Law/Legal
Here's a look at documents from law firms and legal groups
Featured Stories
Sarah Davidoff Discusses AI Literacy and Big Law Hiring in The American Lawyer
BOSTON, Massachusetts, April 24 [Category: BizLaw/Legal] -- Ropes and Gray, a law firm, issued the following news:
* * *
Sarah Davidoff Discusses AI Literacy and Big Law Hiring in The American Lawyer
In a new article in The American Lawyer (https://www.law.com/americanlawyer/2026/04/22/for-law-students-ai-literacy-and-enthusiasm-may-impact-big-law-employment-prospects/), co-hiring partner Sarah Davidoff discusses how AI literacy and enthusiasm are becoming important factors in attorney recruiting, as familiarity with AI tools and their applications in legal practice has become increasingly important,
... Show Full Article
BOSTON, Massachusetts, April 24 [Category: BizLaw/Legal] -- Ropes and Gray, a law firm, issued the following news:
* * *
Sarah Davidoff Discusses AI Literacy and Big Law Hiring in The American Lawyer
In a new article in The American Lawyer (https://www.law.com/americanlawyer/2026/04/22/for-law-students-ai-literacy-and-enthusiasm-may-impact-big-law-employment-prospects/), co-hiring partner Sarah Davidoff discusses how AI literacy and enthusiasm are becoming important factors in attorney recruiting, as familiarity with AI tools and their applications in legal practice has become increasingly important,particularly for entry-level talent.
Sarah describes a new prompt added to Ropes & Gray's 2L summer program application this spring, asking candidates to explain what they are doing day-to-day to keep up with AI development as it relates to their future practice of law. She notes the range of responses the firm has received, from students whose law schools restrict AI use to those actively integrating AI into their coursework and envisioning specific use cases as junior associates.
Visit our AI Resource Center for our latest thinking and firm news on AI.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.ropesgray.com/en/news-and-events/news/2026/04/sarah-davidoff-discusses-ai-literacy-and-big-law-hiring-in-the-american-lawyer
Ryan Weinstein Discusses San Leandro Antisemitism Lawsuit in the San Francisco Chronicle
BOSTON, Massachusetts, April 24 [Category: BizLaw/Legal] -- Ropes and Gray, a law firm, issued the following news:
* * *
Ryan Weinstein Discusses San Leandro Antisemitism Lawsuit in the San Francisco Chronicle
In a new article in the San Francisco Chronicle (https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/san-leandro-high-school-lawsuit-22220489.php), litigation & enforcement counsel Ryan Weinstein is featured discussing a lawsuit filed in Alameda County Superior Court on behalf of Eden Horwitz, a Jewish high school senior, and her mother against the San Leandro Unified School District, the school's
... Show Full Article
BOSTON, Massachusetts, April 24 [Category: BizLaw/Legal] -- Ropes and Gray, a law firm, issued the following news:
* * *
Ryan Weinstein Discusses San Leandro Antisemitism Lawsuit in the San Francisco Chronicle
In a new article in the San Francisco Chronicle (https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/san-leandro-high-school-lawsuit-22220489.php), litigation & enforcement counsel Ryan Weinstein is featured discussing a lawsuit filed in Alameda County Superior Court on behalf of Eden Horwitz, a Jewish high school senior, and her mother against the San Leandro Unified School District, the school'sprincipal, and two teachers. The suit alleges pervasive and unrelenting antisemitic harassment and discrimination over two school years, claiming educators not only failed to intervene on Eden's behalf but actively contributed to a hostile environment and penalized her when she raised complaints.
The case seeks systemic reforms, including mandatory antisemitism training for staff and students, removal of antisemitic content from curricula, and improvements to the district's complaint process, as well as compensatory and punitive damages. "Faculty didn't just ignore the antisemitic abuse--they fueled it," Ryan said in a statement quoted in the article. "And when confronted with the truth, the District didn't investigate; it retaliated."
