Below you will find the CLE schedule for the 2017 Corporate Counsel College. Under each CLE program description, CLE materials are listed. Please click each hyperlink to access that specific CLE material. If you have any issues accessing these materials, please contact Melisa Maisel Vanis, Professional Development Manager, at mmaisel@iadclaw.org or Ashley Fitzgerald, Communications Manager, at afitzgerald@iadclaw.org.
To see speaker bios, please click here.
Thursday, April 27, 2017
7:30 - 8:15 a.m.
Continental Breakfast
8:15 - 8:30 a.m.
Opening Remarks
Speakers:
Molly H. Craig, Corporate Counsel College Dean, Hood Law Firm, LLC, Charleston, SC USA
John T. Lay, Jr., IADC President, Gallivan, White & Boyd, P.A., Columbia, SC USA
8:30 - 10:00 a.m.
The Battles of Two Innocent Companies for Vindication
In 2014, Howard Root, the CEO of Vascular Solutions, Inc., and his company were charged by the Justice Department in an 18 count indictment stemming from a former disgruntled employee’s whistleblower claim. The whistleblower’s claim had no merit, nor did the Justice Department’s indictment. But despite that fact, Howard Root was forced to navigate a five-year ordeal which cost Vascular Solutions, Inc. $25 million in legal fees and forced Vascular Solutions to employ 14 law firms and more than 100 lawyers while still running his public medical device company. When the prosecutors did not receive the evidence they desired, they engaged in witness intimidation, disclosure of secret grand jury testimony, and subpoenaed the company’s customers, all in an attempt to bring the company to its knees. Howard Root will describe how he refused to bow down to the government, fought for his employees and his company, and succeeded in obtaining a not guilty verdict on all charges at the end of a five-week trial in San Antonio, Texas. What is even more telling is that Vascular Solutions did not put on a single witness at trial, as its entire case was proved through the government’s own witnesses.
Similarly, Connie Lewis Lensing, Senior Vice President of Litigation and Employment for FedEx, will discuss the abusive litigation by the Justice Department against FedEx in a 2016 case in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. In 2012, Justice Department officials presented to FedEx claims that FedEx had knowingly shipped illegal internet prescriptions. The Justice Department claimed that there were internal corporate emails which indicated that FedEx knew the shipments were being made by illegal companies. These claims were baseless, yet, the government sought FedEx to admit to liability and accept a multi-million dollar penalty. In 2014, the government obtained a grand jury indictment against FedEx based on little or no evidence. FedEx, knowing it committed no crime, refused to settle and opted to take the case to trial. The trial began in 2016 after FedEx had incurred millions of dollars in legal fees in defending itself from these charges. After starting the trial against FedEx, the Justice Department dropped the case just a few days into the trial, acknowledging it had no evidence against FedEx to even continue the case. After the case was dropped, the Justice Department began its own internal investigation as to why it even prosecuted FedEx in this baseless case in the first place.
Moderator:
Michael A. Brown, Miles & Stockbridge P.C., Baltimore, MD USA
Panelists:
Connie Lewis Lensing, FedEx Express, Memphis, TN USA
Howard Root, Vascular Solutions, Inc., Minneapolis, MN USA
Materials:
10:00 - 10:15 a.m.
Refreshment Break
10:15 - 11:45 a.m.
Practical Advice for Responding to Employee Complaints and Government Investigations: Keeping the Mole Hill from Becoming a Mountain
Employee complaints and government investigations can create public relations nightmares and mushroom into significant criminal and civil exposure for companies and even their executives. A panel of experienced inside and outside counsel will discuss best practices for responding to employee complaints and government investigations, conducting company investigations, avoiding criminal and civil exposure, and maintaining employee and public relations in the process. In addition, the panel will give practical advice on how to preserve and when to waive privileges.
Moderator:
Spencer H. Silverglate, Clarke Silverglate, P.A., Miami, FL USA
Panelists:
Thomas C. Frongillo, Fish & Richardson, PC, Boston, MA USA
Todd Presnell, Bradley LLP, Nashville, TN USA
Laura E. Proctor, Louisiana-Pacific Corporation, Nashville, TN USA
Howard Root, Vascular Solutions, Inc., Minneapolis, MN USA
Materials:
11:45 a.m. - 1:15 p.m.
Luncheon and Keynote Speaker
Speaker:
Mark C. Fava, Chief Counsel, The Boeing Company South Carolina, Charleston, SC USA
1:15 - 2:45 p.m.
What Now - A Look at the First Hundred Days of the Trump Administration. What Does it all Mean for Employers and What can we Expect in the Future?
Vacancies on the US Supreme Court and the federal bench and new management in the Department of Labor (DOL), the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP), and the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) suggest we may expect a return to more restrictive enforcement activity, enforcement positions, and judicial interpretations of workplace laws.
Employers would be right to wonder if accommodations are still required without the EEOC’s systemic enforcement under Title VII (particularly in regard to LGBT issues), the ADAAA (e.g., disparate impact and reasonable accommodations), and the Pregnancy Discrimination Act. If Congress passes legislation repealing the new DOL white collar overtime rule, what does it mean for employers who have already made the necessary salary adjustments to be compliant with the law’s effective date of December 1, 2016? What protections should employers implement considering the expanded DOL fiduciary rule under ERISA and the IRS? What actions, if any, should employers take where Orders have been enjoined like the Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces Order which was slated to go into effect October 25, 2016? What about the NLRB’s recent rules and decisions regarding (1) mandatory class action waivers, (2) expansion of protected concerted activity, (3) quickie elections, and (4) joint employer standard? Finally, if the Administration focuses on expanding enforcement of existing immigration laws in the workplace, (1) will use of E-Verify become mandatory for all employers, (2) will issuance of visas from and to certain countries and regions be suspended and what will be the impact of these actions on the free flow of talent for US companies that operate in major European markets other countries with strong labor interests.
