Expert Analysis

• Do Videoconferences Establish Jurisdiction With Defendants?

  

  What it means to have minimum contacts in a foreign jurisdiction is changing as people become more accustomed to meeting via video, and defendants’ participation in videoconferencing may be used as a sword or a shield in courts’ personal jurisdiction analysis, says Patrick Hickey at Moye White.

• Opinion

  Humanism Should Replace Formalism In The Courts

  

  The worrying tendency for judges to say "it's just the law talking, not me" in American decision writing has coincided with an historic decline in respect for the courts, but this trend can be reversed if courts develop understandable legal standards and justify them in human terms, says Connecticut Superior Court Judge Thomas Moukawsher.

• Pa. Supreme Court Can Finally Set Proper Venue Standards

  

  The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has an opportunity in Hangey v. Husqvarna to finally clarify and further define how much business in a forum a product manufacturer must do for the venue to be proper, an issue state trial courts have wrestled with for almost a century, say Alan Klein and Ethan Feldman at Duane Morris.

• Don't Let Client Demands Erode Law Firm Autonomy

  

  As clients increasingly impose requirements for attorney hiring and retention related to diversity and secondment, law firms must remember their ethical duties, as well as broader issues of lawyer development, culture and firm integrity, to maintain their independence while meaningfully responding to social changes, says Deborah Winokur at Cozen O'Connor.

• A Significant First Step For Pa. Carbon Capture Programs

  

  Pennsylvania's letter of intent to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency indicating interest in taking primary regulatory authority of Underground Injection Control Class VI programs marks the beginning of a potentially long process that would ultimately benefit those involved with carbon capture utilization and storage within the commonwealth, say attorneys at K&L Gates.

• 6th Circ. Ruling's Seismic Shift In FCA Kickback Causation

  

  It is difficult to overstate the significance of the Sixth Circuit’s recent decision in the False Claims Act kickback case U.S. v. Hathaway, which shifts the government's burden of proof by adopting a more defense-friendly causation standard and curbing an expansive definition of remuneration, say attorneys at Morgan Lewis.

• 3rd Circ. Ruling Offers Tools To Manage Exempt Employees

  

  The Third Circuit’s recent opinion in Higgins v. Bayada Home Health, finding the Fair Labor Standards Act allows employers to deduct paid time off for missed employee productivity targets, gives companies another resource for managing exempt employee inefficiency or absenteeism, says Laura Lawless at Squire Patton.

• How CMS Proposal Would Change PE Deal Transparency

  

  The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services recently proposed a new rule that would require the disclosure of additional ownership regarding Medicare and Medicaid nursing facilities, an approach that many states have started to take and reflects the Biden administration's scrutiny on private equity deals, say attorneys at Kirkland.

• 3rd Circ. Samsung Opinion Is A Plaintiffs' Arbitration Playbook

  

  The Third Circuit's recent precedential opinion in White v. Samsung exemplifies language plaintiffs can use when a defendant delays in moving to compel arbitration — and its criticism of pro-arbitration rules invented by other courts can also help plaintiffs avoid the dispute resolution method altogether, say Raphael Janove and Josh Brooks at Pollock Cohen.

• Navigating High Court's Options In Insurer Choice Of Law

  

  Depending on how the U.S. Supreme Court approaches the question of when insurers may invoke choice-of-law clauses in maritime contracts to dodge state-specific liability, the Great Lakes v. Raiders Retreat Realty decision may mean significant changes not only for admiralty law disputes, but for the insurance industry more broadly, say Lara Cassidy and Adriana Perez at Hunton.

• Opinion

  Federal Judge's Amici Invitation Is A Good Idea, With Caveats

  

  An Arkansas federal judge’s recent order — inviting amicus briefs in every civil case before him — has merit, but its implementation may raise practical questions about the role of junior attorneys, economic considerations and other issues, says Lawrence Ebner at the Atlantic Legal Foundation.

• Fox Ex-Producer Case Is A Lesson In Joint Representation

  

  A former Fox News producer's allegations that the network's lawyers pressured her to give misleading testimony in Fox's defamation battle with Dominion Voting Systems should remind lawyers representing a nonparty witness that the rules of joint representation apply, says Jared Marx at HWG.

• A Tale Of 2 State Tax Sourcing Decisions: The Pa. Court's Path

  

  The Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s recent decision in Synthes v. Commonwealth appropriately effectuated the Legislature's intent that ambiguous provisions in Section 17 of the Uniform Division of Income for Tax Purposes Act be construed to reflect the marketplace for the taxpayer's services, says Bruce Fort at the Multistate Tax Commission.

• And Now A Word From The Panel: Baseball And MDLs

  

  With the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation meeting on MLB opening day, Alan Rothman at Sidley explores connections between the national pastime and MDL, including sports-related proceedings in the areas of antitrust, personal injury, and marketing and sales.

• A Tale Of 2 State Tax Sourcing Decisions: The Va. Court's Path

  

  The Virginia Supreme Court's textualist approach in Department of Taxation v. R.J. Reynolds diverges from a recent Pennsylvania Supreme Court analysis and mistakenly precludes consideration of the goals and history underlying provisions of the Uniform Division of Income for Tax Purposes Act, says Bruce Fort at the Multistate Tax Commission.