Sign Up for Alerts
Sign up to receive receive industry-specific emails from our legal team.
Sign Up for Alerts
We provide tailored, industry-specific legal updates to our clients and other friends of the firm.
Areas of Interest
March 8th, 2022
Jan. 6 Panel has Tough Case to Make on Trump Criminal Conspiracy
Ethics & Professional Responsibility Litigation Partner John B. Harris was quoted in the article, “Jan. 6 Panel has Tough Case to Make on Trump Criminal Conspiracy” published by The Hill. The article discusses the Jan. 6 riot investigation committee’s investigation into the attack on the capital and the committee’s newest claim that Trump engaged in a criminal conspiracy in his effort to overturn the 2020 election results. The filing by the committee looks to persuade a federal judge that it should be allowed to obtain Trump campaign attorney John Eastman’s communications. John B. Harris explains details could waver in a larger case against Trump because the department of justice would need to show he had intent to defraud as he carried out his plans. John says, “Here I think the problem is that if Trump's defense may be that he truly, truly believed these measures might be justifiable and decided to believe one set of advisers or another. The Government can bang on the table a lot say, ‘Well, you had more — and more credible — advisers on the side that said you need to stop this.’ And you had advisers using very strong language that it's illegal and unsupportable,” adding, “But if he had his own mindset that something terrible happened here … that creates a bit of a swamp and some murkiness that the government will have to deal with at a trial to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump did this knowing that it was all a sham.”
John, who specializes in attorney-client privilege, says that the question of whether the crime-fraud exception applies is not clear-cut. “To me, the tricky part of this is that Eastman apparently believed that as an academic theory what he was proposing about Pence or the electors was plausible. If that was something that he believed was a fair extension or interpretation of the law, that gives him some protection. It wouldn't automatically be a crime or fraud for him to propound an academic theory even if he believed that it was certain to lose.”
Read the full article here.
Other Quoted
SHOOT’s 65th Anniversary Reflections: FKKS’ Managing Partner Jeffrey A. Greenbaum
SHOOT Magazine quotes Jeffrey A. Greenbaum in its 65th Anniversary coverage on where the advertising industry has been, is, and is going. Jeff discusses the most significant legal cases during his industry tenure and the accompanying lessons, the most pressing legal issues for the commercial production community, his most meaningful professional accomplishments, and the value he has gained from reading SHOOT. Read more.
July 24 2025
Companies Sought Help From Privacy Vendors. They Still Got Fined
Daniel M. Goldberg is quoted in Bloomberg Law on problems faced by companies who have relied on compliance vendors to help them navigate new privacy laws. The article stated that vendors operating with little oversight, outdated tech have “left businesses with consumer-facing websites open to fines and other enforcement actions.”
Bloomberg Law noted, “For example, giving consumers the option to disable cookies may not turn off all of a company’s tracking technology. So consumer data could still be automatically sent to a third party for advertising.
“Vendors cannot just repurpose tools meant to comply with EU’s data protection law for California’s rules, said Daniel M. Goldberg, chair of the data strategy, privacy & security group at Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz PC.
"‘Many solutions are solutions that are built for one purpose,’ Goldberg said, adding that some vendors’ ‘default configurations often aren’t drafted in a way that is sufficient to address US privacy law.’” View Article.
July 14 2025
The Battle over California’s Bill to Regulate how Insurers Handle Personal Data
Rick Borden is quoted in the Continuing Education of the Bar’s (CEB) DailyNews in an article on the proposed California data privacy law, Senate Bill 354, which would extend greater data privacy protections to the insurance industry. The Insurance Consumer Privacy Protection Act (ICPPA) 2025 would expand the California’s existing insurance-specific privacy law, known as the Insurance Information and Privacy Protection Act (IIPPA).
The article stated, “Rick Borden, a partner with Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz who focuses on data strategy and privacy, said California may be acting too soon because revised regulations and guidance are coming down the pike. A working group at the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) is moving ahead with updates to its Model law 672, which each state has either adopted or adopted in substantially similar form. ‘Let them do their stuff,’ Borden said.”
He pointed to the American Property Casualty Insurance Association (APCIA) comment letter, written on behalf of 1,200 companies comprising nearly 60% of the country’s property and casualty insurance market. It also recommended CCPA (California Consumer Privacy Act) regulators to wait.
But the bill’s author Senator Monique Limón and its sponsor, California Insurance Commissioner Richard Lara, are moving forward with the bill.
Mr. Borden also noted “that advertising and marketing is one of the most important areas that California’s proposed new protections could cover.”
“‘Certain advertising is not subject to GLBA [Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act], so already would be subject to CCPA,’ he said. ‘Because you’re not their customer, yet. And this isn’t about a financial transaction with them.’ The revised insurance laws would cover data collection, including for advertising, that is a part of covered insurance relationships.” View article. (Cost-free registration required.)
July 8 2025
