Law/Legal
Here's a look at documents from law firms and legal groups
Featured Stories
Patent Lawyer Recognizes Troutman Pepper Locke as a Top 10 Patent Firm in 2026 Law Firm Rankings
ATLANTA, Georgia, April 18 -- Troutman Pepper, a law firm, issued the following news:
* * *
The Patent Lawyer Recognizes Troutman Pepper Locke as a Top 10 Patent Firm in 2026 Law Firm Rankings
NEW YORK - The Patent Lawyer has recognized Troutman Pepper Locke as a Top 10 Patent Firm in 2026 for North America, in the Northeast region. The publication's rankings are derived from a comprehensive, research-driven methodology that incorporates months of industry research and feedback from its readers, clients, and esteemed connections around the world.
The 2026 guide highlights the most well-respected
... Show Full Article
ATLANTA, Georgia, April 18 -- Troutman Pepper, a law firm, issued the following news:
* * *
The Patent Lawyer Recognizes Troutman Pepper Locke as a Top 10 Patent Firm in 2026 Law Firm Rankings
NEW YORK - The Patent Lawyer has recognized Troutman Pepper Locke as a Top 10 Patent Firm in 2026 for North America, in the Northeast region. The publication's rankings are derived from a comprehensive, research-driven methodology that incorporates months of industry research and feedback from its readers, clients, and esteemed connections around the world.
The 2026 guide highlights the most well-respectedlaw firms from the Middle East, Africa, the Americas, and the Caribbean, with each respective list presented in alphabetical order to avoid bias.
Troutman Pepper Locke's Intellectual Property Practice develops and implements global protection and commercialization strategies for clients with intellectual property assets in virtually all industry areas. The firm's forward-thinking, proactive strategies help clients mitigate risk while maximizing protection and value. With resources around the world, including an office in London, its team of attorneys, patent agents, and other professionals offer comprehensive advice on the development, acquisition, management, and monetization of intellectual property.
* * *
About Troutman Pepper Locke
Troutman Pepper Locke helps clients solve complex legal challenges and achieve their business goals in an ever-changing global economy. With more than 1,600 attorneys in 30+ offices, the firm serves clients in all major industry sectors, with particular depth in energy, financial services, health care and life sciences, insurance and reinsurance, private equity, and real estate. Learn more at troutman.com.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.troutman.com/insights/the-patent-lawyer-recognizes-troutman-pepper-locke-as-a-top-10-patent-firm-in-2026-law-firm-rankings/
[Category: BizLaw/Legal]
Littler: Policy Week in Review - April 17, 2026
SAN FRANCISCO, California, April 18 -- Littler, a law firm, issued the following news:
* * *
Policy Week in Review - April 17, 2026
Congressional and Administrative News
At a Glance
The Policy Week in Review, prepared by Littler's Workplace Policy Institute (WPI), sets forth WPI's updates on federal legislation, regulations, and congressional activity affecting the workplace.
By Shannon Meade, Jim Paretti, Alex MacDonald, and Maury Baskin
White House Announces NLRB Nominations
On April 13, the White House announced the nomination of James Macy from the U.S. Department of Labor to be a
... Show Full Article
SAN FRANCISCO, California, April 18 -- Littler, a law firm, issued the following news:
* * *
Policy Week in Review - April 17, 2026
Congressional and Administrative News
At a Glance
The Policy Week in Review, prepared by Littler's Workplace Policy Institute (WPI), sets forth WPI's updates on federal legislation, regulations, and congressional activity affecting the workplace.
By Shannon Meade, Jim Paretti, Alex MacDonald, and Maury Baskin
White House Announces NLRB Nominations
On April 13, the White House announced the nomination of James Macy from the U.S. Department of Labor to be amember of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) for a term expiring on August 27, 2030, to fill the Republican seat vacated by former Chair Marvin Kaplan. Additionally, the White House renominated current Democratic NLRB member David Prouty, whose term expires in August, for a five-year term expiring on August 27, 2031. If the nominees are confirmed by the U.S. Senate, the NLRB will maintain its quorum and increase its majority to three Republican Board members until December 16, 2027, when Chair James Murphy's term expires.
