Featured Stories
Sean Tonolli to Speak at Ethicsverse Day 2026
NEW YORK, July 23 [Category: BizLaw/Legal] -- Cahill Gordon and Reindel, a law firm, posted the following news:
* * *
Sean Tonolli to Speak at Ethicsverse Day 2026
*
Cahill partner Sean Tonolli will speak on the keynote panel "DOJ Insider Perspectives on the Current Regulatory Landscape" at Ethico's Ethicsverse Day 2026.
Sean will join fellow panelists Hui Chen (CDE Advisors) and Matthew Axelrod (Gibson Dunn) for a discussion on the enforcement landscape, including compliance program effectiveness, voluntary disclosure and cooperation, data and metrics, and common gaps between compliance
... Show Full Article
NEW YORK, July 23 [Category: BizLaw/Legal] -- Cahill Gordon and Reindel, a law firm, posted the following news:
* * *
Sean Tonolli to Speak at Ethicsverse Day 2026
*
Cahill partner Sean Tonolli will speak on the keynote panel "DOJ Insider Perspectives on the Current Regulatory Landscape" at Ethico's Ethicsverse Day 2026.
Sean will join fellow panelists Hui Chen (CDE Advisors) and Matthew Axelrod (Gibson Dunn) for a discussion on the enforcement landscape, including compliance program effectiveness, voluntary disclosure and cooperation, data and metrics, and common gaps between compliancepractices and prosecutorial expectations.
Ethicsverse Day 2026 is a virtual event designed for compliance professionals, ethics officers, and industry leaders to explore the latest trends in ethical decision-making, regulatory updates, and AI integration in compliance programs.
To learn more about the event and register, click here.
***
Original text here: https://www.cahill.com/news/events/2026-07-23-sean-tonolli-to-speak-at-ethicsverse-day-2026
Joel Kurtzberg and Landis Best Present the Supreme Court Roundup: Review of the 2025-2026 Term Webinar
NEW YORK, July 22 [Category: BizLaw/Legal] -- Cahill Gordon and Reindel, a law firm, posted the following news:
* * *
Joel Kurtzberg and Landis Best Present the Supreme Court Roundup: Review of the 2025-2026 Term Webinar
*
Cahill partners and co-chairs of the First Amendment & Media Litigation practice, Joel Kurtzberg and Landis Best will present the webinar "Supreme Court Roundup: Review of the 2025-2026 Term," examining the Supreme Court's 2025-2026 Term. The program will examine key decisions and trends, including the rejection of President Trump's sweeping global tariffs, the bounds of
... Show Full Article
NEW YORK, July 22 [Category: BizLaw/Legal] -- Cahill Gordon and Reindel, a law firm, posted the following news:
* * *
Joel Kurtzberg and Landis Best Present the Supreme Court Roundup: Review of the 2025-2026 Term Webinar
*
Cahill partners and co-chairs of the First Amendment & Media Litigation practice, Joel Kurtzberg and Landis Best will present the webinar "Supreme Court Roundup: Review of the 2025-2026 Term," examining the Supreme Court's 2025-2026 Term. The program will examine key decisions and trends, including the rejection of President Trump's sweeping global tariffs, the bounds ofthe President's authority to unilaterally remove heads of independent agencies such as the Federal Reserve, the return of the challenge to the administration's birthright citizenship executive order, and many other decisions on matters impacting society at large, such as voting rights, conversion therapy, and transgender athletic participation.
This program has been accredited with New York CLE credit in Professional Practice.
To learn more and register for this event, please click here.
***
Original text here: https://www.cahill.com/news/events/2026-07-22-joel-kurtzberg-and-landis-best-present-the-supreme-court-roundup-review-of-the-2025-2026-term-webinar
Joshua Lichtenstein Comments on Department of Labor's ESG Proposed Rule in Ignites
BOSTON, Massachusetts, July 18 -- Ropes and Gray, a law firm, issued the following news:
* * *
Joshua Lichtenstein Comments on Department of Labor's ESG Proposed Rule in Ignites
ERISA and benefits partner Joshua Lichtenstein spoke to Ignites about the Department of Labor's proposal that would outline how plan fiduciaries may consider ESG factors when selecting investments.
Joshua discussed how the "tiebreaker" test, which allows fiduciaries to use nonfinancial factors when selecting between two indistinguishable investment options, is seldom used.
