Expert Analysis

• Boosting Confidence In Pennsylvania's Election System

  

  As Election Day nears, Pennsylvania is facing an intense flurry of litigation, including an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court centered on mail-in and provisional ballots, but the state's election system is robust, and attorneys from all practice areas have an important role to play in ensuring confidence in and access to our election system, says Bucks County Commissioner Bob Harvie.

• Takeaways From The IRS' Crypto Doc Summons Win

  

  A recent First Circuit decision holding that taxpayers do not have a Fourth Amendment reasonable expectation of privacy in cryptocurrency transaction records should prompt both taxpayers and exchanges to take stock of past transactions and future plans, say attorneys at BakerHostetler.

• A Novel Expansion Of Alien Tort Statute In 9th Circ.

  

  The Ninth Circuit's Doe v. Cisco rehearing denial allows a new invocation of the Alien Tort Statute to proceed, which could capture the U.S. Supreme Court's attention, and has potentially dramatic consequences for U.S. companies doing business with foreign governments, say attorneys at Ropes & Gray.

• Empathy In Mediation Offers A Soft Landing For Disputes

  

  Experiencing a crash-landing on a recent flight underscored to me how much difference empathy makes in times of crisis or stress, including during mediation, says Eydith Kaufman at Alternative Resolution Centers.

• Series

  Being An Artist Makes Me A Better Lawyer

  

  My work as an artist has highlighted how using creativity and precision together — qualities that are equally essential in both art and law — not only improves outcomes, but also leads to more innovative and thoughtful work, says Sarah La Pearl at Segal McCambridge.

• Reading Tea Leaves In Fed. Circ. Deep Dive On Review Scope

  

  Roy Wepner at Kaplan Breyer investigates why a recent Federal Circuit opinion spent six pages explaining its unsurprising conclusion on proper scope of review — that no deference need be afforded to the trial court in a case dismissed for failure to state a claim.

• How Judiciary Can Minimize AI Risks In Secondary Sources

  

  Because courts’ standing orders on generative artificial intelligence and other safeguards do not address the risk of hallucinations in secondary source materials, the judiciary should consider enlisting legal publishers and database hosts to protect against AI-generated inaccuracies, say attorneys at Lankler Siffert & Wohl.

• Newly Acquired Information Can Be Key In Drug Label Cases

  

  The question of whether federal law preempts state law claims is often central in pharmaceutical labeling cases, like the Fosamax litigation now before the Third Circuit — but parties must also consider whether there is newly acquired information to justify submitting a proposed labeling change in the first place, say attorneys at Arnold & Porter.

• Tips For Employers As Courts Shift On Paid Leave Bias Suits

  

  After several federal courts recently cited the U.S. Supreme Court's Muldrow decision — which held that job transfers could be discriminatory — in ruling that paid administrative leave may also constitute an adverse employment action, employers should carefully consider several points before suspending workers, says Tucker Camp at Foley & Lardner.

• NC Ruling Takes Practical Approach To Duty-To-Defend Costs

  

  In Murphy-Brown v. Ace American Insurance, a case of first impression, the North Carolina Business Court adopted the commonsense rationale of many state courts in holding that policyholders' defense costs should be deemed presumtively reasonable when a insurer breaches its duty to defend, say attorneys at McGuireWoods.

• Calif. Ruling Offers Hope For Mitigated Negative Declarations

  

  In Upland Community First v. City of Upland, a California appeals court upheld a warehouse development's mitigated negative declaration over its greenhouse gas emissions thresholds — a rare victory against this type of challenge providing reassurance that such declarations can be upheld, say attorneys at Sheppard Mullin.

• False Patent Marking Claims Find New Home In Lanham Act

  

  While the Patent Act may have closed the courthouse doors for many false patent marking claims, the Federal Circuit, in its recent decision in Crocs v. Effervescent, may be opening a window to these types of claims under the Lanham Act, says John Cordani at Robinson & Cole.

• 3rd. Circ. Ruling Shows Employers Where To Put ADA Focus

  

  A recent Third Circuit decision in Morgan v. Allison Crane & Rigging, confirming that the Americans with Disabilities Act protects some temporarily impaired employees, reminds employers to pursue compliance through uniform policies that head off discriminatory decisions, not after-the-fact debates over an individual's disability status, says Joseph McGuire at Freeman Mathis.

• Nvidia Case's Potential Impact On Securities Class Actions

  

  In Nvidia v. Ohman Fonder, the U.S. Supreme Court could strip lower courts of their long-standing ability and obligation to holistically weigh all relevant facts supporting plaintiffs' allegations of securities fraud, which would have a wide-ranging impact on securities fraud class actions in the U.S., say attorneys at Labaton Keller.

• Justices Face Tough Question On HHS Hospital Pay Formula

  

  In Advocate Christ Medical Center v. Becerra, the U.S. Supreme Court will determine whether the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services properly applied certain Medicare reimbursement adjustments to hospitals — a decision that could significantly affect hospitals' ability to seek higher Medicare reimbursement for low-income patients, say attorneys at Sheppard Mullin.