* * *
House Passes Measure Extending TPS for Haiti
On April 16, the House passed a resolution that extends temporary legal protections for Haitian migrants for three years via a procedural vote on a discharge petition filed by Representative Ayanna Pressley (D-MA), co-chair of the House Haiti Caucus. (A discharge petition, typically used by the minority party, requires 218 signatures to bypass committee consideration and circumvent House leadership to force a vote on the House floor.) The measure, passed by a vote of 224-204, with the support of 10 Republicans, now moves to the Senate for consideration where its fate is uncertain. Since February 2025, the administration's immigration policy has been to end TPS for Haitians.
* * *
OSHA Updates National Emphasis Program (NEP) on Heat-Related Hazards
The U.S. Department of Labor's Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) updated its National Emphasis Program (NEP) to direct agency resources, including inspections and outreach, on industries and workplaces where heat hazards are more prevalent and most likely to occur. The revised NEP is effective immediately and will be in place for five years. For additional Littler insights, read here.
House Workforce Protections Subcommittee Holds Hearing on AI's Economic Impact on Workers and Employers
On April 15, Chair Ryan Mackenzie (R-PA) of the House Workforce Protections Subcommittee held the sixth hearing in a series examining artificial intelligence, titled "Building an AI-Ready America: Understanding AI's Economic Impact on Workers and Employers." For a recap of the hearing, read here.
* * *
House Health, Employment, Labor and Pensions Subcommittee Holds Hearing on EBSA
On April 16, Chair Rick Allen (R-GA) of the House Health, Employment, Labor and Pensions Subcommittee held a hearing to examine the policies and priorities of the Employee Benefits Security Administration (EBSA), which is responsible for regulating employer-provided benefit plans subject to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). For a recap of the hearing and the testimony of Assistant Secretary Daniel Aronowitz, read here.
* * *
Authors
Shannon Meade
Executive Director, Workplace Policy Institute
Washington, D.C.
* * *
James A. Paretti
Shareholder
Washington, D.C.
* * *
Alexander T. MacDonald
Shareholder
Washington, D.C.
* * *
Maury Baskin
Shareholder
Washington, D.C.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.littler.com/news-analysis/asap/policy-week-review-april-17-2026
[Category: BizLaw/Legal]
Fisher Phillips Issues Insight: Private Clubs Must Manage Member Harassment Risks - 5 Tips for Protecting Your Workforce in a Member-First Culture
ATLANTA, Georgia, April 18 -- Fisher Phillips, a law firm, issued the following insight on April 17, 2026:
* * *
Private Clubs Must Manage Member Harassment Risks: 5 Tips for Protecting Your Workforce in a Member-First Culture
Private clubs expect their front-line staff to keep members happy - but when does that expectation cross the line and create workplace liability risks for your organization? Over the past year, multiple golf and country clubs have been hit with lawsuits from employees who claim that club members harassed them, and courts are closely examining whether clubs that tacitly
... Show Full Article
ATLANTA, Georgia, April 18 -- Fisher Phillips, a law firm, issued the following insight on April 17, 2026:
* * *
Private Clubs Must Manage Member Harassment Risks: 5 Tips for Protecting Your Workforce in a Member-First Culture
Private clubs expect their front-line staff to keep members happy - but when does that expectation cross the line and create workplace liability risks for your organization? Over the past year, multiple golf and country clubs have been hit with lawsuits from employees who claim that club members harassed them, and courts are closely examining whether clubs that tacitlytolerate misconduct to appease a member should be held liable for negligent retention and supervision. Like all employers, private clubs should take proactive steps to foster a healthy, safe, and welcoming work environment. Here's a guide to understanding these unique risks and five best practices to manage your club's exposure.
The Unique Risk Posture of Private Clubs
Employees shouldn't be expected to endure harassment or offensive conduct from members as a condition of continued employment. In a traditional office, HR departments can easily discipline or terminate an employee who harasses a colleague. But private clubs operate differently. The alleged harasser is often a dues-paying member, a tournament sponsor, or a founding family member.
Front-line employees frequently work in isolated areas, such as golf courses or locker rooms - and they rely on tips and member goodwill for their livelihood. This power imbalance can make them highly vulnerable to inappropriate comments, physical advances, or abusive conduct.
If your club ignores this dynamic, you invite legal trouble. Any time bullying or harassment relates to a protected characteristic, such as race, sex, or age, it can lead to a discrimination claim. Private clubs cannot afford to treat member harassment as a simple customer service issue.
