The 2026 edition of Best Lawyers' "Best Law Firms" Directory has been published, with Hinshaw picking up 13 national and 56 metropolitan rankings in the guide.

Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP is pleased to announce that 80 lawyers are recognized in the 2026 edition of The Best Lawyers in America, with ten receiving this honor for the first time. Additionally, 22 Hinshaw lawyers are included in The Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch.

Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP is delighted to announce that Chicago associate Camille Evans has been selected as a 2025 Top 40 Under 40 honoree by the National Black Lawyers (NBL).

Read a CCFL Quarterly Report article by Aimee Szygenda and Alfredo (“Fred”) Ramos that analyzes how generative artificial intelligence is reshaping litigation practice for attorneys.

Hinshaw attorneys Mark Carter, Anthony Jacob, and Kyle Fonjemie contributed three chapters to the newly released 2025 edition of the Illinois Institute for Continuing Legal Education (IICLE) “Limited Liability Companies” handbook.

Read how a team of Hinshaw attorneys collaborated to contribute six chapters in the 2025 edition of the Illinois Institute for Continuing Legal Education (IICLE) "Attorneys' Legal Liability" handbook.

Hinshaw partner April Toy will co-present a panel at the firm-sponsored Hispanic National Bar Association/VIA 2025 Annual Convention on September 5, 2025. The panel is titled "Ethical Challenges in the Legal Profession: Maintaining Integrity in Complex Scenarios."

Chicago-based partner Matthew Henderson will participate in a panel discussion on "Disqualification of Counsel—When the Client’s Right to Counsel is Taken Away" at the Annual Conference of the Association of Professional Responsibility Lawyers (“APRL”) on August 2, 2024, in Chicago, Illinois.

Save the date and plan to join us at the 22nd Annual Legal Malpractice & Risk Management Conference (LMRM). 

Chicago-based partner David Levitt will moderate a DRI webinar, titled "Litigation Financing: What You Need to Know," on September 3, 2025.

Hinshaw partner April Toy will moderate a webinar hosted by the Hispanic National Bar Association/VIA Solo-Small Summer Series, sponsored by Berkley Select on August 21, 2025.

Hinshaw's Joanna Storey will co-present a virtual CLE event titled "Ethical Lessons Learned from Fictional Attorneys," on May 12, 2022. The CLE is presented by the Bar Association of San Francisco's (BASF) Legal Ethics Committee, of which Storey is the current Vice-Chair. The program will look at fictional attorney examples of legal ethical dilemmas and analyze if the attorney addressed the issue properly by discussing the professional conduct duties owed to clients.

Navigating the ever changing waters of consumer privacy could become much more challenging if the “It's Your Data Act" (IYDA) is passed in New York. Some provisions of the proposed law may apply to any person or business, even law firms no matter how small, that collects any personal information of New York residents for the purpose of generating commercial or economic value.

Hinshaw's Steve Puiszis has authored a comprehensive white paper on the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), published by the ABA's Journal of the Professional Lawyer, which provides clarity on the many issues the GDPR raises for law firms and their clients in the United States. We are pleased to offer a complimentary copy of this paper to Cyber Alert and Lawyers for the Profession® Alert readers.

What are some of the newest hacking scams that may affect law firms and other businesses?

What precautions can lawyers, staff, and law firms as a whole take to mitigate the risk of falling victim to the latest COVID-19 scam involving phishing for personal information by dangling eligibility for bogus government-sponsored loan programs as bait?

What precautions can law firms, along with their lawyers and staff, take when they receive an unexpected request for protected health information (PHI) from someone claiming to be a representative of the Office of Civil Rights (OCR) or the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)?

By: Dana A. Rice

A former director of operations and director of engineering at Google, Inc. sued the company alleging age discrimination. The trial court granted Google’s motion for summary judgment, finding that plaintiff’s evidence of “stray remarks” by non-decision-makers in support of his discrimination claim were insufficient evidence of discrimination to merit a trial. Under the “stray remarks” doctrine, which is routinely applied to federal discrimination claims, discriminatory remarks made by co-workers or non-decision-makers are not enough to overcome an employer's motion for summary judgment. Courts deem such evidence irrelevant because it is not probative of a discriminatory animus on the part of those actually involved in the decision-making process. The California Court of Appeals reversed, holding the stray remarks admissible as potential evidence of discriminatory animus. The California Supreme Court agreed and rejected strict application of the stray remarks doctrine in California discrimination cases, counter to the doctrine’s wide acceptance in federal courts. The Supreme Court held that evidence of non-decision-makers’ stray remarks are admissible and must be considered along with the totality of the facts in determining whether the plaintiff has presented sufficient evidence of discrimination to necessitate a trial on the merits. The Court’s holding makes it more difficult for California employers to dispose of cases on summary judgment where the plaintiff’s discrimination claims rest on stray remarks made by non-decision-makers. Reid v. Google, Inc., No. S158965 (August 5, 2010).

In a legal malpractice action arising out of revisions to a client's estate plan, the appellate court considered whether an attorney has a duty to evaluate a client's mental capacity and, if so, whether the plaintiff alleged sufficient facts to show the defendants (a law firm and its attorneys) were aware of their client's disability at the time they provided legal services.

As we say goodbye to 2024, we are pleased to announce our 2024 Hinshaw Readers’ Choice Awards in the professional liability and legal ethics category. The following are the Top 5 posts receiving the highest levels of engagement from our readers in 2024 on topics ranging from financial elder abuse claims and bar advisory opinions to attorney disqualification motions.

The First District Appellate Court in Illinois affirmed the trial court's denial of a defendant law firm's motion to compel arbitration on the basis that the arbitration provision in the "Attorney-Client Agreement" entered into with plaintiff in the underlying personal injury action was procedurally unconscionable. The court ruled that plaintiff could not be held to an agreement to arbitrate a legal malpractice claim "without being informed about the scope and effect of the agreement."

What if a lawyer makes a mistake? What guidance do legal ethics rules provide regarding materiality, conflicts of interest, and disclosure requirements? Read our newsletter to learn the importance of notifying malpractice carriers about the error.

It seems as though every day, there is a story in the legal news about a well-known law firm facing a disqualification motion. While disqualification motions are being filed more frequently, that is only half the story[1].

When done correctly, fee-sharing arrangements between lawyers can be lucrative for lawyers while simultaneously maximizing the quality of legal representation for the client without increasing the cost. However, lawyers who do not strictly follow the ethical rules on fee sharing may be subject to bar discipline, unable to enforce their fee agreement, or even sued by the referred client if the matter is subsequently mishandled.