* * *
Original text here: https://www.ropesgray.com/en/news-and-events/news/2026/04/ryan-weinstein-discusses-san-leandro-antisemitism-lawsuit-in-the-san-francisco-chronicle
Littler: Global Guide Quarterly
SAN FRANCISCO, California, April 24 -- Littler, a law firm, issued the following news:
* * *
The Global Guide Quarterly (Quarter 1, 2026)
By Geida D. Sanlate, Peter Susser, and Stephan Swinkels
The Global Guide Quarterly (GGQ) is a newsletter published by Littler on a quarterly basis to provide high-level and concise coverage of global labor and employment (L&E) law developments in key countries across the Americas, the Asia-Pacific (APAC) region, and Europe, the Middle East, and Africa (EMEA). The GGQ aims to help multinational enterprises stay informed about important changes in the L&E law
... Show Full Article
SAN FRANCISCO, California, April 24 -- Littler, a law firm, issued the following news:
* * *
The Global Guide Quarterly (Quarter 1, 2026)
By Geida D. Sanlate, Peter Susser, and Stephan Swinkels
The Global Guide Quarterly (GGQ) is a newsletter published by Littler on a quarterly basis to provide high-level and concise coverage of global labor and employment (L&E) law developments in key countries across the Americas, the Asia-Pacific (APAC) region, and Europe, the Middle East, and Africa (EMEA). The GGQ aims to help multinational enterprises stay informed about important changes in the L&E lawframework by covering enacted legislation, significant judiciary or regulatory decisions, legislative initiatives, and trends impacting employers.
The GGQ brings together a curated collection of legal updates by attorneys from Littler offices and contributing firms worldwide. This quarter, the newsletter includes updates from 42 jurisdictions, including but not limited to Austria, China, Croatia, Finland, Hungary, Israel, Poland, South Africa, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, and Zambia featuring developments pertinent to various regional and industry-specific labor and employment issues.
Headlines include:
* Australia: Parliament Enacts New Tax Regime for Very Large Superannuation Balances
* Brazil: Sao Paulo Introduces "Care-Friendly Company" Certification
* Canada (Ontario): New Job Posting Requirements in Force January 1, 2026
* Egypt: New Framework for Apprenticeship Programs
* Kingdom of Saudi Arabia: Increased Saudization Quotas for Marketing and Sales Roles
* Malaysia: Gig Workers Act Establishes New Statutory Protections and Consultative Framework
* Portugal: Enhanced Rest and Absence Rights for Informal Caregivers
* Romania: New Employment Subsidies for Hiring Older and Vulnerable Unemployed Workers
* South Korea: "Yellow Envelope Act" Expands Union Protections and Employer Obligations
* Switzerland: New Tax Rules for Cross Border Remote Work Between Switzerland and France
* United Kingdom: Data (Use and Access) Act 2025: Key Provisions Now in Force
* Vietnam: Decree 337 Introduces Electronic Labor Contract Framework
Download the GGQ (https://www.littler.com/sites/default/files/2026-04/littler-ggq-2026-q1.pdf?syt70ir061l)
This newsletter is not a substitute for legal advice. The material is for informational purposes only, and not for the purpose of establishing an attorney-client relationship.
To receive the Global Guide Quarterly by email, subscribe at littler.com/subscribe-GGQ.
* * *
Key Contacts
Geida D. Sanlate
Knowledge Management Counsel
* * *
Peter A. Susser
Senior Counsel
Washington, D.C.
* * *
Stephan C. Swinkels
Shareholder
* * *
Original text here: https://www.littler.com/news-analysis/global-guide-quarterly/global-guide-quarterly-quarter-1-2026
[Category: BizLaw/Legal]
Littler Lounge: Summer Camp Vibes, Employer Obligations - The Realities of Seasonal Work
SAN FRANCISCO, California, April 24 -- Littler, a law firm, issued the following news about a podcast:
* * *
Littler Lounge: Summer Camp Vibes, Employer Obligations - The Realities of Seasonal Work
Summer camp may be all friendship bracelets and field games - but behind the scenes, it's also a complex workplace with real-life legal considerations. In this episode, hosts Nicole LeFave and Claire Deason are joined by Shareholder Rachel Fendell Satinsky to explore what employers need to know when the "office" looks nothing like an office at all.
While camp itself may only run for a few months,
... Show Full Article
SAN FRANCISCO, California, April 24 -- Littler, a law firm, issued the following news about a podcast:
* * *
Littler Lounge: Summer Camp Vibes, Employer Obligations - The Realities of Seasonal Work
Summer camp may be all friendship bracelets and field games - but behind the scenes, it's also a complex workplace with real-life legal considerations. In this episode, hosts Nicole LeFave and Claire Deason are joined by Shareholder Rachel Fendell Satinsky to explore what employers need to know when the "office" looks nothing like an office at all.
While camp itself may only run for a few months,the employment law considerations begin well before the first camper arrives - and often continue after the last canoe is stored away. From hiring minors and managing seasonal staffing to handling accommodations, investigations and conduct in environments where employees live and work side by side, this episode highlights why preparation and clear expectations are essential for camps and other seasonal employers alike.
