<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Jaczko Goddard LLP</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.jaczkogoddard.com/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.jaczkogoddard.com</link>
	<description>Just another WordPress weblog</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 04 Feb 2012 03:21:56 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7.1</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>CNN Doesn&#8217;t Get Far in Fight Against Closed Captioning</title>
		<link>http://www.jaczkogoddard.com/2012/02/03/cnn-doesnt-get-far-in-fight-against-closed-captioning/</link>
		<comments>http://www.jaczkogoddard.com/2012/02/03/cnn-doesnt-get-far-in-fight-against-closed-captioning/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 04 Feb 2012 03:21:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Legal News]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jaczkogoddard.com/2012/02/03/cnn-doesnt-get-far-in-fight-against-closed-captioning/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In a hearing Thursday, a federal magistrate judge seemed to agree with disability advocates that forcing CNN to provide closed captioning on its Internet videos doesn't violate the First Amendment, since closed captioning doesn't require the news organization to summarize, distill or change its content.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In a hearing Thursday, a federal magistrate judge seemed to agree with disability advocates that forcing CNN to provide closed captioning on its Internet videos doesn&#8217;t violate the First Amendment, since closed captioning doesn&#8217;t require the news organization to summarize, distill or change its content.</p>
<p>Go here to read the rest:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.law.com/jsp/law/sign_me_in.jsp?article=http://www.law.com/jsp/ca/PubArticleCA.jsp?id=1202541207697&amp;rss=newswire" title="CNN Doesn't Get Far in Fight Against Closed Captioning">CNN Doesn&#8217;t Get Far in Fight Against Closed Captioning</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.jaczkogoddard.com/2012/02/03/cnn-doesnt-get-far-in-fight-against-closed-captioning/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Attorney Sanctions Upheld in 9/11 Conspiracy Case</title>
		<link>http://www.jaczkogoddard.com/2012/02/03/attorney-sanctions-upheld-in-911-conspiracy-case/</link>
		<comments>http://www.jaczkogoddard.com/2012/02/03/attorney-sanctions-upheld-in-911-conspiracy-case/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 04 Feb 2012 03:21:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Legal News]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jaczkogoddard.com/2012/02/03/attorney-sanctions-upheld-in-911-conspiracy-case/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Sanctions against two attorneys who insist that former Vice President Dick Cheney and former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld caused the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks have been upheld by a unanimous 2nd Circuit panel that refused to disqualify itself from the case.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sanctions against two attorneys who insist that former Vice President Dick Cheney and former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld caused the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks have been upheld by a unanimous 2nd Circuit panel that refused to disqualify itself from the case.</p>
<p>See the rest here:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.law.com/jsp/law/sign_me_in.jsp?article=http://www.law.com/jsp/nylj/PubArticleNY.jsp?id=1202541246402&amp;rss=newswire" title="Attorney Sanctions Upheld in 9/11 Conspiracy Case">Attorney Sanctions Upheld in 9/11 Conspiracy Case</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.jaczkogoddard.com/2012/02/03/attorney-sanctions-upheld-in-911-conspiracy-case/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Was Penn State&#8217;s GC Counsel for University Officials?</title>
		<link>http://www.jaczkogoddard.com/2012/02/03/was-penn-states-gc-counsel-for-university-officials/</link>
		<comments>http://www.jaczkogoddard.com/2012/02/03/was-penn-states-gc-counsel-for-university-officials/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 04 Feb 2012 03:21:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Legal News]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jaczkogoddard.com/2012/02/03/was-penn-states-gc-counsel-for-university-officials/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In-house lawyers understand that they're hired to represent the entity that issues their paychecks, not the executives and staff. ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In-house lawyers understand that they&#8217;re hired to represent the entity that issues their paychecks, not the executives and staff. </p>
<p>Read more:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.law.com/jsp/law/sign_me_in.jsp?article=http://www.law.com/jsp/cc/PubArticleCC.jsp?id=1202541166368&amp;rss=newswire" title="Was Penn State's GC Counsel for University Officials?">Was Penn State&#8217;s GC Counsel for University Officials?</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.jaczkogoddard.com/2012/02/03/was-penn-states-gc-counsel-for-university-officials/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>U.K. Moves &#8216;No Win, No Fee&#8217; Litigation Reforms to 2013</title>
		<link>http://www.jaczkogoddard.com/2012/02/03/uk-moves-no-win-no-fee-litigation-reforms-to-2013/</link>