Although the tiebreaker has existed in guidance
... Show Full Article
BOSTON, Massachusetts, July 18 -- Ropes and Gray, a law firm, issued the following news:
* * *
Joshua Lichtenstein Comments on Department of Labor's ESG Proposed Rule in Ignites
ERISA and benefits partner Joshua Lichtenstein spoke to Ignites about the Department of Labor's proposal that would outline how plan fiduciaries may consider ESG factors when selecting investments.
Joshua discussed how the "tiebreaker" test, which allows fiduciaries to use nonfinancial factors when selecting between two indistinguishable investment options, is seldom used.
Although the tiebreaker has existed in guidancefor "a long time," Joshua said, using the tiebreaker test is "not a position people generally want to be in."
Joshua also commented on whether the proposal would include restrictions on proxy voting for nonfinancial reasons, and how it could compare with the first Trump administration's ESG rule and the current rule finalized during the Biden administration.
"The Trump administration rule sort of built from this presumption that most proxy voting probably wasn't actually in the best interest of plan participants and built out a way for plan sponsors to adopt safe harbor approaches to determine when or when not to vote proxies, which would result in less proxy voting," Joshua said. "The Biden administration took that part of the proxy rule away but left all the other proxy language intact from the Trump rule."
The proposed regulation is currently under review at the White House's Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.ropesgray.com/en/news-and-events/news/2026/07/joshua-lichtenstein-comments-on-department-of-labors-esg-proposed-rule-in-ignites
[Category: BizLaw/Legal]
Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer Successfully Guides Client Through Class Action Which Failed to Meet Certification Criteria
NEW YORK, July 18 -- Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer LLP, a law firm, issued the following news:
* * *
Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer successfully guides client through class action which failed to meet certification criteria
Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer has successfully represented Roland Europe Group Limited and Roland Corporation (Roland) in the dismissal of an application for a Collective Proceedings Order (CPO) and an award for their costs on the indemnity basis, the fourth time the firm has helped clients avoid the certification of a CPO application.
Elisabetta Sciallis, acting as Proposed
... Show Full Article
NEW YORK, July 18 -- Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer LLP, a law firm, issued the following news:
* * *
Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer successfully guides client through class action which failed to meet certification criteria
Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer has successfully represented Roland Europe Group Limited and Roland Corporation (Roland) in the dismissal of an application for a Collective Proceedings Order (CPO) and an award for their costs on the indemnity basis, the fourth time the firm has helped clients avoid the certification of a CPO application.
Elisabetta Sciallis, acting as ProposedClass Representative (PCR), brought an application for a CPO against Roland, a leading manufacturer and distributor of electronic musical instruments, in the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT).
The application set out follow-on and standalone claims alleging damage to class members caused by resale price maintenance. The PCR also brought separate CPO applications against other musical instrument manufacturers (Fender, Korg, Yamaha and Casio) on a similar basis.
The PCR did not have a litigation funding agreement in place when the CPO applications were brought and did not subsequently secure one. The Tribunal agreed with HSF Kramer's arguments for Roland, as well as those of the other manufacturers, that in the absence of adequate funding arrangements the CPO applications should not be permitted to proceed. The PCR subsequently sought permission to withdraw the CPO applications and they were dismissed.
The CAT assessed the vast majority of Roland's costs of the proceedings on the indemnity basis. In particular, the CAT agreed with Roland's position that the PCR had acted unreasonably in failing to confirm that its negotiations with a potential funder (which were referred to in the CPO applications) had ceased in 2023. If the PCR had confirmed this promptly, the PCR's funding issues could have been brought to the CAT's attention much sooner than 2026, thereby reducing costs.
This is the fourth occasion since 2023 where HSF Kramer has successfully assisted clients in avoiding the certification of a CPO application, acting for Meta (in Gormsen) (certification initially refused but subsequently granted following amendment), Severn Trent (in Roberts) and Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group (in Evans) in the other three cases.
The HSF Kramer team comprised partners Kim Dietzel, Gregg Rowan and Joe Williams, senior associate Ben Phillips and associate Phoebe Clifford.
Kim Dietzel comments: "We are proud to have supported Roland in these proceedings. The success here, following successes in other cases where certification has been avoided, underlines both our unparalleled experience of the CPO regime and our track record in securing crucial results for clients."
