Expert Analysis

• Accidental Death Ruling Shows ERISA Review Standard's Pull

  

  The Eleventh Circuit’s recent accidental death insurance ruling in Goldfarb v. Reliance Standard Life Insurance illustrates how an arbitrary and capricious standard of review in Employee Retirement Income Security Act denial-of-benefits cases creates a steep uphill battle for benefit claimants, says Mark DeBofsky at DeBofsky Law.

• Critical Questions Remain After High Court's Abortion Rulings

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court's decisions in two major abortion-related cases this term largely preserve the status quo for now, but leave federal preemption, the Comstock Act and in vitro fertilization in limbo, say attorneys at Jenner & Block.

• California Adds A Novel Twist To State Suits Against Big Oil

  

  California’s suit against Exxon Mobil Corp., one of several state suits that seek to hold oil and gas companies accountable for climate-related harms, is unique both in the magnitude of the alleged claims and its use of a consumer protection statute to seek disgorgement of industry profits, says Julia Stein at UCLA School of Law.

• Opinion

  States Should Loosen Law Firm Ownership Restrictions

  

  Despite growing buzz, normalized nonlawyer ownership of law firms is a distant prospect, so the legal community should focus first on liberalizing state restrictions on attorney and firm purchases of practices, which would bolster succession planning and improve access to justice, says Michael Di Gennaro at The Law Practice Exchange.

• Why Justices Should Rule On FAA's Commerce Exception

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court should review the Ninth Circuit's Ortiz v. Randstad decision, to clarify whether involvement in interstate commerce exempts workers from the Federal Arbitration Act, a crucial question given employers' and employees' strong competing interests in arbitration and litigation, says Collin Williams at New Era.

• Series

  After Chevron: Rethinking Agency Deference In IP Cases

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent overturning of Chevron deference could make it simpler to challenge the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s proposed rule on terminal disclaimers and U.S. International Trade Commission interpretations, says William Milliken at Sterne Kessler.

• FLSA Conditional Certification Is Alive And Well In 4th Circ.

  

  A North Carolina federal court's recent decision in Johnson v. PHP emphasized continued preference by courts in the Fourth Circuit for a two-step conditional certification process for Fair Labor Standards Act collective actions, rejecting views from other circuits and affording plaintiffs a less burdensome path, say Joshua Adams and Damón Gray at Jackson Lewis.

• 7th Circ. Exclusion Ruling Will Narrow BIPA Coverage

  

  The Seventh Circuit's recent decision in Thermoflex Waukegan v. Mitsui Sumitomo Insurance, holding that the access or disclosure exclusion applies to insurance claims brought under the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act, departs from the majority rule and opens the door to insurers more firmly denying coverage under general liability policies, say attorneys at Perkins Coie.

• Tricky Venue Issues Persist In Fortenberry Prosecution Redo

  

  Former Rep. Jeff Fortenberry was recently indicted for a second time after the Ninth Circuit tossed his previous conviction for improper venue, but the case, now pending in the District of Columbia, continues to illustrate the complexities of proper venue in "false statement scheme" prosecutions, says Kevin Coleman at Covington.

• Series

  Solving Puzzles Makes Me A Better Lawyer

  

  Tackling daily puzzles — like Wordle, KenKen and Connections — has bolstered my intellectual property litigation practice by helping me to exercise different mental skills, acknowledge minor but important details, and build and reinforce good habits, says Roy Wepner at Kaplan Breyer.

• 1st Gender Care Ban Provides Context For High Court Case

  

  The history of Arkansas' ban on gender-affirming medical care — the first such legislation in the U.S. — provides important insight into the far-reaching ramifications that the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in U.S. v. Skrmetti next term will have on transgender healthcare, says Tyler Saenz at Baker Donelson.

• Series

  After Chevron: FCC And Industry Must Prepare For Change

  

  The Chevron doctrine was especially significant in the communications sector because of the indeterminacy of federal communications statutes, so the U.S. Supreme Court's overturning of the doctrine could have big implications for those regulated by the Federal Communications Commission, bringing both opportunities and risks for companies, say Thomas Johnson and Michael Showalter at Wiley.

• Series

  After Chevron: Uniform Tax Law Interpretation Not Guaranteed

  

  The loss of Chevron deference will significantly alter the relationship between the IRS, courts and Congress when it comes to tax law, potentially precipitating more transparent rulemaking, but also provoking greater uncertainty due to variability in judicial interpretation, say Michelle Levin and Carneil Wilson at Dentons.

• Series

  After Chevron: Environmental Law May Face Hurdles

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court's recent ruling overturning Chevron deference could prove to be as influential as the original 1984 decision, with far-reaching implications for U.S. environmental laws, including rendering recently promulgated regulations more vulnerable to challenges, say attorneys at Morgan Lewis.

• Opinion

  'Trump Too Small' Ruling Overlooks TM Registration Issues

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court's decision last month in Vidal v. Elster, which concluded that “Trump Too Small” cannot be a registered trademark as it violates a federal prohibition, fails to consider modern-day, real-world implications for trademark owners who are denied access to federal registration, say Tiffany Gehrke and Alexa Spitz at Marshall Gerstein.