5 Best Practices to Manage Member Harassment Risks
To protect your employees and your organization, clubs must establish clear rules and enforce them consistently. Here are five best practices you should consider implementing to shield your private club from liability:
1. Adopt a Member Conduct Policy
Your club likely has a strong employee handbook, but how do you regulate member behavior? You should have a written policy that explicitly extends harassment prohibitions to members, guests, and vendors.
The policy should clearly define prohibited conduct. Use specific examples that relate directly to the club environment, such as inappropriate comments to servers or aggressive behavior on the golf course. Make it clear that membership status does not insulate anyone from the consequences of their actions.
Include a graduated response protocol in your policy. This might start with a formal warning, escalate to suspended club privileges, and end with membership termination. The existence of this policy, along with proof that you actively enforce it, is often the deciding factor in defending against negligent supervision claims.
2. Train Front-Line Employees on Reporting
Beverage cart attendants, servers, locker room staff, and caddies face the most exposure to member contact, yet they are often the least likely to feel empowered to report misconduct. Consider removing the barriers that might keep them silent.
Conduct regular training to make it clear that reporting is both expected and protected. Your staff should know that your club will not tolerate retaliation against them for raising a concern.
The reporting channel should never run exclusively through a supervisor who is also evaluated on member satisfaction metrics. That structural conflict may suppress reporting. Instead, establish a direct pathway to human resources or provide an anonymous hotline. Give your employees a safe, unbiased way to ask for help.
3. Act Promptly When a Report Is Made
The most damaging fact pattern in harassment litigation is a documented complaint followed by inaction. If you minimize a complaint because the accused member is a large dues-payer, courts and juries may treat that as direct evidence of deliberate indifference.
When you receive a complaint, treat the investigation exactly as you would for an internal employee dispute. Promptly interview the reporting employee, any witnesses, and the accused member. Document every step of your investigation thoroughly.
Take proportionate interim protective measures while the matter is pending. This might mean reassigning a beverage cart attendant's route or duties so they do not interact with the accused member. It could also involve restricting the member's access to certain club areas until you conclude the investigation.
4. Review Employment and Member Agreements for Alignment
Many clubs have robust employment agreements that address internal workplace harassment. However, their member agreements - the documents signed upon joining - say absolutely nothing about behavioral expectations.
Closing this gap serves as both a powerful deterrent and a vital legal protection. Consider aligning these two documents by updating your member agreements to explicitly reference the club's code of conduct.
Ensure the member agreement reserves the club's right to discipline, suspend, or revoke membership for conduct that violates club policies. This alignment gives your club the contractual cover it needs to act swiftly without triggering complex membership dispute litigation.
5. Document Remedial Action and Follow Up
When your club takes corrective action against a member, document the process with extreme rigor. Keep detailed records of the initial complaint, the investigation steps, the factual findings, and the specific actions taken, and include notes on any monitoring measures you put in place to ensure the behavior does not repeat.
Once the investigation concludes, you should follow up with the reporting employee. Confirm that the inappropriate conduct has stopped and reinforce that you took their report seriously. This critical follow-up often distinguishes a defensible response from one that sparks a retaliation claim. Employees left in the dark frequently assume that no action was taken. That perception of inaction may drive an employee's decision to file a lawsuit.
Bridging the Gap Between Policy and Practice
Having policies on paper is only half the battle. Your club's posture should be internally consistent - from written rules to staff training to investigation protocols and the actual consequences - or you will risk creating legal liability and destroy workplace morale. If you promise a harassment-free environment but look the other way for a VIP member, plaintiffs' attorneys will use that gap to build their case.
Conclusion
Don't wait for a lawsuit to evaluate your risk posture - take proactive steps today to secure your club. If you have questions, please contact the authors of this Insight, your Fisher Phillips attorney, or any member of our Non-Profit and Tax-Exempt Organizations team. We will continue to monitor all developments related to non-profits and tax-exempt organizations, so make sure you are subscribed to Fisher Phillips' Insight System to receive the most up-to-date information.