Whether the workplace includes cabins, campfires or shared living quarters, this conversation offers practical guidance for employers looking to stay compliant while keeping the focus where it belongs - on a successful season.
(https://soundcloud.com/littler-interviews)
* * *
Nicole S. LeFave
Shareholder
Austin
* * *
Claire B. Deason
Shareholder
Minneapolis
* * *
Rachel Fendell Satinsky
Shareholder
Philadelphia
* * *
Original text here: https://www.littler.com/news-analysis/podcast/littler-lounge-summer-camp-vibes-employer-obligations-realities-seasonal-work
[Category: BizLaw/Legal]
Littler Issues Commentary: Acting Attorney General Issues New DEA Order Reclassifying Some Marijuana Products as Schedule III Controlled Substances, Available by Prescription
SAN FRANCISCO, California, April 24 -- Littler, a law firm, issued the following commentary on April 23, 2026, by shareholders Nancy N. Delogu and Jennifer Chierek Znosko:
* * *
Acting Attorney General Issues New DEA Order Reclassifying Some Marijuana Products as Schedule III Controlled Substances, Available by Prescription
New Order and Anticipated Regulation Have Significant Workplace Implications
*
With the stroke of a pen, Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche issued a new "final order" on April 23, 2026, that reclassifies FDA-approved medications that contain marijuana and marijuana products
... Show Full Article
SAN FRANCISCO, California, April 24 -- Littler, a law firm, issued the following commentary on April 23, 2026, by shareholders Nancy N. Delogu and Jennifer Chierek Znosko:
* * *
Acting Attorney General Issues New DEA Order Reclassifying Some Marijuana Products as Schedule III Controlled Substances, Available by Prescription
New Order and Anticipated Regulation Have Significant Workplace Implications
*
With the stroke of a pen, Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche issued a new "final order" on April 23, 2026, that reclassifies FDA-approved medications that contain marijuana and marijuana productsauthorized pursuant to a state medical marijuana program as Schedule III controlled substances and makes them available by prescription, immediately. Any form of marijuana other than as found in an FDA-approved drug product or marijuana subject to a state medical marijuana license continues to be illegal to use or possess as a matter of federal law, at least for now, meaning that any recreational use of marijuana falls outside of this order and is not protected.
The final order, partially named "Rescheduling of Food and Drug Administration Approved Products Containing Marijuana and Products Containing Marijuana Subject to a Qualifying State-issued License from Schedule I to Schedule III," requires state-licensed medical marijuana entities to submit their state credentials to the DEA for registration in the federal system and promises review of any such licenses submitted for approval within the next six months.1 Prescribers and pharmacists who fill prescriptions will need to meet DEA requirements for the proper prescribing and dispensing of controlled substances, but researchers will be allowed to obtain marijuana from state sources for study. The final order specifically states that it does not legalize the use of marijuana for recreational purposes, and synthetically obtained or derivative marijuana products (such as Delta-10 THC) remain outside the protections of the final order.
This regulatory change addresses moving only certain marijuana products and derivatives from Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act - a schedule, or classification, that states that marijuana is a highly addictive substance with no known medical use - to Schedule III - a classification that acknowledges that while the covered substances are subject to abuse and harm, they have medical value and may be helpful if taken under the supervision of a licensed medical professional. And, while the final order acknowledges that marijuana use can lead to both physical and psychological dependence, it concludes that the likelihood of serious health outcomes is low relative to other drugs of abuse placed on Schedules I and II of the Controlled Substances Act.
The new order, long-awaited by the marijuana industry, which also will see immediate tax relief as a result, is not without controversy. Despite President Trump's December 2025 executive order directing the Department of Justice to move forward swiftly to reclassify marijuana, at least 20 Republican Senators are on record as opposing the rescheduling, and some states - most notably, Oklahoma - have recently rolled back state employment protections for medical marijuana users. A hearing at which the public may be heard on any issues or objections related to the rescheduling of marijuana and marijuana products is scheduled to be held in Arlington, Virginia, starting on June 29, 2026.