		<comments>http://www.jaczkogoddard.com/2012/02/03/uk-moves-no-win-no-fee-litigation-reforms-to-2013/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Feb 2012 07:19:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Legal News]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jaczkogoddard.com/2012/02/03/uk-moves-no-win-no-fee-litigation-reforms-to-2013/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The U.K.'s implementation of "no win, no fee" conditional fee arrangements has been pushed back, from October of this year to April 2013. The U.K]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The U.K.&#8217;s implementation of &#8220;no win, no fee&#8221; conditional fee arrangements has been pushed back, from October of this year to April 2013. The U.K</p>
<p>Read the rest here:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202541183886&amp;rss=newswire" title="U.K. Moves 'No Win, No Fee' Litigation Reforms to 2013">U.K. Moves &#8216;No Win, No Fee&#8217; Litigation Reforms to 2013</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.jaczkogoddard.com/2012/02/03/uk-moves-no-win-no-fee-litigation-reforms-to-2013/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Firm Alleges Defendants Misappropriated Trade Secrets, Privileged Info</title>
		<link>http://www.jaczkogoddard.com/2012/02/03/firm-alleges-defendants-misappropriated-trade-secrets-privileged-info/</link>
		<comments>http://www.jaczkogoddard.com/2012/02/03/firm-alleges-defendants-misappropriated-trade-secrets-privileged-info/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Feb 2012 07:18:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Legal News]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jaczkogoddard.com/2012/02/03/firm-alleges-defendants-misappropriated-trade-secrets-privileged-info/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Shrader &#038; Associates has filed a petition in Texas state court alleging a former office manager, who was indicted for allegedly taking more than $200,000 from the firm, provided "confidential, proprietary, and privileged information" from the firm's computer server to a Houston lawyer and firm.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Shrader &#038; Associates has filed a petition in Texas state court alleging a former office manager, who was indicted for allegedly taking more than $200,000 from the firm, provided &#8220;confidential, proprietary, and privileged information&#8221; from the firm&#8217;s computer server to a Houston lawyer and firm.</p>
<p>Originally posted here:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.law.com/jsp/law/sign_me_in.jsp?article=http://www.law.com/jsp/tx/PubArticleTX.jsp?id=1202541018910&amp;rss=newswire" title="Firm Alleges Defendants Misappropriated Trade Secrets, Privileged Info">Firm Alleges Defendants Misappropriated Trade Secrets, Privileged Info</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.jaczkogoddard.com/2012/02/03/firm-alleges-defendants-misappropriated-trade-secrets-privileged-info/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Am Law 100, the Early Numbers: SNR Denton Joins Comeback List as Revenue, Profits Grow</title>
		<link>http://www.jaczkogoddard.com/2012/02/03/the-am-law-100-the-early-numbers-snr-denton-joins-comeback-list-as-revenue-profits-grow/</link>
		<comments>http://www.jaczkogoddard.com/2012/02/03/the-am-law-100-the-early-numbers-snr-denton-joins-comeback-list-as-revenue-profits-grow/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Feb 2012 07:18:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Legal News]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jaczkogoddard.com/2012/02/03/the-am-law-100-the-early-numbers-snr-denton-joins-comeback-list-as-revenue-profits-grow/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In what is quickly becoming a recurring theme for Am Law 100 firms, SNR Denton's U.S. arm bounced back in 2011 after two years of financial decline. The firm's gross revenue rose 4.4 percent last year, to $474.5 million, while profits per equity partner climbed almost 7 percent, to $880,000.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In what is quickly becoming a recurring theme for Am Law 100 firms, SNR Denton&#8217;s U.S. arm bounced back in 2011 after two years of financial decline. The firm&#8217;s gross revenue rose 4.4 percent last year, to $474.5 million, while profits per equity partner climbed almost 7 percent, to $880,000.</p>
<p>Continue reading here:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.law.com/jsp/law/sign_me_in.jsp?article=http://www.law.com/jsp/tal/PubArticleTAL.jsp?id=1202541195938&amp;rss=newswire" title="The Am Law 100, the Early Numbers: SNR Denton Joins Comeback List as Revenue, Profits Grow">The Am Law 100, the Early Numbers: SNR Denton Joins Comeback List as Revenue, Profits Grow</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.jaczkogoddard.com/2012/02/03/the-am-law-100-the-early-numbers-snr-denton-joins-comeback-list-as-revenue-profits-grow/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Am Law 100, the Early Numbers: McDermott Stems the Tide as Revenues, Profits Rise</title>
		<link>http://www.jaczkogoddard.com/2012/02/03/the-am-law-100-the-early-numbers-mcdermott-stems-the-tide-as-revenues-profits-rise/</link>
		<comments>http://www.jaczkogoddard.com/2012/02/03/the-am-law-100-the-early-numbers-mcdermott-stems-the-tide-as-revenues-profits-rise/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Feb 2012 07:18:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Legal News]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jaczkogoddard.com/2012/02/03/the-am-law-100-the-early-numbers-mcdermott-stems-the-tide-as-revenues-profits-rise/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[After two straight years of financial decline, McDermott, Will &#038; Emery saw revenues and profits per equity partner bounce back in 2011. The improved performance also resulted in a special bonus to all staff members in January. ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>After two straight years of financial decline, McDermott, Will &#038; Emery saw revenues and profits per equity partner bounce back in 2011. The improved performance also resulted in a special bonus to all staff members in January. </p>