* * *
Related People
Erin Gibson Allen
Partner
eallen@fisherphillips.com
412.822.6635
* * *
Leanne Lane Coyle
Associate
lcoyle@fisherphillips.com
610.230.6121
* * *
Original text here: https://www.fisherphillips.com/en/insights/insights/private-clubs-must-manage-member-harassment-risks
[Category: BizLaw/Legal]
Fisher Phillips Issues Insight: Alabama Enacts Sweeping Consumer Privacy Law - 7 Steps Your Business Should Consider to Prepare
ATLANTA, Georgia, April 18 -- Fisher Phillips, a law firm, issued the following insight on April 17, 2026:
* * *
Alabama Enacts Sweeping Consumer Privacy Law: 7 Steps Your Business Should Consider to Prepare
Alabama just joined 20 others states by enacting a comprehensive consumer privacy law, and businesses must get ready to comply with sweeping new obligations that will kick in next year. The state's new Alabama Personal Data Protection Act (APDPA), signed into effect yesterday by Governor Ivey, establishes a broad privacy framework for how businesses collect and sell consumers' personal data.
... Show Full Article
ATLANTA, Georgia, April 18 -- Fisher Phillips, a law firm, issued the following insight on April 17, 2026:
* * *
Alabama Enacts Sweeping Consumer Privacy Law: 7 Steps Your Business Should Consider to Prepare
Alabama just joined 20 others states by enacting a comprehensive consumer privacy law, and businesses must get ready to comply with sweeping new obligations that will kick in next year. The state's new Alabama Personal Data Protection Act (APDPA), signed into effect yesterday by Governor Ivey, establishes a broad privacy framework for how businesses collect and sell consumers' personal data.We'll explain key aspects of the new law and offer seven steps you can take now to prepare.
Table of Contents
* Overview
* Scope and Applicability
- Covered Consumers
- Covered Data
- Covered Businesses
- Controllers vs. Processors
* Controller Duties
- Complying With Consumer Requests
- Data Minimization, Consumer Privacy Notice, and More
* Processor Duties
* Enforcement
* 7 Steps Your Business Should Consider Taking Now
* Conclusion
Overview
Governor Kay Ivey just signed a bill (HB 351) into law that establishes the Alabama Personal Data Protection Act (APDPA). The new law, which takes effect May 1, 2027, establishes:
* data privacy rights for consumers;
* duties for "controllers" (see "Controllers vs. Processors" below);
* duties for "processors" (see "Controllers vs. Processors" below); and
* enforcement measures.
While the law imposes extensive obligations on covered businesses, it also includes many broad exemptions and carve-outs. We'll cover some of the highlights below, but you should work with counsel to understand whether and how the APDPA applies to your business in various specific data processing situations.
Scope and Applicability
Covered Consumers
The APDPA aims to protect consumers who are residents of Alabama. Importantly, however, it does not cover individuals acting in a commercial or employment context or as an employee, owner, director, officer, or contractor.
The APDPA's employment-data exception is consistent with all other state consumer privacy laws, except for the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA), which broadly defines "consumer" to include job applicants, current and former employees, and more.
Covered Data
The APDPA protects consumers' personal data, which means any information that is linked or reasonably linkable to an identified or an individual who can be readily identified, directly or indirectly.
However, "personal data" does not include deidentified data (so long as the controller possessing the data complies with certain conditions) or publicly available information. In addition, the new state law specifies various types of data that are not covered by the APDPA, including, for example:
* many types of federally regulated data, such as protected health information under HIPAA or consumer reporting data covered by the Fair Credit Reporting Act;
* employment and HR data, such as information related to job applicants, current employees, contractors, or agents, as well as certain emergency contact and benefits administration data; and
* data or information collected or processed to comply with state law.
Covered Businesses
The APDPA applies to businesses that:
* operate in Alabama or produce products or services that target residents of the state; and
* control or process the personal data of more than 25,000 consumers or derive more than 25% of gross revenue from the "sale of personal data" (see below for more details).
Sale of Personal Data. Under the APDPA, a sale of personal data occurs (subject to any applicable exclusions) when a controller sells a consumer's personal data to a third party (without restricting how the third party may use that data in the future) in exchange for monetary or "other valuable" consideration that materially benefits the controller. While some states define the sale of data strictly to mean disclosures in exchange for monetary consideration, Alabama joins the batch of states that expand the definition to include disclosures in exchange for other things of real value, not just monetary consideration. But unlike other states, Alabama limits this "other valuable" category to only consideration that materially benefits the controller. In the context of website cookies, this definition may implicate the sharing of data through certain cookies unless the following exception applies. The APDPA includes some significant carveouts from what would be considered selling of data (in addition to other standard types of exclusions included in most state consumer privacy laws) for certain types of data disclosures or transfers. For example, under the Alabama law, the disclosure or transfer of personal data to a third party for the purposes of providing analytics services or providing marketing services solely to the controller will not be treated as sales of personal data.