Workplace Impacts
The final order rescheduling marijuana and marijuana products does not, on its face, address any potential workplace impact. As a practical matter, however, impacts may be substantial, at least in states with medical marijuana programs with broad application. Many more individuals will be authorized to use marijuana for medical reasons in a manner that complies with federal law than do now. Presently, a relatively small number of individuals have prescriptions for drugs like dronabinol (Marinol or Syndros) or Epidolex, FDA-approved prescription medications approved to treat specific medical conditions. Adding state-approved medical marijuana "certifications" - until today, legally not prescriptions - means that roughly six million more marijuana users will be able to present evidence of their state medical marijuana approvals to explain positive drug tests and request workplace accommodations. (Qualifying state medical marijuana certifications or state-accepted authorization documents must include the user's name and address, be dated and signed on the day of issuance, and identify the issuing practitioner by name, address, and state license number of the practitioner authorized to do so under state law.)
It is also unclear at this time how the change will impact the U.S. Department of Transportation's (DOT) implementation of the Omnibus Transportation Employee Testing Act, which includes marijuana on the list of "prohibited drugs" for which regulated employers must test their workforce. Although the use of marijuana for other than medical purposes remains illegal, and therefore testing for this group presumably will continue, employers may need to accept the medical use of marijuana by regulated transportation workers who are not also subject to medical qualification requirements. For example, FMCSA-regulated drivers are already prohibited from using any medication, even by prescription, that may cause impairment absent approval from a certified medical examiner, and so it is unlikely that medical marijuana users will be wholesale authorized to use marijuana and also meet medical qualifications. In contrast, most individuals subject to drug and alcohol testing under Federal Aviation Administration, Federal Railway Administration, Federal Transit Administration, and the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration's mandatory marijuana testing rules are typically not subject to independent medical qualification standards. (Nervous flyers may be reassured to know there are independent medical qualification standards for pilots.)
Next Steps
Employers certainly may continue to prohibit individuals from working while impaired, and to impose workplace rules prohibiting the use and possession of marijuana and marijuana products for other than medical reasons by their workers. Prepare for questions and accommodation requests. Nevertheless, this rule change may create more questions than it answers, at least for now. In the coming days and weeks, employers should be prepared to field questions about the impact of the rule change on their current policies. Employers should also reexamine, and where necessary revise, those policies to ensure that they are administered in accordance with these changes.
* * *
See Footnotes
1/ The order applies to marijuana as defined in the Controlled Substances Act (CSA), marijuana extracts, and delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol and other compounds derived from the marijuana plant (other than the mature stalks and seeds) that falls outside the definition of hemp, to the extent that any of these are included in the FDA-approved drug product or are subject to a state-issued license to manufacture, distribute, and/or dispense marijuana or products containing marijuana for medical purposes ("state medical marijuana license").
* * *
Authors
Nancy N. Delogu
Shareholder
Washington, D.C.
* * *
Jen Znosko
Shareholder
St. Louis
* * *
Original text here: https://www.littler.com/news-analysis/asap/acting-attorney-general-issues-new-dea-order-reclassifying-some-marijuana
[Category: BizLaw/Legal]
Fisher Phillips Issues Insight: House Republicans Unveil National Data Privacy Bill - Here's What Employers and Businesses Need to Know
ATLANTA, Georgia, April 24 -- Fisher Phillips, a law firm, issued the following insight on April 23, 2026:
* * *
House Republicans Unveil National Data Privacy Bill: Here's What Employers and Businesses Need to Know
House Republicans just introduced sweeping federal data privacy legislation yesterday that could reshape how businesses collect, store, and use personal information, aiming to finally replace a growing patchwork of state laws with a single national standard. But the bill, known as the SECURE Data Act, faces significant hurdles before becoming law, so employers and businesses should
... Show Full Article
ATLANTA, Georgia, April 24 -- Fisher Phillips, a law firm, issued the following insight on April 23, 2026:
* * *
House Republicans Unveil National Data Privacy Bill: Here's What Employers and Businesses Need to Know
House Republicans just introduced sweeping federal data privacy legislation yesterday that could reshape how businesses collect, store, and use personal information, aiming to finally replace a growing patchwork of state laws with a single national standard. But the bill, known as the SECURE Data Act, faces significant hurdles before becoming law, so employers and businesses shouldapproach it cautiously. This Insight will recap what you need to know about the bill and provide a few best practices all businesses can take when it comes to data privacy.
What Is the SECURE Data Act?
The Securing and Establishing Consumer Uniform Rights and Enforcement over Data Act, introduced by Rep. John Joyce (R-Pa.) on April 22 and backed by House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Brett Guthrie (R-Ky.), would create the first comprehensive federal consumer privacy framework in US history. The bill is the product of a Data Privacy Working Group that gathered input from more than 170 organizations and received over 250 written responses from stakeholders across industry, civil society, and government.
