF after October 7. They discuss Major Wahlhaus’ day to day activities as a lawyer adviser to the IDF. Finally, they discuss the action South Africa brought before the World Court alleging that Israel is currently engaged in war crimes as well as genocide, including the Major’s role as part of Israel’s defense team and the evidence presented concerning Israel’s efforts to mitigate civilian harm.
Podcast Link: Law-disrupted.fm
Host: John B. Quinn
Producer: Alexis Hyde
Music and Editing by: Alexander Rossi -
John is joined by Hisaya Kimura, Senior Counsel in the Tokyo office of Nagashima Ohno & Tsunematsu. They discuss aspects of the Japanese legal system, including Japan’s historical adoption of the German civil procedure system and subsequent incorporation of elements, such as cross-examination, of the American system. They also discuss how Japanese litigants typically exchange multiple detailed briefs covering both factual and legal issues in detail for years before trial followed by trials that last less than a day with only one witness testifying for each side. They also discuss key differences between Japanese and American litigation, including the absence of discovery, juries, and punitive damages in Japan as well as the application of the beyond reasonable doubt standard in civil litigation. Finally, they discuss recent changes to the legal profession in Japan, including the expansion of Japanese law firms beyond litigation to include advice on regulatory, M&A and competition issues, the expansion of leading Japanese firms into international markets and the impact foreign firms have had by opening Japanese offices.
Podcast Link: Law-disrupted.fm
Host: John B. Quinn
Producer: Alexis Hyde
Music and Editing by: Alexander Rossi - Mostrar mais