Notably, these thresholds make it easier for a business to be covered compared to the thresholds under other states' privacy laws. However, the new law provides various important exemptions, many of which go far beyond the exemptions available under other state laws of this kind. For example, the following entities will not be required to comply with the APDPA:
* Political subdivisions of the state, or any board, authority, district, or public corporation.
* Two-year or four-year institutions of higher education, as well as their affiliates.
* National registered securities associations.
* Certain federally regulated financial institutions and their affiliates.
* HIPAA covered entities or business associates.
* Businesses with fewer than 500 employees, so long as the business does not engage in the sale of personal data.
* Nonprofit entities with fewer than 100 employees, so long as the entity does not engage in the sale of personal data.
* Certain regulated industries.
* Trade associations explicitly authorized to receive certain documents or evidence from state insurance regulators.
* Certain political action committees, political parties, or principal campaign committees, and political organizations, as well as businesses that primarily sell data to them.
* Electric providers subject to national reliability standards.
Controllers vs. Processors
If a business is covered by the APDPA, it must meet certain compliance requirements, which vary depending on whether the business is a "controller" or a "processor." Here's what these terms mean:
* A controller is an "individual or legal entity that, alone or jointly with others, determines the purposes and means of processing personal data."
* A processor is an "individual or legal entity that processes personal data on behalf of a controller."
Whether a person is acting as a controller or processor with respect to a specific processing of data is a fact-based determination that depends on criteria laid out under the APDPA.
Controller Duties
Complying With Consumer Requests
A controller must comply with a consumer's authenticated request to invoke any of their rights under the APDPA, including requests for the controller to:
* Confirm whether the controller (or a processor or third party acting on its behalf) is processing the consumer's personal data and accessing any of their personal data under its control - unless confirmation or access would require the controller to reveal a trade secret.
* Correct inaccuracies in the consumer's personal data, considering the nature of it and the purposes for processing it.
* Delete the consumer's personal data.
* Provide a copy of the consumer's personal data (as previously provided by the consumer to the controller) in a format that meets certain conditions - unless providing the data would require the controller to reveal a trade secret.
* Allow the consumer to opt out of the processing of their personal data for the purpose of targeted advertising, sale of the data, or profiling in connection with solely automated significant decisions concerning them.
If a consumer is a child under age 13, these consumer rights may be exercised by their parent or legal guardian (and the same is true for guardian-consumer or conservator-consumer relationships, regardless of age).
In addition, controllers will be required to establish a secure and reliable method for consumers to exercise these rights and to follow certain procedures when handling consumers' requests, including, for example:
* responding to the consumer within 45 days after receiving their request (extensions are available under specific conditions) and, if applicable, provide justification for declining the request; and
* providing information in response to an authenticated request free of charge once per consumer during any 12-month period (subject to limited exceptions that allow the controller to charge the consumer a reasonable fee).
Other Controller Duties: Data Minimization, Consumer Privacy Notice, and More
The APDPA will impose many other compliance requirements on controllers. As just a few examples, controllers will be:
* limited to collecting personal data that is "adequate, relevant, and necessary" in relation to the purpose for processing it;
* required to establish and maintain "reasonably administrative, technical, and physical data security practices to protect the confidentiality, integrity, and accessibility of personal data appropriate to the volume and nature of the personal data at issue";
* prohibited from, among other things, processing personal data for purposes that are not compatible with the disclosed purposes for processing it or processing a consumer's "sensitive data" without obtaining their consent (note: personal data of a known child under age 13 must be processed in accordance with the federal Children's Online Privacy Protection Act);
* required to provide consumers with a privacy notice that meets certain criteria; and
* required to handle deidentified data in accordance with specific rules.
Notably, however, the APDPA stops short of imposing several significant requirements that are included in consumer privacy laws in many other states. For example, the APDPA does not require controllers to conduct data protection impact assessments or implement universal opt-out preference signals.
Processor Duties
Processors will be required to adhere to the controller's instructions and take measures to assist the controller in complying with its obligations under the APDPA. The law also establishes requirements for contracts between controllers and processors.