What Would It Require of Businesses?
The legislation builds on the framework already adopted by the majority of states that have enacted consumer privacy laws. It would impose several significant obligations on companies that process personal data above certain thresholds. Here are the key provisions employers and businesses need to understand.
Data Minimization
Companies would be required to limit their collection of personal data to what is "adequate, relevant, and reasonably necessary" for the purposes disclosed to consumers. Many state laws already include similar language, but a federal standard would make it universally applicable to businesses operating across state lines.
Consumer Rights
The bill would give consumers the right to access, correct, delete, and obtain a portable copy of their personal data. Consumers could also opt out of targeted advertising, the sale of their personal data, and certain automated profiling decisions. Sensitive data (including health information, financial data, precise geolocation, and more) could only be processed with a consumer's affirmative opt-in consent.
Teen Data Gets Special Treatment
One of the bill's more significant departures from the typical state framework: personal data about anyone under age 16 would be classified as sensitive data, requiring verified parental consent to process. This expands the age-13 threshold contained in the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) by three years and would have significant implications for any consumer-facing business that collects data from teenagers.
Data Broker Obligations
Data brokers would face new registration requirements with the Federal Trade Commission, which would maintain a public-facing registry. Brokers would also be subject to data minimization, disclosure, and security requirements under the bill.
Foreign Adversary Disclosures
Companies would be required to disclose when personal data is processed in or sold to China, Russia, or other designated foreign adversaries, a notable national-security addition not commonly seen in state privacy laws.
Two Big Wins for Businesses: Preemption and No Private Right of Action
The bill includes two provisions that businesses and employers have long sought in any federal privacy framework.
Key facts:
* First, the SECURE Data Act would strongly preempt state laws. Any state law or regulation that "relates to" the bill's provisions would be superseded by the federal standard. For multistate employers currently navigating a complex web of state privacy requirements - California, Colorado, Virginia, Texas, and nearly two dozen others - a single federal framework would represent a significant compliance simplification.
* Second, the bill does not include a private right of action. Enforcement would rest with the FTC and state attorneys general. This is a meaningful distinction from California's privacy regime, which has exposed companies to costly consumer lawsuits, and it aligns with how the majority of state privacy laws are structured.
The Road Ahead Is Daunting
Despite the bill's ambitions, passing it will not be easy. Republicans hold slim majorities in both chambers, and the Senate requires 60 votes to advance most legislation, meaning Democratic support will be essential. So far, no Democrats have signed on as key sticking points emerge:
* Several states, California chief among them, have resisted federal preemption of their stronger local standards. (And it's also worth noting that even some Republicans have expressed hesitation about preemption given their preference for strong state's rights, so universal GOP support for a measure that preempts state privacy laws is not guaranteed - which could make passage even more challenging given the razor-thin margins in both houses.)
* Democrats have historically pushed for a federal privacy law that sets a floor rather than a ceiling, allowing states to go further as technology evolves.
* Democrats have also consistently backed a private right of action, which the Republican bill deliberately omits.
* And while some Democrats have proven willing to support versions of this type of bill in the past, the political will to compromise may not be there if they believe they have a chance to take back Congress in November's midterm elections.
But it appears the GOP House strategy here is to have Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Guthrie and Financial Services Committee Chair Hill endorse the bill to grow support on the Republican side first, including those who were on the working group that Rep. Guthrie previously formed. They will then attempt to get as many Democrats on board as they can after they know they have the votes. Democrats might try to assert leverage and extract concessions from GOP leaders before agreeing to any sort of support.
The bill will next head to a subcommittee hearing, followed by markup sessions at both the subcommittee and full committee level. That process alone will take months, and negotiations between the parties are just beginning.
What Should Businesses Do Now?
Given the bill's uncertain path forward, sweeping compliance overhauls would be premature. But employers and businesses should still pay close attention, as the SECURE Data Act represents the most serious federal privacy push in years.
In the meantime, good data hygiene remains the right call regardless of what happens legislatively. Conducting an inventory of the personal data you collect, reviewing your data minimization practices, and ensuring you have appropriate consent mechanisms in place for sensitive data will position your organization well whether this bill advances or a future iteration ultimately crosses the finish line.
