Expert Analysis

• Where Anti-Discrimination Law Stands 4 Years After Bostock

  

  On the fourth anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark Bostock ruling, Evan Parness and Abby Rickeman at Covington take stock of how the decision, which held that Title VII protects employees from discrimination because of their sexual orientation and gender identity, has affected anti-discrimination law at the state and federal levels.

• 8th Circ. Insurance Ruling Spotlights Related-Claims Defenses

  

  The Eighth Circuit’s recent Dexon v. Travelers ruling — that the insurer must provide a defense despite the policy’s related-acts provision — provides guidance for how policyholders can overcome related-acts defenses, say Geoffrey Fehling and Jae Lynn Huckaba at Hunton.

• Series

  Playing Chess Makes Me A Better Lawyer

  

  There are many ways that chess skills translate directly into lawyer skills, but for me, the bigger career lessons go beyond the direct parallels — playing chess has shown me the value of seeing gradual improvement in and focusing deep concentration on a nonwork endeavor, says attorney Steven Fink.

• 9th Circ. Clarifies ERISA Preemption For Healthcare Industry

  

  The Ninth Circuit's recent ruling in Bristol SL Holdings v. Cigna notably clarifies the broad scope of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act's preemption of certain state law causes of action, standing to benefit payors and health plan administrators, say attorneys at Troutman Pepper.

• Patent Lessons From 7 Federal Circuit Reversals In May

  

  A look at recent cases where the Federal Circuit reversed or vacated decisions by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board or a federal district court provide guidance on how to succeed on appeal by clarifying the obviousness analysis of design patents, the finality of a judgment, and more, say Denise De Mory and Li Guo at Bunsow De Mory.

• Litigation Inspiration: Attys Can Be Heroic Like Olympians

  

  Although litigation won’t earn anyone an Olympic medal in Paris this summer, it can be worthy of the same lasting honor if attorneys exercise focused restraint — seeking both their clients’ interests and those of the court — instead of merely pursuing every advantage short of sanctionable conduct, says Bennett Rawicki at Hilgers Graben.

• What To Know As CFPB Late Fee Rule Hangs In Limbo

  

  Though the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's final credit card late fee rule faces an uncertain future due to litigation involving injunctions, emergency petitions and now a venue dispute, card issuers must understand how to navigate the interim period and what to do if the rule takes effect, say attorneys at Steptoe.

• Updated Federal Rules Can Improve Product Liability MDLs

  

  The recent amendment of a federal evidence rule regarding expert testimony and the proposal of a civil rule on managing early discovery in multidistrict legislation hold great promise for promoting the uniform and efficient processes that high-stakes product liability cases particularly need, say Alan Klein and William Heaston at Duane Morris.

• Lean Into The 'Great Restoration' To Retain Legal Talent

  

  As the “great resignation,” in which employees voluntarily left their jobs in droves, has largely dissipated, legal employers should now work toward the idea of a “great restoration,” adopting strategies to effectively hire, onboard and retain top legal talent, says Molly McGrath at Hiring & Empowering Solutions.

• 9th Circ. Ruling Shows Lies Must Go To Nature Of Bargain

  

  The Ninth Circuit’s recent U.S. v. Milheiser decision, vacating six mail fraud convictions, clarifies that the key question in federal fraud cases is not whether lies were told, but what they were told about — thus requiring defense counsel to rethink their strategies, say Charles Kreindler and Krista Landis at Sheppard Mullin.

• What High Court Ruling Means For Sexual Harassment Claims

  

  In its recent Smith v. Spizzirri decision, the U.S. Supreme Court held that a district court compelling a case to arbitration is obligated to stay the case rather than dismissing it, but this requirement may result in sexual harassment cases not being heard by appellate courts, says Abe Melamed at Signature Resolution.

• Trademark In Artistic Works 1 Year After Jack Daniel's

  

  In the year since the U.S. Supreme Court's Jack Daniel's v. VIP Products ruling, courts have applied Jack Daniel's inconsistently to deny First Amendment protection to artistic works, providing guidance for dismissing trademark claims relating to film and TV titles, say Hardy Ehlers and Neema Sahni at Covington.

• 9th Circ. Ruling Broadens Sweep Of Securities 'Solicitation'

  

  The Ninth Circuit's recent revival of a putative securities fraud class action against Genius Brands for hiring a stock promoter to write favorable articles about it shows that companies should view "solicitation" broadly in considering whether they may have paid someone to urge an investor to purchase a security, say attorneys at Simpson Thacher.

• Why Jurors Balk At 'I Don't Recall' — And How To Respond

  

  Jurors often react negatively to a witness who responds “I don’t remember” because they tend to hold erroneous beliefs about the nature of human memory, but attorneys can adopt a few strategies to mitigate the impact of these biases, say Steve Wood and Ava Hernández at Courtroom Sciences.

• Series

  Fishing Makes Me A Better Lawyer

  

  Atop the list of ways fishing makes me a better lawyer is the relief it offers from the chronic stress of a demanding caseload, but it has also improved my listening skills and patience, and has served as an exceptional setting for building earnest relationships, says Steven DeGeorge​​​​​​​ at Robinson Bradshaw.