Further information on the CPO regime can be found in our certification tracker of UK competition class actions. This tracks the CPO applications filed at the CAT, including the certification status of those applications and certain key details about the nature of the claims.
* * *
URL: Roland Europe Group Limited
URL: Roland Corporation
* * *
Original text here: https://www.hsfkramer.com/news/2026-07/hsf-kramer-successfully-guides-client-through-class-action-which-failed-to-meet-certification-criteria
[Category: BizLaw/Legal]
Haynes & Boone: Read in The American Lawyer - Old and New Ways of Operating Prove Obstacles to Law Firms Addressing Mental Health Challenges
DALLAS, Texas, July 18 [Category: BizLaw/Legal] -- Haynes and Boone, a law firm, posted the following news:
* * *
Read in The American Lawyer: Old and New Ways of Operating Prove Obstacles to Law Firms Addressing Mental Health Challenges
As law firms continue to invest in attorney well-being, longstanding workplace pressures combined with emerging technologies like AI are creating new mental health challenges across the legal profession. Haynes Boone Director of Wellness Abby Read spoke with The American Lawyer about the importance of prioritizing attorney well-being and why firms are increasingly
... Show Full Article
DALLAS, Texas, July 18 [Category: BizLaw/Legal] -- Haynes and Boone, a law firm, posted the following news:
* * *
Read in The American Lawyer: Old and New Ways of Operating Prove Obstacles to Law Firms Addressing Mental Health Challenges
As law firms continue to invest in attorney well-being, longstanding workplace pressures combined with emerging technologies like AI are creating new mental health challenges across the legal profession. Haynes Boone Director of Wellness Abby Read spoke with The American Lawyer about the importance of prioritizing attorney well-being and why firms are increasinglyrecognizing it as a business imperative.
Read an excerpt below.
One firm that is placing a focus on mental health is Haynes Boone, where Abby Read has led its wellness program since 2022.
She said few firms employed wellness specialists when she began working in her position in 2022, but more firms have invested in their attorneys' mental health in the past four years.
"To me, I think that signals there's a greater understanding from leaders of these big firms in the legal industry who realize that there's a significant business case to invest in mental health and well-being of attorneys and how to positively impact performance," Read said.
Read the full article from The American Lawyer here (https://www.law.com/americanlawyer/2026/07/16/old-and-new-ways-of-operating-prove-obstacles-to-law-firms-addressing-mental-health-challenges-/).
***
Original text here: https://www.haynesboone.com/news/articles/read-in-the-american-lawyer
Haynes & Boone: Ramish and Prince for Law360 - DOD's Cyber Certification Pause May Heighten FCA Risks
DALLAS, Texas, July 18 [Category: BizLaw/Legal] -- Haynes and Boone, a law firm, posted the following news:
* * *
Ramish and Prince for Law360: DOD's Cyber Certification Pause May Heighten FCA Risks
By Daniel Ramish and Zachary Prince
In an article for Law360, Haynes Boone Partners Dan Ramish and Zach Prince examine the U.S. Department of Defense's decision to suspend Phase 2 of the Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) program and what it means for defense contractors.
While the pause eliminates near-term third-party assessment requirements, Ramish and Prince explain that contractors
... Show Full Article
DALLAS, Texas, July 18 [Category: BizLaw/Legal] -- Haynes and Boone, a law firm, posted the following news:
* * *
Ramish and Prince for Law360: DOD's Cyber Certification Pause May Heighten FCA Risks
By Daniel Ramish and Zachary Prince
In an article for Law360, Haynes Boone Partners Dan Ramish and Zach Prince examine the U.S. Department of Defense's decision to suspend Phase 2 of the Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) program and what it means for defense contractors.
While the pause eliminates near-term third-party assessment requirements, Ramish and Prince explain that contractorsmust still comply with existing cybersecurity obligations under NIST SP 800-171 and continue to certify their compliance through self-assessments. They note that the shift away from third-party verification may actually increase False Claims Act (FCA) risk, as contractors' own representations regarding cybersecurity compliance will face greater scrutiny.
Read the full article below and on the Law360 website here (https://www.law360.com/articles/2502226).
DOD's Cyber Certification Pause May Heighten FCA Risks
On July 13, the U.S. Department of Defense released a memorandum and a request for information suspending Phase 2 of the Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification program that would have required certified third-party assessments.[1] The memoranda explain both why the agency is taking this action and how it intends to implement the suspension.