Moderator:
Deborah K. St. Lawrence Thompson, Miles & Stockbridge P.C., Baltimore, MD USA
Panelists:
Suzzanne W. Decker, Miles & Stockbridge P.C., Baltimore, MD USA
Jacqueline J. Harding, Wilson, Elser, Moskowitz, Edelman & Dicker LLP, Los Angeles, CA USA
Terrence O. Reed, Federal Express Corporation, Memphis, TN USA
Zachary Ward, GlaxoSmithKline plc, Research Triangle Park, NC USA
Materials:
2:45 - 3:00 p.m.
Refreshment Break
3:00 - 4:30 p.m.
The Enemy Within
Is the greatest risk to your organization coming from within your organization? 10K, 10Qs, customer complaints, and external reporting, not to mention social media, provide the outside public with certain information, which is a regular business occurrence for most companies. However, if private litigants, government, or regulatory attorneys were to seek information through discovery, subpoenas, or civil investigative demands (“CIDs”) regarding your internal reporting (audit, risk, 3 lines of defense, vendor management) what would be their perception of your organization? Do your internal documents of policies and procedures, training manuals, and job aides, for example, intersect with your internal reporting or your corporate goals/values? This panel will discuss what the likely pressure points are and leverage issues presented by a litigation or investigation environment based on your company’s own risk reporting.
Moderator:
Edward S. Sledge, IV, Bradley LLP, Birmingham, AL USA
Panelists:
Elizabeth M. DeSilva, Ditech Financial LLC, Dallas, TX USA
Noah Hanft, President, International Institute for Conflict Prevention & Resolution, Inc., New York, NY USA
Robert R. Maddox, Bradley LLP, Birmingham, AL USA
Frank Ozment, Assistant General Counsel/Senior Vice President, Regions Bank, Birmingham, AL USA
Materials:
4:30 - 4:40 p.m.
Concluding Comments for Day One
Speaker:
Molly H. Craig, Corporate Counsel College Dean, Hood Law Firm, LLC, Charleston, SC USA
4:45 - 6:00 p.m.
Cocktail Reception
Friday, April 28, 2017
7:30 - 8:15 a.m.
Continental Breakfast
8:15 - 9:45 a.m.
In the Crosshairs
With increasing regularity, corporate defendants are finding themselves the targets of well-organized, generously-funded, and highly sophisticated marketing campaigns that influence public opinion, spread fear, and in many instances result in the initiation of class actions, MDLs, and serial litigation. Given the confluence of exposure and costs in many of these types of lawsuits, corporations are left wondering whether our current process of handling class actions, MDLs, and serial litigation serves any useful purpose for corporations. Comprised of in-house and outside counsel, this panel will critically explore the mechanisms available to address aggregating claims. We will address today’s litigation environment, how we got here, and what the future holds for companies facing exposure on these types of claims.
Moderator:
James B. Hood, Hood Law Firm, LLC, Charleston, SC USA
Panelists:
Kyle H. Dreyer, Hartline Dacus Barger Dreyer LLP, Dallas, TX USA
Rita A. McConnell, Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN USA
William S. Ohlemeyer, Boies, Schiller & Flexner LLP, New York, NY USA
Timothy A. Pratt, Boston Scientific Corporation, Marlborough, MA USA
Materials:
9:45 - 10:00 a.m.
Refreshment Break
10:00 - 11:30 a.m.
Taking Control of Your Law Department - Practical Uses of Legal Project Management
In-house legal departments require new and innovative methods to meet the demands of delivering real value for legal service to their companies. In order to meet this challenge, in-house legal departments need law firms that can help them deliver legal budget predictability and support consistent management of legal matters within their departments. Legal Project Management (LPM) allows for systematic planning and budget accountability in the handling of legal matters.
Whether you are overseeing in-house legal staff or multiple outside law firms or both, LPM methods and principals can be implemented for a specific engagement or an entire inventory of legal matters. LPM can dramatically improve efficiencies and overall management of legal matters, while improving the quality of legal services delivered to the client. LPM is not just a way to indiscriminately “cut costs.” It is a proven method of delivering better service at a better price - leading to lasting, profitable relationships for companies and their outside counsel.
The panel will discuss the wide variety of ways they have used LPM to meet the needs of their departments, how it has improved their relationships with outside counsel, and the practical-and painless-means of actually implementing LPM in your legal department.
Moderator:
David A. Rueff, Jr., Baker Donelson, Jackson, MS USA
Panelists:
Hal Clarke, Wells Fargo Legal Department, Wealth and Investment Management Legal Division, Charlotte, NC USA
Jennifer G. Cooper, Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, PC, Atlanta, GA USA
Jim Kochinski, Crawford & Company, Atlanta, GA USA
Bryon Koepke, Avis Budget Group, Parsippany, NJ USA
Christian M. Zust, Bryan Cave, St. Louis, MO USA
Materials:
11:30 - 11:40 a.m.
Closing Remarks
Speakers:
Molly H. Craig, Corporate Counsel College Dean, Hood Law Firm, LLC, Charleston, SC USA
Tripp Haston, Corporate Counsel College Dean-Elect, Bradley LLP, Birmingham, AL USA