Expert Analysis

• In NY, Long COVID (Tolling) Still Applies

  

  A series of pandemic-era executive orders in New York tolling state statutes of limitations for 228 days mean that many causes of action that appear time-barred on their face may continue to apply, including in federal practice, for the foreseeable future, say attorneys at Sher Tremonte.

• Opinion

  Expert Reports Can't Replace Facts In Securities Fraud Cases

  

  The Ninth Circuit's 2023 decision in Nvidia v. Ohman Fonder — and the U.S. Supreme Court's punt on the case in 2024 — could invite the meritless securities litigation the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act was designed to prevent by substituting expert opinions for facts to substantiate complaint assertions, say attorneys at A&O Shearman.

• 3rd Circ. Ruling Forces A Shift In Employer CFAA Probes

  

  The Third Circuit's recent ruling in NRA Group v. Durenleau, finding that "unauthorized access" requires bypassing technical barriers rather than simply violating company policies, is forcing employers to recalibrate insider misconduct investigations and turn to contractual, trade secret and state-level claims, say attorneys at Sidley.

• Opinion

  High Court, Not A Single Justice, Should Decide On Recusal

  

  As public trust in the U.S. Supreme Court continues to decline, the court should adopt a collegial framework in which all justices decide questions of recusal together — a reform that respects both judicial independence and due process for litigants, say Michael Broyde at Emory University and Hayden Hall at the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware.

• FTC's Consumer Finance Pivot Brings Industry Pros And Cons

  

  An active Federal Trade Commission against the backdrop of a leashed Consumer Financial Protection Bureau will be welcomed by most in the consumer finance industry, but the incremental expansion of the FTC's authority via enforcement actions remains a risk, say attorneys at Hudson Cook.

• Reel Justice: 'One Battle After Another' And The Limits Of Zeal

  

  The political thriller “One Battle After Another,” following a former revolutionary who became a recluse, offers a potent metaphor for attorneys on diligence and the ethical boundaries of zealous advocacy, says Veronica Finkelstein at Wilmington University School of Law.

• Series

  Traveling Solo Makes Me A Better Lawyer

  

  Traveling by myself has taught me to assess risk, understand tone and stay calm in high-pressure situations, which are not only useful life skills, but the foundation of how I support my clients, says Lacey Gutierrez at Group Five Legal.

• 6th Circ. FirstEnergy Ruling Protects Key Legal Privileges

  

  The Sixth Circuit’s recent grant of mandamus relief in In re: First Energy Corp. confirms that the attorney-client privilege and work-product protections apply to internal investigation materials, ultimately advancing the public interest, say attorneys at Cooley.

• Opinion

  Courts Must Continue Protecting Plaintiffs In Mass Arbitration

  

  In recent years, many companies have imposed onerous protocols that function to frustrate plaintiffs' ability to seek justice through mass arbitration, but a series of welcome court decisions in recent months indicate that the pendulum might be swinging back toward plaintiffs, say Raphael Janove and Sasha Jones at Janove Law.

• Series

  Law School's Missed Lessons: Client Service

  

  Law school teaches you how to interpret the law, but it doesn't teach you some of the key ways to keeping clients satisfied, lessons that I've learned in the most unexpected of places: a book on how to be a butler, says Gregory Ramos at Armstrong Teasdale.

• Loper Bright's Evolving Application In Labor Case Appeals

  

  Following the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Loper Bright v. Raimondo, which upended decades of precedent requiring courts to defer to agency interpretations of federal regulations, the Third and Sixth Circuits' differing approaches leave little certainty as to which employment regulations remain in play, say attorneys at Foley & Lardner.

• Mass. Ruling May Pave New Avenue To Target Subpoenas

  

  A Massachusetts federal court’s recent decision to quash a subpoena seeking information on gender-affirming care at Boston Children’s Hospital is a significant departure from courts' deferential approach to subpoena enforcement, and may open a new pathway for practitioners challenging investigative tools in the future, say attorneys at Gibson Dunn.

• Where 4th And 9th Circ. Diverge On Trade Secret Timing

  

  Recent Fourth and Ninth Circuit decisions have revealed a deepening circuit split over when plaintiffs must specifically define their alleged trade secrets, turning the early stages of trade secret litigation into a key battleground and elevating the importance of forum selection, say attorneys at Skadden.

• What Justices' Bowe Ruling Could Mean For Federal Prisoners

  

  Bowe v. U.S. — set for oral argument before the U.S. Supreme Court on Oct. 14 — presents the high court with two consequential questions about the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act's successive-petition regime that will be immediately relevant to federal postconviction practice, says attorney Elizabeth Franklin-Best.

• Why Justices Seem Inclined To Curtail Del. Affidavit Statute

  

  After recent oral argument before the U.S. Supreme Court in Berk v. Choy — asking whether Delaware's affidavit-of-merit statute applies in federal diversity actions, or whether the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure displace the state requirement — it appears the court is poised to simplify the standard approach, says Eric Weitz of The Weitz Law Firm.