As DOD Chief Information Officer Kirsten Davies wrote in the memorandum, "the current CMMC program is structurally incompatible with [the Department's] need to rapidly expand the [Defense Industrial Base)]."[2] The memorandum stated that the CMMC program as currently constituted "imposes significant and often prohibitive burdens on the [DIB], particularly the small and non-traditional businesses that are the engine of American innovation."
After years of iterative changes and a previous overhaul of the program, the DOD is once again reconsidering its approach to assuring adequate protection of controlled unclassified information, or CUI, on contractor information systems. A newly established CMMC reform task force is charged with recommending a framework that, in the memorandum's words, "replaces prohibitive, third-party compliance models with scalable, realistic security measures" -suggesting third-party certification may not return in its current form. CMMC 3.0 may be on the horizon.
Contractors must continue to comply with existing cybersecurity requirements during the suspension period. The CMMC Level 2 self-assessment clause will continue to be included in defense contracts involving CUI, requiring implementation of cybersecurity requirements known as NIST SP 800-171, notwithstanding the pause in third-party assessments.
Under CMMC Level 2 (Self), only a limited set of controls remains eligible for plans of action and milestones, or POA&Ms, in lieu of immediate compliance, and even those controls are subject to a 180-day closeout period.
In sum, contractors receive relief from third-party assessments, not from compliance itself or from the risks associated with noncompliance, including contract termination and False Claims Act liability. Indeed, FCA risk may become more pronounced during the suspension because contractors must affirm their conditional or final CMMC Level 2 (Self) status to remain eligible for covered contracts. Any overstatement in those affirmations could expose contractors to significant FCA liability.
CMMC's Verification and Full Compliance Components
The CMMC program was designed to verify that contractors are implementing the full set of NIST SP 800-171 cybersecurity controls. To accomplish that objective, CMMC incorporates two complementary features.
First, for most contractors handling CUI, it replaces the contractor self-attestation framework under Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement 252.204-7019 and 252.204-7020 with independent third-party assessments to verify implementation of the required controls.
Second, unlike the existing DFARS regime, which permits contractors to rely more broadly on POA&Ms, CMMC requires contractors to achieve full implementation of NIST SP 800-171, permitting POA&Ms only for a narrowly defined subset of controls that must be remediated within 180 days.
In short, CMMC strengthens both the verification mechanism and the expectation of full compliance established under the existing DFARS cybersecurity clauses.
The Phase 2 suspension affects only the first feature. It pauses third-party verification while leaving intact CMMC's more stringent compliance requirements, including the limited availability of POA&Ms.
Security Imperatives Versus Small Business Reality
There is an inherent tension between the need to safeguard CUI from adversaries and the need to avoid imposing undue cost and burdens on the small businesses that make up the majority of the defense industrial base.
Implementing the government-specific cybersecurity requirements of NIST SP 800-171 is challenging and expensive, typically requiring outsourced support, and presents a genuine barrier to entry into the defense market. These burdens have increased as NIST SP 800-171 has evolved. Revision 3 of the standard would be mandated under the proposed Federal Acquisition Regulation CUI rule that is part of a broader overhaul of the FAR.[3]
Meanwhile, the DIB, and particularly small business participation within it, has contracted significantly over the past 15 years.
The CMMC program did not resolve the inherent conflict between the need for heightened cybersecurity and the resource-intensive burden on small businesses. To the contrary, the CMMC rollout may have forced the conflict to come to a head.
As the CMMC program rollout began, there were signs that the DOD may have lacked confidence that the DIB would be able or willing to achieve full compliance. For example, while the CMMC rule at Title 32 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 170, contemplated that the CMMC clause would be included in all contracts involving CUI beginning in Phase 1, the corresponding DFARS implementation gave program offices and requiring activities discretion during the first three years of the rollout to determine whether a solicitation or contract would require a specific CMMC level.
The DOD components have also been urging prime contractors to obtain greater information and assurances from their supply chains regarding subcontractors' ability to comply with the CMMC requirements, compounding inconsistent messaging about the scope and urgency of these obligations. Anecdotal feedback from small businesses and nontraditional defense suppliers indicates that many remain far from full compliance.
At the same time, the DOD is attempting to reimagine government procurement to make government buying faster, with less red tape and more focus on achieving the warfighting mission. Expensive cybersecurity implementation is arguably in tension with this objective as well, and the DOD appears to be wavering on whether CMMC is workable as part of that vision.
