Expert Analysis

• Series

  Mich. Banking Brief: All The Notable Legal Updates In Q2

  

  The second quarter brought several notable financial services law developments to Michigan, including a U.S. Supreme Court ruling on state tax foreclosures, progress on a money transmission modernization bill package, and continued legislative momentum on cryptocurrency and mortgage lending, say attorneys at Dykema.

• Justices' Ruling Alters Playing Field For State Subpoena Suits

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in First Choice Women’s Resource Centers v. Davenport will spark more federal court challenges to state subpoenas, but procedural defenses will block some merits decisions, so plaintiffs must carefully time and manage parallel federal and state proceedings, say attorneys at Troutman.

• Looking At Drake's Diss Track Appeal Through An IP Lens

  

  Though Drake's pending Second Circuit appeal over UMG's promotion of Kendrick Lamar's "Not Like Us" is formally about defamation, it shows that IP considerations can help identify records showing how a work traveled, which may guide courts when deciding context, says attorney Abdul Abdullahi.

• Series

  Bass Fishing Makes Me A Better Lawyer

  

  Landing a trophy striped bass and closing a big deal both require cultivating the patience to finesse — not force — your way to desired outcomes, changing course when your old approach isn’t working and learning from the ones that got away, says Jon Ruiss at Alston & Bird.

• Series

  NY Banking Brief: All The Notable Legal Updates In Q2

  

  The year's second quarter brought several notable banking law developments to New York, including a proposal to align state stablecoin rules with the federal Genius Act, fresh fair lending and cybersecurity guidance from state regulators, and a significant Second Circuit holding on preemption, say attorneys at Ashurst Perkins Coie.

• PacifiCorp Ruling Shows Limits Of Aggregate Wildfire Loss Models

  

  An Oregon appeals court's recent decision in James v. PacifiCorp illustrates that in litigation involving multiple wildfires, materially different causation theories, and evidence tied to particular fires and locations, a single undifferentiated damages model is vulnerable to attack, say Paige Van Oosten and Jason Kim at Hunton and Kevin Cahill at FTI Consulting.

• Roundup

  The Most Talked-About Supreme Court Decisions Of 2026

  

  This term, 11 U.S. Supreme Court decisions quickly became hot topics among Law360's guest writers.

• A New Defense For Medicaid Fraud Cases In Texas

  

  The Texas Supreme Court decision in LabCorp v. Texas last month, finding that the state's False Claims Act requires proof that an omission is material, is among the first to establish that the government's lack of reaction to the defendant's disclosures rendered alleged omissions immaterial, say attorneys at Sheppard.

• Fighting The Evidentiary Risks Of Deepfakes In Court

  

  Though courts and federal rules are only slowly developing frameworks for assessing digital evidence that could have been created or generated by artificial intelligence, litigators should understand what steps they'll likely need to take to successfully challenge potentially deepfaked exhibits — and fight questions about the authenticity of their own, say attorneys at MoFo.

• Justices' Cuba Ruling Narrowly Recasts Sovereign Immunity

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court recently allowed Exxon Mobil's bid for $1 billion in damages for Cuban-seized property to proceed, but the ruling's doctrinal significance is in treating the Helms-Burton Act as a later, specific and self-contained statutory displacement of the default jurisdictional immunity regime, says Josep Galvez at 4-5 Gray's Inn.

• 'Tiger King' Funeral Clip Ruling Offers Fair Use Road Map

  

  The Tenth Circuit's decision in Whyte Monkee v. Netflix that the streaming service's use of another party's funeral footage in the docuseries "Tiger King" constituted fair use lays out a framework for producers to apply the four statutory fair use factors to their own projects, says Frank D’Angelo at Loeb & Loeb.

• Justices Stand On Statutory Specifics In Cisco And Landor

  

  With its June 23 decisions in Cisco Systems Inc. v. Doe and Landor v. Louisiana Department of Corrections and Public Safety, the U.S. Supreme Court doubled down on the critical point that the statute invoked in a federal claim must authorize a private lawsuit and the remedy sought, says Patrick Judd at Phelps Dunbar.

• Justices' Concurrences Foretell Fault Line On Appeal Waivers

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court recently ruled 8-1 in Hunter v. U.S. that appeal waivers that produce a miscarriage of justice are unenforceable, but the decision's concurrences indicate future divisions over whether this exception will be used as a rare safety valve or to police ordinary but troubling plea errors, say attorneys at RJO.

• How Montgomery Ruling Will Affect Cos. Across Supply Chain

  

  Since the U.S. Supreme Court's May 14 decision in Montgomery v. Caribe Transport II, the immediate focus has been on freight brokers and negligent carrier-selection claims, but the ripple effects may extend to shippers, logistics providers, insurers, transportation managers and other participants in the supply chain, say attorneys at Quintairos Prieto.

• High Court's FCC Fine Ruling Reframes Agency Enforcement

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision in Federal Communications Commission v. AT&T sweeps aside uncertainty about what kinds of regulatory enforcement trigger a Seventh Amendment right, say attorneys at Squire Patton.