Expert Analysis

• How Hyperlinks Are Changing E-Discovery Responsibilities

  

  A recent e-discovery dispute over hyperlinked data in Hubbard v. Crow shows how courts have increasingly broadened the definition of control to account for cloud-based evidence, and why organizations must rethink preservation practices to avoid spoliation risks, says Bree Murphy at Exterro.

• 11th Circ. Equitable Tolling Ruling Deepens Circuit Split

  

  The Eleventh Circuit recently held that equitable tolling was unavailable to extend a deadline to object to discharge of debt, becoming the most recent circuit court decision to address this issue, and deepening a split that requires resolution by the U.S. Supreme Court, says Paul Avron at Berger Singerman.

• Tips As 6th Circ. Narrows Employers' Harassment Liability

  

  In Bivens v. Zep, the Sixth Circuit adopted a heightened standard for employer liability for nonemployee harassment, which diverges from the prevailing view among federal appeals courts, and raises questions about how quickly employers must respond to third-party harassment and how they manage risk across jurisdictions, say attorneys at Benesch.

• Preserving Refunds As Tariffs Await Supreme Court Weigh-In

  

  In the event that the U.S. Supreme Court decides in V.O.S. Selections v. Trump that the president doesn't have authority to levy tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, importers should keep records of imports on which they have paid such tariffs and carefully monitor the liquidation dates, say attorneys at Butzel.

• How Justices' Ruling Upends Personal Jurisdiction Defense

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision in Fuld v. Palestinian Liberation Organization, holding that the Fifth Amendment's due process clause does not require a defendant to have minimum contacts with a forum, may thwart foreign defendants' reliance on personal jurisdiction to evade federal claims in U.S. courts, say attorneys at Axinn.

• 'Occurrence' Lessons From Policyholder's COVID Ruling Win

  

  The Minnesota Court of Appeals recently handed policyholders an important win in Life Time v. Zurich American Insurance, reversing a trial court ruling that had capped coverage under a communicable disease endorsement at a single occurrence, showing the importance of fact-specific inquiry, say attorneys at Hunton.

• 9th Circ. Ruling Leaves SEC Gag Rule Open To Future Attacks

  

  Though the Ninth Circuit's recent ruling in Powell v. U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission leaves the SEC's no-admit, no-deny rule intact, it could provide some fodder for litigants who wish to criticize the commission's activities either before or after settling with the commission, says Jonathan Richman at Brown Rudnick.

• Series

  Writing Musicals Makes Me A Better Lawyer

  

  My experiences with writing musicals and practicing law have shown that the building blocks for both endeavors are one and the same, because drama is necessary for the law to exist, says Addison O’Donnell at LOIS Law.

• Diverging FAA Preemption Rulings Underscore Role Of Venue

  

  Two recent rulings evaluating Federal Arbitration Act preemption of state laws — one from the California Supreme Court, upholding the state law, and another from a New York federal court, upholding the arbitration agreement — demonstrate why venue should be a key consideration when seeking to enforce arbitration clauses, say attorneys at Hollingsworth.

• A Reminder Of The Limits Of The SEC's Crypto Thaw

  

  As the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission's regulatory thaw has opened up new possibilities for tokenization projects, the Ninth Circuit's recent decision in SEC v. Barry that certain fractional interests are investment contracts, and thus securities, illustrates that guardrails remain via the Howey test, say attorneys at Skadden.

• Series

  Adapting To Private Practice: From Va. AUSA To Mid-Law

  

  Returning to the firm where I began my career after seven years as an assistant U.S. attorney in Virginia has been complex, nuanced and rewarding, and I’ve learned that the pursuit of justice remains the constant, even as the mindset and client change, says Kristin Johnson at Woods Rogers.

• 2 Fed. Circ. Rulings Underscore Patent Prosecution Pitfalls

  

  Two recent patent decisions from the Federal Circuit, overturning significant judgments, serve as reminders that claim modifications and cancellations may have substantive effects on the scope of other claims, and that arguments distinguishing prior art and characterizing claims may also limit claim scope, say attorneys at Morgan Lewis.

• Conn. Ruling May Help Prevent Abuse Of Anti-SLAPP Statute

  

  If the decision in Aguilar v. Eick, where the Connecticut Appellate Court held that the state's anti-SLAPP statute does not authorize the court to conduct an evidentiary hearing, is reconsidered by the state Supreme Court, it could provide an important mechanism for defendants to prevent plaintiffs from pleading around the reach of the statute, say attorneys at McCarter & English.

• How 5th Circ.'s NLRB Ruling May Reshape Federal Labor Law

  

  The Fifth Circuit's recent SpaceX National Labor Relations Board decision undermines the agency's authority, but it does not immediately shut down NLRB enforcement, so employers and labor organizations should expect more litigation, more uncertainty and a possible U.S. Supreme Court showdown, say attorneys at Goldberg Segalla.

• Rebutting Price Impact In Securities Class Actions

  

  Defendants litigating securities cases historically faced long odds in defeating class certification, but that paradigm has recently begun to shift, with recent cases ushering in a more searching analysis of price impact and changing the evidence courts can consider at the class certification stage, say attorneys at Katten.