<p>View post:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.law.com/jsp/law/sign_me_in.jsp?article=http://www.law.com/jsp/tal/PubArticleTAL.jsp?id=1202541154890&amp;rss=newswire" title="The Am Law 100, the Early Numbers: McDermott Stems the Tide as Revenues, Profits Rise">The Am Law 100, the Early Numbers: McDermott Stems the Tide as Revenues, Profits Rise</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.jaczkogoddard.com/2012/02/03/the-am-law-100-the-early-numbers-mcdermott-stems-the-tide-as-revenues-profits-rise/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Wolf Block Asks Justices to Review Ex-Partner&#8217;s Lawsuit</title>
		<link>http://www.jaczkogoddard.com/2012/02/03/wolf-block-asks-justices-to-review-ex-partners-lawsuit/</link>
		<comments>http://www.jaczkogoddard.com/2012/02/03/wolf-block-asks-justices-to-review-ex-partners-lawsuit/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Feb 2012 07:18:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Legal News]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jaczkogoddard.com/2012/02/03/wolf-block-asks-justices-to-review-ex-partners-lawsuit/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Wolf Block has asked the Pennsylvania Supreme Court to decide if a case by a former partner seeking severance payments can be removed to confidential arbitration. ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wolf Block has asked the Pennsylvania Supreme Court to decide if a case by a former partner seeking severance payments can be removed to confidential arbitration. </p>
<p>Read more:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.law.com/jsp/law/sign_me_in.jsp?article=http://www.law.com/jsp/pa/PubArticlePA.jsp?id=1202541038130&amp;rss=newswire" title="Wolf Block Asks Justices to Review Ex-Partner's Lawsuit">Wolf Block Asks Justices to Review Ex-Partner&#8217;s Lawsuit</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.jaczkogoddard.com/2012/02/03/wolf-block-asks-justices-to-review-ex-partners-lawsuit/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Amex Again Loses Bid to Enforce Waiver</title>
		<link>http://www.jaczkogoddard.com/2012/02/03/amex-again-loses-bid-to-enforce-waiver/</link>
		<comments>http://www.jaczkogoddard.com/2012/02/03/amex-again-loses-bid-to-enforce-waiver/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Feb 2012 07:18:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Legal News]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jaczkogoddard.com/2012/02/03/amex-again-loses-bid-to-enforce-waiver/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In a case that has returned twice in three years because of fresh case law from the U.S. Supreme Court, the 2nd Circuit keeps coming up with the same answer: A class action waiver provision in American Express contracts with merchants is unenforceable under the Federal Arbitration Act.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In a case that has returned twice in three years because of fresh case law from the U.S. Supreme Court, the 2nd Circuit keeps coming up with the same answer: A class action waiver provision in American Express contracts with merchants is unenforceable under the Federal Arbitration Act.</p>
<p>See the original post:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.law.com/jsp/law/sign_me_in.jsp?article=http://www.law.com/jsp/nylj/PubArticleNY.jsp?id=1202540961091&amp;rss=newswire" title="Amex Again Loses Bid to Enforce Waiver">Amex Again Loses Bid to Enforce Waiver</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.jaczkogoddard.com/2012/02/03/amex-again-loses-bid-to-enforce-waiver/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>AG Holder Defends DOJ In Flap Over Firearm Sting</title>
		<link>http://www.jaczkogoddard.com/2012/02/03/ag-holder-defends-doj-in-flap-over-firearm-sting/</link>
		<comments>http://www.jaczkogoddard.com/2012/02/03/ag-holder-defends-doj-in-flap-over-firearm-sting/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Feb 2012 07:18:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Legal News]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jaczkogoddard.com/2012/02/03/ag-holder-defends-doj-in-flap-over-firearm-sting/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[House Republicans demanded greater access Thursday to documents on the "Operation Fast and Furious" gun trafficking probe, accusing the Justice Department of hiding information that could embarrass the department. Attorney General Eric Holder Jr. fought back, telling critics the DOJ is not involved in a cover-up.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>House Republicans demanded greater access Thursday to documents on the &#8220;Operation Fast and Furious&#8221; gun trafficking probe, accusing the Justice Department of hiding information that could embarrass the department. Attorney General Eric Holder Jr. fought back, telling critics the DOJ is not involved in a cover-up.</p>
<p>Read more here:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.law.com/jsp/law/sign_me_in.jsp?article=http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNLJ.jsp?id=1202541134556&amp;rss=newswire" title="AG Holder Defends DOJ In Flap Over Firearm Sting">AG Holder Defends DOJ In Flap Over Firearm Sting</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.jaczkogoddard.com/2012/02/03/ag-holder-defends-doj-in-flap-over-firearm-sting/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