The CMMC Phase 2 Pause
CMMC Phase 2, which had been scheduled to begin on Nov. 10, would have marked the point at which designated procurements could require as a condition of contract award CMMC Level 2 assessments completed by a certified third-party assessor organization or, where applicable, CMMC Level 3 assessment completed by the Defense Industrial Base Cybersecurity Assessment Center. In anticipation of that milestone, some program offices had already begun incorporating certain Phase 2 requirements into solicitations and contracts.
According to the DOD guidance, the suspension of CMMC Phase 2 affects solicitations, existing contracts and new awards as follows:
* Current solicitations: Program managers and requiring activities are directed to amend active solicitations to remove CMMC Level 2 and CMMC Level 3 requirements "as soon as practicable." These will presumably be replaced with CMMC Level 2 (Self).
* Existing contracts: Contracting Officers are directed to remove CMMC Level 2 and CMMC Level 3 requirements from existing contracts "via modification prior to the exercise of the next option period or during the next scheduled administrative modification." Again, CMMC Level 2 (Self) is the likely substitute in these contracts as well.
* New solicitations and contracts: The DOD components may designate only CMMC Level 1 or CMMC Level 2 self assessments. Separately, the DOD will continue to enforce baseline compliance through select government-led assessments -presumably Defense Industrial Base Cybersecurity Assessment Center medium or high assessments, already implemented under existing DFARS clauses. Level 2 (Self) is not a ceiling, however; the undersecretary's memorandum states that the Program Managers and requiring activities may require additional cybersecurity protections as commensurate with law and regulation."[4]
* Waivers: No CMMC waivers will be granted during the review period. Program managers must continue to identify information security requirements for planned contract efforts, but the case-by-case flexibility of the waiver process is suspended along with the phased rollout.
Takeaways for Defense Contractors
Defense contractors may not be subject to third-party verification requirements, at least in the near term, but achieving full compliance with NIST SP 800-171 Rev. 2 controls remains an urgent priority. Contractors should also consider taking steps toward NIST SP 800-171 Rev. 3 in anticipation of its potential adoption.
The DOD's commitment to full compliance has not wavered, and contractors' underlying cybersecurity obligations under DFARS 252.204-7012 and NIST SP 800-171 Rev. 2 remain unchanged. Notwithstanding the pause on third-party assessments, CMMC Level 2 still limits which controls can be deferred through POA&Ms, and requires that any such POA&Ms be closed out within 180 days. Addressing any gaps in implementation of NIST SP 800-171 Rev. 2 controls therefore remains essential to preserving eligibility for defense contracts and subcontracts involving CUI.
A shift back toward self-assessment places even greater weight on the accuracy of contractors' own compliance representations, which is precisely where FCA exposure arises. The U.S. Department of Justice has given no indication that it will relax enforcement of cybersecurity representations and requirements under its Civil Cyber-Fraud Initiative, as demonstrated by a recent series of FCA settlements involving cybersecurity representations.
Contractors should ensure that they have conducted appropriate self-assessments, that their scores are justified and well documented, and that they maintain sufficient evidence of their current system state before affirming.
One implementation detail left unaddressed in the memorandum is how subcontracts and supplier agreements should be modified to remove third-party and Defense Industrial Base Cybersecurity Assessment Center assessment requirements. Contractors should watch for further DOD guidance on this point.
What to Watch
Whether the DOD ultimately returns to third-party certification, adopts a different verification model or moves toward broader reliance on self-attestation remains to be seen. The 60-day review should provide greater clarity regarding the future of the DOD's cybersecurity and CMMC verification requirements.
The DOD is soliciting stakeholder input through its public request for information that seeks views on which current controls deliver meaningful risk reduction, and how commercial capabilities and self-attestation might anchor a reformed framework. These questions telegraph the likely direction of reform. Contractors with views on what should replace the current model should submit comments in response to the request by Aug. 14.
In the meantime, defense contractors performing contracts involving CUI should ensure that they have implemented all required cybersecurity controls under NIST SP 800-171 Rev. 2 or, where permitted, have documented any remaining deficiencies in POA&Ms and are working to remediate them within the required time frame.
Contractors should also ensure that their Supplier Performance Risk System self-assessment scores accurately reflect their current implementation status.