Enforcement
Alabama's attorney general will have the power to enforce the APDPA and will be required to issue a notice of violation to the controller before initiating any action against it. The controller will then have 45 days to correct the alleged violation and notify the attorney general of the correction - if it fails to do so, the AG may bring an action in court, and, if the court finds against the controller, it may assess a civil penalty of up to $15,000 per violation.
7 Steps Your Business Should Consider Taking Now
If your business is covered by the APDPA, here are six steps you should consider taking now ahead of the law's May 1, 2027, effective date:
* Evaluate your organization's current data collection and privacy procedures.
* Review existing privacy notices and policies, including those drafted for compliance with the laws of other jurisdictions that have passed similar consumer privacy legislation.
* Implement systems to respond to authenticated consumer requests to invoke their rights under the APDPA.
* Consider engaging in a data mapping exercise, if your business has not done so recently, to identify consumer data your organization has collected and where that data resides.
* Identify third parties with whom your business shares consumer data and any existing data processing agreements with those entities.
* Assess your collection of data concerning minors (if any).
* Stay tuned for updates and work with data privacy counsel to evaluate your business's readiness for compliance with the APDPA.
Conclusion
As consumers demand more transparency about who receives their data and what it's used for, and without progress on a federal data privacy scheme, we expect more proposed legislation at the state level, as 20 other states have already enacted similar laws - including, most recently, the Oklahoma Consumer Data Privacy Act enacted last month.
Fisher Phillips will continue to monitor developments in this area and provide updates as warranted, so make sure you are subscribed to Fisher Phillips' Insight System to get the most up-to-date information direct to your inbox. You can also visit FP's U.S. Consumer Privacy Hub for additional resources to help you navigate this area. If you have questions, please contact your Fisher Phillips attorney, the authors of this Insight, any member of our Privacy and Cyber team or any attorney in our Birmingham office.
* * *
Related People
Ree Harper
Partner
rharper@fisherphillips.com
205.963.5403
* * *
Raymond W. Perez
Of Counsel
rwperez@fisherphillips.com
205.963.5400
* * *
Original text here: https://www.fisherphillips.com/en/insights/insights/alabama-enacts-sweeping-consumer-privacy-law
[Category: BizLaw/Legal]
Best Lawyers in Singapore 2027 Recognizes 5 Jones Day Lawyers Across 5 Practice Areas
CLEVELAND, Ohio, April 18 -- Jones Day, a law firm, issued the following news:
* * *
The Best Lawyers in Singapore(TM) 2027 recognizes 5 Jones Day lawyers across 5 practice areas
The 2027 edition of The Best Lawyers in Singapore(TM) has recognized five lawyers from Jones Day's Singapore Office across five distinct areas of practice, underscoring the Firm's deep-rooted presence and continued excellence in the region. For over 25 years, Jones Day's Singapore Office has served as a strategic hub for clients conducting business throughout South and Southeast Asia, providing sophisticated legal counsel
... Show Full Article
CLEVELAND, Ohio, April 18 -- Jones Day, a law firm, issued the following news:
* * *
The Best Lawyers in Singapore(TM) 2027 recognizes 5 Jones Day lawyers across 5 practice areas
The 2027 edition of The Best Lawyers in Singapore(TM) has recognized five lawyers from Jones Day's Singapore Office across five distinct areas of practice, underscoring the Firm's deep-rooted presence and continued excellence in the region. For over 25 years, Jones Day's Singapore Office has served as a strategic hub for clients conducting business throughout South and Southeast Asia, providing sophisticated legal counselon complex cross-border matters. This recognition reflects the Firm's long-standing commitment to delivering exceptional service in the region.
Best Lawyers(R) compiles its listings through a months-long peer review process across specific practice areas and geographic regions, seeking candid assessments of their collegues' professional abilities and reputations.
The following is a complete list of Jones Day lawyers recognized by The Best Lawyers in Singapore(TM):
* Elizabeth Cole - Mergers & Acquisitions
* Parveet Singh Gandoak - Private Equity
* Paul Greening - Energy Law
* Sushma Jobanputra - Insolvency & Reorganization
* Zack Oswald - Private Funds
* * *
Jones Day is a global law firm with 2,500 lawyers in 40 offices across five continents. The Firm is distinguished by: a singular tradition of client service; the mutual commitment to, and the seamless collaboration of, a true partnership; formidable legal talent across multiple disciplines and jurisdictions; and shared professional values that focus on client needs.
