|
Janna J
"The panel included interesting hypotheticals and I appreciated the question answer session "
|
|
Jessica F
"I thought the CLE was well done, but I wish they gave more hypotheticals and talked about in-house government attorneys more. "
|
|
Thomas D
"The topic itself is somewhat dry."
|
|
Anita S
"Interesting but more on point with state govt employees"
|
|
John T
"Discussed different types of gov lawyers that is not well explained in the rule changes."
|
|
Joseph L
"Good overview of the rules and helpful, practical examples highlighting the challenges of representing the US Govt as a client."
|
|
Felecia R
"expertise of the presenters and the examples and discussion"
|
|
Stephen W
"All good / no bad. Required content, so it is what it is."
|
|
Megan M
"This was a very brief and high level overview but it seemed to raise a lot of questions but there was not time to answer. It would have been great to make this a little longer session to get a chance to hear responses to additional questions. "
|
|
Bradford P
"The rules are still pretty vague to me, but perhaps that's the rules' fault, not the presenters'. Hypothetical One seem to beg a lot of questions."
|