Conclusion
We will continue to monitor the SECURE Data Act as it moves through Congress and will provide more specific compliance guidance if and when it gains meaningful traction, so make sure that you are subscribed to Fisher Phillips' Insight System to get the most up-to-date information directly to your inbox. For further information, contact your Fisher Phillips attorney, the authors of this Insight, or any attorney on the firm's Privacy and Cyber Practice Group or Consumer Privacy Team.
* * *
Related People
Risa B. Boerner, CIPP/US, CIPM
Partner
610.230.2132
rboerner@fisherphillips.com
* * *
Benjamin M. Ebbink
Partner
916.210.0400
bebbink@fisherphillips.com
* * *
Usama Kahf, CIPP/US
Partner
949.798.2118
ukahf@fisherphillips.com
* * *
Braden Lawes
Senior Government Affairs Analyst
202.916.7176
blawes@fisherphillips.com
* * *
Original text here: https://www.fisherphillips.com/en/insights/insights/house-republicans-unveil-national-data-privacy-bill
[Category: BizLaw/Legal]
Blair Dawson and Dominic Paluzzi Selected to Cybersecurity Docket's Incident Response Elite for 2026
CLEVELAND, Ohio, April 24 -- McDonald Hopkins, a law firm, issued the following news:
* * *
Blair Dawson and Dominic Paluzzi selected to Cybersecurity Docket's Incident Response Elite for 2026
Blair Dawson, MS CyS, FIP, CIPP/US, CIPP/E, CIPM Dominic Paluzzi
McDonald Hopkins is proud to congratulate data privacy and cybersecurity attorneys Blair Dawson and Dominic Paluzzi on their selection to Cybersecurity Docket's Incident Elite for 2026.
The list of lawyers in the Incident Response Elite for 2026 represent many of the top law firms in the U.S. and Europe, and are often the "first call" for
... Show Full Article
CLEVELAND, Ohio, April 24 -- McDonald Hopkins, a law firm, issued the following news:
* * *
Blair Dawson and Dominic Paluzzi selected to Cybersecurity Docket's Incident Response Elite for 2026
Blair Dawson, MS CyS, FIP, CIPP/US, CIPP/E, CIPM Dominic Paluzzi
McDonald Hopkins is proud to congratulate data privacy and cybersecurity attorneys Blair Dawson and Dominic Paluzzi on their selection to Cybersecurity Docket's Incident Elite for 2026.
The list of lawyers in the Incident Response Elite for 2026 represent many of the top law firms in the U.S. and Europe, and are often the "first call" forcompanies that suddenly find themselves the victims of a security incident or ransomware attack. Cybersecurity Docket calls the Incident Response Elite "our list of the best data breach response lawyers in the business. Based on nominations, input from numerous senior lawyers and other professionals in the field, and considerable research, we tried to answer a simple question: "Who would you hire if your company suddenly found itself the victim of a data breach?"
Blair brings extensive experience in data privacy consulting and responding to data security incidents to McDonald Hopkins' Data Privacy and Cybersecurity Practice Group. She also has more than 20 years of insurance coverage consulting and claims knowledge, including serving as General Counsel and Senior Vice President of Insurance Management for one of the largest international insurance brokers in the world.
Blair's practice includes extensive experience responding to data security incidents while ensuring her clients remain compliant with state, federal and international requirements, as well as managing operational and reputational impact.
Dominic is the Co-Chair of McDonald Hopkins' Data Privacy and Cybersecurity Practice Group. He advises organizations on data privacy and cybersecurity risks on both a national and international basis, including pre-breach services, incident response strategies and management, and defense of regulatory enforcement actions and single-plaintiff and class action litigation.
He and the data privacy team have counseled clients through over 21,500 data breaches and privacy incidents, where he works closely with local, state and federal law enforcement, forensic investigators and third-party cybersecurity vendors to offer his clients efficient and effective breach response services in compliance with the numerous state, federal, international and industry-specific legal obligations.
This is Dom's seventh time on the list.
To learn more about Incident Response Elite, click here (https://cybersecuritydocket.com/cybersecurity-docket-announces-incident-response-elite-for-2026/).
* * *
Blair Dawson, MS CyS, FIP, CIPP/US, CIPP/E, CIPM
Member
bdawson@mcdonaldhopkins.com
* * *
Dominic Paluzzi
Member
dpaluzzi@mcdonaldhopkins.com
* * *
Original text here: https://www.mcdonaldhopkins.com/insights/news/dominic-paluzzi-and-blair-dawson-selected-to-incident-response-elite-for-2026
[Category: BizLaw/Legal]