* * *
Footnotes:
[1] Removing Barriers to DIB Expansion: Immediate Suspension and Strategic Review of Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification Requirements (July 13, 2026), https://dowcio.war.gov/Portals/0/Documents/Library/CMMC-ReformMemo.pdf; Implementing Department of War Chief Information Officer's Suspension of the Advancement to Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification Phase 2 Requirements (July 13, 2026), https://dowcio.war.gov/Portals/0/Documents/Library/ImplementingSuspensionCMMC-PhaseII.pdf ; Dep't of War, Request for Information: Reforming CMMC and Reducing Compliance Burden for the Defense Industrial Base (July 13, 2026), https://sam.gov/opp/89ef9bfb0834473791e991c712698d94/view.
[2] Removing Barriers to DIB Expansion: Immediate Suspension and Strategic Review of Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification Requirements (July 13, 2026), https://dowcio.war.gov/Portals/0/Documents/Library/CMMC-ReformMemo.pdf.
[3] See Federal Acquisition Regulation: Revolutionary Federal Acquisition Regulation Overhaul Parts 1, 2, 4, 33, 39, 40, and 53, 91 Fed. Reg. 37,550 (proposed June 23, 2026).
[4] Implementing Department of War Chief Information Officer's Suspension of the Advancement to Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification Phase 2 Requirements (July 13, 2026), https://dowcio.war.gov/Portals/0/Documents/Library/ImplementingSuspensionCMMC-PhaseII.pdf.
***
Original text here: https://www.haynesboone.com/news/publications/ramish-and-prince-for-law360-dods-cyber-certification-pause-may-heighten-fca-risks
15 Baker Donelson Attorneys Named to 2026 Legal 500 City Elite
MEMPHIS, Tennessee, July 18 -- Baker Donelson, a law firm, issued the following news release:
* * *
15 Baker Donelson Attorneys Named to 2026 Legal 500 City Elite
Fifteen attorneys from Baker Donelson have been named to the 2026 Legal 500 City Elite Nashville and Baltimore listings.
The selected attorneys and the jurisdiction and practice area in which they were recognized are:
* Kenneth B. Abel, Baltimore - Corporate & M&A
* Thomas H. Barnard, Baltimore - White-collar Crime
* Brigid M. Carpenter, Nashville - Commercial Disputes
* Christy Tosh Crider, Nashville - Commercial Disputes
*
... Show Full Article
MEMPHIS, Tennessee, July 18 -- Baker Donelson, a law firm, issued the following news release:
* * *
15 Baker Donelson Attorneys Named to 2026 Legal 500 City Elite
Fifteen attorneys from Baker Donelson have been named to the 2026 Legal 500 City Elite Nashville and Baltimore listings.
The selected attorneys and the jurisdiction and practice area in which they were recognized are:
* Kenneth B. Abel, Baltimore - Corporate & M&A
* Thomas H. Barnard, Baltimore - White-collar Crime
* Brigid M. Carpenter, Nashville - Commercial Disputes
* Christy Tosh Crider, Nashville - Commercial Disputes
*Christopher C. Dahl, Baltimore - Commercial Disputes
* Bruce C. Doeg, Nashville - Corporate & M&A
* James E. Edwards Jr., Baltimore - Commercial Disputes
* Tonya Mitchem Grindon, Nashville - Corporate & M&A
* Matthew G. Huddle, Baltimore - Corporate & M&A
* Ty Kelly, Baltimore - Commercial Disputes; White-collar Crime
* Stephen E. Luttrell, Baltimore - Corporate M&A
* J. Allen Roberts, Nashville - Corporate & M&A
* Jordan Savitz, Baltimore - Corporate & M&A
* Alison Schurick, Baltimore - White-collar Crime
* Hunter Threet, Nashville - Corporate & M&A
Legal 500 "US Elite" aims to highlight key lawyers operating at regional players across business centers in the United States. Notably, "US Elite" seeks to recognize key U.S. lawyers outside global firms, opting to focus on those at regional powerhouses that may not receive comparable recognition in other rankings. "US Elite" emphasizes lawyers who are handling work at the top of the legal market in their respective cities, states, or regions. The ranking is distinct from the main Legal 500 U.S. guide, with lawyers ranked by tier as individuals rather than as teams.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.bakerdonelson.com/15-baker-donelson-attorneys-named-to-2026-legal-500-city-elite-1
[Category: BizLaw/Legal]
