Expert Analysis

• Opinion

  Litigation Funding Disclosure Should Be Mandatory

  

  Despite the Appellate Rules Committee's recent deferral of the issue of requiring third-party litigation funding disclosure, such a mandate is necessary to ensure the even-handed administration of justice across all cases, says David Levitt at Hinshaw.

• Recalling USWNT's Legal PR Playbook Amid World Cup Bid

  

  As the U.S. Women's National Soccer Team strives to take home another World Cup trophy, their 2022 pay equity settlement with the U.S. Soccer Federation serves as a good reminder that winning in the court of public opinion can be more powerful than a victory inside the courtroom, says Hector Valle at Vianovo.

• How Calif. Privacy Law Changes Affect Asset Managers

  

  Asset managers need to understand the important ways in which the California Consumer Privacy Act applies to their work, despite a recent update to the law that exempts information subject to the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, say Kevin Angle and Catherine Skulan at Ropes & Gray.

• Contract Disputes Recap: Timeliness, Evidence, Fact-Finding

  

  Edward Arnold and Bret Marfut at Seyfarth Shaw look at three recent opinions from three stages of government contract claims litigation about avoiding untimeliness by ticking procedural boxes, supporting factual positions at the summary judgment stage and how the appellate boards review default terminations.

• Indivior Ruling May Affect Rebate Wall Litigation

  

  A New Jersey federal court's recent decision in Indivior v. Alvogen, in which a claim that an alleged rebate wall anti-competitively blocked generic competition survived summary judgment, may provide a blueprint for successfully challenging other drug rebating practices, say Peter Herrick and Monsura Sirajee at O'Melveny.

• Perspectives

  Mallory Gives Plaintiffs A Better Shot At Justice

  

  Critics of the U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision in Mallory v. Norfolk Southern claim it opens the door to litigation tourism, but the ruling simply gives plaintiffs more options — enabling them to seek justice against major corporations in the best possible court, say Rayna Kessler and Ethan Seidenberg at Robins Kaplan.

• An Emerging Copyright Paradox For AI-Generated Content

  

  It is becoming increasingly clear that something of a double-edged sword now exists with regard to copyrights and artificial intelligence — though it may not be possible to secure or convey copyrights in AI-generated content, the same content may result in claims of copyright infringement, says Samuel Lewis at Cozen O’Connor.

• Key Considerations For Negotiating Sponsor Guaranties

  

  As both creditors and borrower groups shift their negotiating positions regarding sponsor guaranties, practitioners should refresh their understanding of common law suretyship defenses and their associated waivers so that they can watch for contract terms that are overly or insufficiently broad, say attorneys at Dorsey & Whitney.

• Canada Emoji Ruling Considers Digital-Age Contract Realities

  

  In South West Terminal v. Achter Land & Cattle, a Canadian court recently held that a thumbs-up emoji was just as valid as a signature, illustrating a common situation in the digital age and setting forth a rational framework for addressing contract disputes in U.S. courts and elsewhere, says George Singer at Holland & Hart.

• Effectual Relief Questions Linger After Section 363 Ruling

  

  In the months since the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in MOAC Mall Holdings, courts and practitioners must grapple with the issue of what effectual relief courts may grant upon an appeal of an unstayed sale order, says Monique Jewett-Brewster at Hopkins Carley.

• Cannabis Cos. Must Heed PFAS Risks In Products, Packaging

  

  Cannabis businesses and ancillary service providers will have to grapple with evolving PFAS enforcement, litigation and regulations – most recently enacted in Minnesota – and take steps to mitigate risks posed by forever chemicals in their products and packaging, say Malina Dumas and Amy Rubenstein at Dentons.

• SEC v. Ripple Labs Decision Could Change Crypto Regulation

  

  The distinction drawn by federal securities laws between a transaction and an asset is key to understanding the remarkable recent decision from a New York federal court in SEC v. Ripple Labs — a ruling that could mark a turning point in the nation's fraught regulatory relationship with cryptocurrency, says Joseph Hall at Davis Polk.

• Courts Can Overturn Deficient State Regulations, Too

  

  While suits challenging federal regulations have become commonplace, such cases against state agencies are virtually nonexistent, but many states have provisions that allow litigants to bring suit for regulations with inadequate cost-benefit analyses, says Reeve Bull at the Virginia Office of Regulatory Management.

• 4 Things Cos. Must Know About Texas' New Business Courts

  

  A recently passed Texas law will create a special court system to handle the state's increasingly large business dispute docket — but there are several key features of the new business courts that companies and their legal teams must understand before their cases are filed, say Nicholas Bruno and Madison Moore at Beck Redden.

• Micromobility Can Lead To Macro Liability For Cities, Cos.

  

  E-bike and scooter manufacturers and rental operators, as well as the cities that host such services, must be aware of the major litigation risk associated with the growing number of serious accidents and injuries involving such micromobility devices — and should track emerging regulations in this area, says Arturo Aviles at Segal McCambridge.