O'Melveny, Paul Hastings Launch South Korea Offices


O'Melveny, Paul Hastings Launch South Korea Offices
By Julia Love   November 13, 2012

O'Melveny & Myers opened an office in Seoul Monday, becoming at least the third U.S. firm to open a South Korean office just this month.

Jinwon Park and Sungyong Kang, both of counsels, will be based in Seoul for the firm; counsel Youngwook Shin and partner Joseph Kim, head of the Korea practice, will divide their time between the U.S. and Korea.

"I'm very excited," Shin said. "By having a physical presence in Korea, we think we can serve our clients more efficiently."

O'Melveny followed Paul Hastings, which launched its Seoul office last week. Korea Office Chair Jong Han Kim will be joined in that office by vice chair and corporate partner Daniel Kim, of counsel Dong Chul Kim, of counsel Woojae Kim and associate K. Trisha Chang, who plans to relocate from Washington, D.C.

Both firms came on the heels of Covington & Burling, which debuted its office in Seoul on November 1. Korea-based corporate partner William H.Y. Park is going to lead a team of four other lawyers for Covington.

U.S. firms have been scrambling to get a foothold in South Korea's legal market since a free trade agreement that took force earlier this year created the long-awaited opportunity. The Recorder sibling publication The Am Law Daily reported that O'Melveny, Paul Hastings and Covington were among at least 16 firms that sought approval from the South Korean Ministry of Justice and the Korean Bar Association to start offices in the country. Ropes & Gray was first to open its doors in July, and Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton followed suit in August.

Sheppard Mullin Chairman Guy Halgren noted that the firm has landed several new Korean clients since starting its office in Seoul.

"We think the reason we were able to get that additional work is because we were over there," he said.

A team of three lawyers launched the office and the firm has hired a few more Korean and American lawyers, who are awaiting approval from the Korean Ministry of Justice, Halgren said. But because American firms are not permitted to practice Korean law, Halgren sees no need now for a large operation.

Supreme Court to review constitutionality of same-sex marriage


Supreme Court to review constitutionality of same-sex marriage
Friday, December 07, 2012   Julia Zebley


[JURIST] The US Supreme Court [official website] on Friday granted certiorari [order list, PDF] in two cases dealing with same-sex marriage [JURIST backgrounder]. InHollingsworth v. Perry [docket; cert. petition, PDF] the court will consider the validity ofProposition 8 [JURIST news archive], a California referendum that revoked same-sex marriage rights. Same-sex marriage was briefly legal in California following a state Supreme Court decision and then overturned with a constitutional amendment created by Proposition 8. Early in the proceedings, the state of California declined to defend the law, and the backers of Proposition 8, ProtectMarriage.com [advocacy website], successfully intervened. The court will consider whether Proposition 8 is constitutional under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment as well as if the Proposition 8 supporters had standing to intervene under Article III [LII Cornell backgrounders].

The court also granted United States v. Windsor [docket; cert. petition, PDF], which examines the constitutionality of Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) [text; JURIST news archive]. The case concerns Edith Windsor [ACLU backgrounder], a widow who had a legal same-sex marriage under Canadian and New York law but was denied spousal deduction for federal estate taxes when her wife died. The Supreme Court will consider the constitutionality of DOMA under the Fifth Amendment [LII Cornell backgrounder]. Prior to her challenge, the US Department of Justice (DOJ) announced that it would no longer defend DOMA in courts, and in response, the US House of Representatives formed [JURIST reports] the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group (BLAG) to defend the law. The court will also consider if BLAG had standing to intervene and if the DOJ's refusal to defend the law deprives the Supreme Court of jurisdiction. The Windsorcourt held homosexuals to an intermediate scrutiny standard of review. The other petitions concerning same-sex marriage remain on hold.