Expert Analysis

• Calif. Ruling Lowers Bar For Health Data Breach Claims

  

  The California Supreme Court's ruling in J.M. v. Illuminate Education offers protection for non-healthcare companies that maintain health-related data but also adopts a new and more plaintiff-favorable standard for breach of confidentiality that companies maintaining any health-related data should address, say attorneys at Cooley.

• Florida Atty Fees Ruling Could End Expert Testimony Mandate

  

  For over 60 years, Florida appellate courts have required an evidentiary hearing and expert testimony to support the reasonableness of an attorney fee award, but the Florida Sixth District Court of Appeal's recent Ruffenach v. Deutsche Bank National Trust ruling could make substantive changes to this requirement, say attorneys at RumbergerKirk.

• Texas Ruling Leaves Key Oil Royalty Question Unresolved

  

  The Texas Supreme Court's recent decision in Fasken Oil and Ranch v. Puig clarifies that royalty reservations containing “free of cost forever” language do not bar deduction of post-production costs — but it leaves open whether prices producers report to royalty owners should reflect what unaffiliated buyers would pay, says Robert Foss at Hinds Feat Advisors.

• Justices Widen Path For Confiscated Cuban Property Claims

  

  For Americans holding claims to confiscated Cuban property, the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in Havana Docks v. Royal Caribbean Cruises means that the expiration of their property interest is no longer a bar and that any company using such property is now a potential defendant, say attorneys at Bracewell.

• Your Next Litigation Hold Should Cover AI Chat Logs

  

  The Delaware Chancery Court’s recent decision in Fortis Advisors v. Krafton to treat a CEO’s artificial intelligence chats as substantive evidence is being read as a discovery warning to litigators, but there is a second duty-to-preserve lesson that is especially pertinent to in-house counsel, say attorneys at Faegre Drinker.

• Opinion

  High Court's Abortion Pill Stay Reinforces Appellate Principles

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court's recent order in Danco Laboratories v. Louisiana, staying a Fifth Circuit ruling that reinstated an in-person requirement for dispensing the abortion medicine mifepristone, should be seen not as a definitive ruling on reproductive rights, but as an affirmation of a more disciplined jurisdictional reality, says Daniel Nardo at Nardo & Associates.

• Series

  Studying Foreign Languages Makes Me A Better Lawyer

  

  Studying Italian and Japanese has shown me that learning a new language can benefit a legal career in several ways, including by demonstrating the importance of approaching problems from a fresh perspective and the value of practicing patience with colleagues and clients, says Anna King at Genworth Financial.

• 6th Circ. Ruling Highlights Split On Labor Cost Depreciation

  

  The Sixth Circuit's recent decision in Schoening Investment v. Cincinnati Casualty throws into relief the fine lines of courts' varying interpretations of whether a commercial property insurer may justifiably depreciate labor costs to determine the actual cash value of damage, says Nabila Rahim at Zelle.

• 6th Circ. Ruling Broadest So Far In Wave Of Habeas Decisions

  

  The Sixth Circuit’s recent opinion in Lopez-Campos v. Raycraft provides the most developed structural reasoning among rulings in a widening circuit split over mandatory detention after undocumented entry into the U.S., and supplies immigration practitioners a template for due process arguments in favor of habeas relief, says Kemal Hepsen at Mandamus Lawyers.

• Opinion

  Murdaugh Reversal Masks Deeper Justice System Issues

  

  The South Carolina Supreme Court's recent reversal of Alex Murdaugh's murder conviction leans heavily on improper jury influence by an ex-county clerk of court while underbilling other errors in the case, which are emblematic of larger issues with the justice system, says Barry Edwards at Fair Trial Analysis.

• Del. Justices' Ripeness Ruling Shields Advance Notice Bylaws

  

  The Delaware Supreme Court’s recent decision dismissing two AES and Owens Corning stockholder challenges of advance notice bylaws as unripe provides corporations more room to insulate their nomination procedures from activist pressure, say attorneys at Reed Smith.

• How The High Court Expanded Freight Broker Liability

  

  After the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Montgomery v. Caribe Transport II that freight brokers may be liable for selecting unsafe motor carriers, the key question will be whether brokers used reasonable care in selecting a given motor carrier, with the concurring opinion offering some clues as to what reasonable care might look like, says Marc Blubaugh at Benesch.

• 'Anderson Method' Ruling Shows Copyright Limits In Fitness

  

  The Ninth Circuit's ruling in Tracy Anderson Mind and Body v. Megan Roup, finding that sequences of exercises developed and recorded by Tracy Anderson were not copyrightable choreographic works, is a reminder that even highly creative fitness programming can fall outside the scope of copyright protection, says Meredith Bobber Strauss at Michelman & Robinson.

• 2nd Circ.'s Cantero Redo Complicates Mortgage Escrow Issue

  

  The Second Circuit's recent decision in Cantero v. Bank of America reflects the absence of definitiveness in mortgage escrow preemption jurisprudence, leaving lenders to navigate conflicting state rules and pricing challenges amid a deepening circuit split, say attorneys at Sullivan & Cromwell.

• 3 Rulings Show How Creditors Make Civil RICO Claims Stick

  

  An Arizona federal court's recent decision concerning UniCredit Bank Austria is one of few in which creditors' claims against debtors for Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act violations have survived motions to dismiss, and these claims' substantial benefits make the rulings worth analyzing for guidance, says Brian Asher at Asher Research.