* * *
Elizabeth Cole
Of Counsel
Singapore + 65.6538.3939
ecole@jonesday.com
Practice: M&A
* * *
Parveet Singh Gandoak
Partner
Singapore + 65.6233.5523
pgandoak@jonesday.com
Practice: M&A
* * *
Paul Greening
Partner
Singapore + 65.6233.5502
pgreening@jonesday.com
Practice: Energy
* * *
Sushma Jobanputra
Partner-in-Charge Singapore
Singapore + 65.6233.5989
sjobanputra@jonesday.com
Practice: Financial Markets
* * *
Zack Oswald
Partner
Singapore + 65.6233.5526
zoswald@jonesday.com
Practice: Private Equity
* * *
Original text here: https://www.jonesday.com/en/news/2026/04/the-best-lawyers-in-singapore-2027-recognizes-5-jones-day-lawyers-across-5-practice-areas
[Category: BizLaw/Legal]
Alan Yanovich Authors Law360 Article on the Significance of Australia-EU's Free Trade Deal
WASHINGTON, April 18 -- Akin Gump, a law firm, issued the following news release:
* * *
Alan Yanovich Authors Law360 Article on the Significance of Australia-EU's Free Trade Deal
Law360 has published an article by Akin international trade partner Alan Yanovich, titled "Assessing The Significance Of Australia-EU's Free Trade Deal".
The article considers the free trade agreement between Australia and the European Union (EU), concluded on March 24 2026, and explores its potential implications as a springboard for a more ambitious initiative between the EU and the Comprehensive and Progressive
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, April 18 -- Akin Gump, a law firm, issued the following news release:
* * *
Alan Yanovich Authors Law360 Article on the Significance of Australia-EU's Free Trade Deal
Law360 has published an article by Akin international trade partner Alan Yanovich, titled "Assessing The Significance Of Australia-EU's Free Trade Deal".
The article considers the free trade agreement between Australia and the European Union (EU), concluded on March 24 2026, and explores its potential implications as a springboard for a more ambitious initiative between the EU and the Comprehensive and ProgressiveAgreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP).
The piece examines the broader implications for global trade policy and international economic cooperation including the potential impact of closer CPTPP-EU alignment on supply chains, regulatory frameworks and geopolitical stability. Alan notes that "A combined EU-CTIPP trade bloc would represent 32% of global GDP, 37% of global trade in goods and services, and encompass over 1 billion consumers."
Read the full article here (https://www.law360.com/articles/2464030).
* * *
People Mentioned in This News
Alan Yanovich
Partner
ayanovich@akingump.com
+41 22.888.2034
* * *
Original text here: https://www.akingump.com/en/insights/media-mentions/alan-yanovich-authors-law360-article-on-the-significance-of-australia-eus-free-trade-deal
[Category: BizLaw/Legal]
23 Bradley Partners Recognized in Legal 500's 2026 U.S. City Elite Series
BIRMINGHAM, Alabama, April 18 -- Bradley, a law firm, issued the following news release:
* * *
23 Bradley Partners Recognized in Legal 500's 2026 U.S. City Elite Series
Bradley is pleased to announce that 23 of the firm's attorneys have been recognized in the 2026 Legal 500 U.S. City Elite lists for Atlanta, the Southeast, and North Carolina.
The four Bradley partners recognized in the 2026 Atlanta Elite list, and their areas of recognition, are:
* William Holley - Commercial Disputes
* Daniel Huynh - Intellectual Property
* Ashley Klein - Intellectual Property
* Stephen Opler - Corporate
... Show Full Article
BIRMINGHAM, Alabama, April 18 -- Bradley, a law firm, issued the following news release:
* * *
23 Bradley Partners Recognized in Legal 500's 2026 U.S. City Elite Series
Bradley is pleased to announce that 23 of the firm's attorneys have been recognized in the 2026 Legal 500 U.S. City Elite lists for Atlanta, the Southeast, and North Carolina.
The four Bradley partners recognized in the 2026 Atlanta Elite list, and their areas of recognition, are:
* William Holley - Commercial Disputes
* Daniel Huynh - Intellectual Property
* Ashley Klein - Intellectual Property
* Stephen Opler - CorporateM&A
The firm was also ranked in the Atlanta Elite list in the area of Corporate M&A.
The 14 Bradley partners recognized in the 2026 Southeast Elite list, and their areas of recognition, are:
* Alexander Ash - Corporate M&A
* Bill Athanas - White Collar Crime
* Justin Burney - Corporate M&A
* Frank Caprio - Intellectual Property
* Mike Denniston - Intellectual Property
* Jake Gipson - Intellectual Property
* Stephen Hall - Intellectual Property
* Will Manuel - Commercial Disputes
* Stuart Maxey - Corporate M&A
* Alex Purvis - Commercial Disputes
* Brad Robertson - White Collar Crime
* Jack Selden - White Collar Crime
* Paul Sykes - Intellectual Property
* Stephen Wilson - Corporate M&A
The firm was also ranked in the Southeast Elite list in the areas of Corporate M&A, Intellectual Property, and White Collar Crime.
The five Bradley partners recognized in the 2026 North Carolina Elite list, and their areas of recognition, are:
* Bailey King - Commercial Disputes and Intellectual Property
* Chris Lam - Commercial Disputes
* Rob Marcus - Commercial Disputes
* Samantha Skains-Menchaca - Intellectual Property
* Henry Ward - Intellectual Property
The new Legal 500 U.S. Elite series highlights top lawyers at regional firms in key markets across the U.S., including Atlanta, Charlotte, Chicago, New York, and D.C., allowing clients to discover the best-of-the-best lawyers who are carrying out high-quality, market-leading work within specific practices in their respective city or region.
The Legal 500 U.S. Elite honorees are determined by the Legal 500 research team, beginning with a list of prospective candidates reviewed by the publication's editors. All shortlisted lawyers are invited to make a submission and participate in an in-depth interview with the researchers, covering recent representative matters and market trends to demonstrate their innovative practice and strategic counsel. The research team also solicits extensive peer feedback regarding other lawyers operating in their respective areas of practice to compile the final lists.
The Legal 500 has been analyzing the capabilities of law firms across the world for more than 30 years, relying on a comprehensive research program to assess the strengths of law firms in more than 150 jurisdictions. The rankings are based on a series of criteria, feedback from clients, submissions from law firms, and interviews with leading private practice lawyers.
* * *
Meet the Team
Alexander Ash
Partner
205.521.8319
aash@bradley.com
* * *
William C. Athanas
Partner
205.521.8996
bathanas@bradley.com
* * *
L. Justin Burney
Partner
256.517.5103
jburney@bradley.com
* * *
Frank M. Caprio
Partner
256.517.5142
fcaprio@bradley.com
* * *
Michael S. Denniston
Partner
205.521.8244
mdenniston@bradley.com
* * *
Jake M. Gipson
Partner
205.521.8678
jgipson@bradley.com
* * *
Stephen H. Hall
Partner
256.517.5140
shall@bradley.com
* * *
William J. Holley, II
Partner
404.868.2002
bholley@bradley.com
* * *
Daniel L. Huynh
Partner
404.868.2802
dhuynh@bradley.com
* * *
C. Bailey King Jr.
Partner
704.338.6027
bking@bradley.com
* * *
Ashley Klein
Partner
404.868.2728
aklein@bradley.com
* * *
Christopher C. Lam
Partner
704.338.6059
clam@bradley.com
J. William Manuel
Partner
601.592.9915
wmanuel@bradley.com
* * *
Robert R. Marcus
Partner
704.338.6020
rmarcus@bradley.com
* * *
Stuart M. Maxey
Partner
205.521.8602
smaxey@bradley.com
* * *
Stephen A. Opler
Partner
404.868.2055
sopler@bradley.com
* * *
Alex Purvis
Partner
601.592.9923
apurvis@bradley.com
* * *
Brad Robertson
Partner
205.521.8188
brobertson@bradley.com
* * *
Jack W. Selden
Partner
205.521.8472
jselden@bradley.com
* * *
Samantha N. Skains-Menchaca
Partner
704.338.6019
smenchaca@bradley.com
* * *
Paul M. Sykes
Partner
205.521.8766
psykes@bradley.com
* * *
Henry B. III
Henry B. Ward III
Partner
704.338.6024
hward@bradley.com
* * *
Stephen M. Wilson
Partner
601.592.9957
swilson@bradley.com
* * *
Original text here: https://www.bradley.com/insights/news/2026/04/23-bradley-partners-recognized-in-legal-500s-2026-us-city-elite-series
[Category: BizLaw/Legal]
