Expert Analysis

• What Courts' Deference Preference Can Mean For Sentencing

  

  The Fifth Circuit’s recent U.S. v. Vargas decision deepens the split among federal appeals courts on the level of deference afforded to commentary in the U.S. sentencing guidelines — an issue that has major real-life ramifications for defendants, and is likely bound for the U.S. Supreme Court, say Jennifer Freel and Michael Murtha at Jackson Walker.

• Caregiver Flexibility Is Crucial For Atty Engagement, Retention

  

  As the battle for top talent continues post-pandemic, many firms are attempting to attract employees with progressive hybrid working environments — and supporting caregivers before, during and after an extended leave is a critically important way to retain top talent, says Manar Morales at The Diversity & Flexibility Alliance.

• How A Union Fight Played A Key Role In Yellow's Bankruptcy

  

  Finger-pointing between company and union representatives appears to be front and center at the early stages of trucking company Yellow’s bankruptcy case, highlighting the failed contract negotiations' role in the company's demise, says George Singer at Holland & Hart.

• What To Watch As Justices Take Up Title VII Job Transfer Case

  

  With its recent decision to hear Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, the U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to decide whether an involuntary job transfer can count as employment discrimination under Title VII — an eventual ruling that has potential to reshape workplace bias claims nationwide, says Adam Grogan at Bell Law Group.

• In-Office Engagement Is Essential To Associate Development

  

  As law firms develop return-to-office policies that allow hybrid work arrangements, they should incorporate the specific types of in-person engagement likely to help associates develop attributes common among successful firm leaders, says Liisa Thomas at Sheppard Mullin.

• Perspectives

  A Judge's Pitch To Revive The Jury Trial

  

  Ohio state Judge Pierre Bergeron explains how the decline of the jury trial threatens public confidence in the judiciary and even democracy as a whole, and he offers ideas to restore this sacred right.

• What Patent Bills Would Mean For Infringement Litigation

  

  Attorneys at Farella Braun summarize a pair of recently introduced patent bills — one that would reform patent eligibility and another that would change procedures for litigating patent invalidity — and explore the potential impact of each.

• How To Recognize And Recover From Lawyer Loneliness

  

  Law can be one of the loneliest professions, but there are practical steps that attorneys and their managers can take to help themselves and their peers improve their emotional health, strengthen their social bonds and protect their performance, says psychologist and attorney Traci Cipriano.

• Opinion

  Litigation Funding Disclosure Should Be Mandatory

  

  Despite the Appellate Rules Committee's recent deferral of the issue of requiring third-party litigation funding disclosure, such a mandate is necessary to ensure the even-handed administration of justice across all cases, says David Levitt at Hinshaw.

• Recalling USWNT's Legal PR Playbook Amid World Cup Bid

  

  As the U.S. Women's National Soccer Team strives to take home another World Cup trophy, their 2022 pay equity settlement with the U.S. Soccer Federation serves as a good reminder that winning in the court of public opinion can be more powerful than a victory inside the courtroom, says Hector Valle at Vianovo.

• 6 Joint-Inventorship Lessons From Fed. Circ.'s Hormel Ruling

  

  The recent Federal Circuit ruling in HIP v. Hormel, finding that David Howard of HIP was not a joint inventor of a Hormel patent, offers patent litigation and application tips, like discussing any work performed under a joint research agreement and assigning invention ownership rights to a specific entity, say attorneys at BCLP.

• Mootness Fees Are Losing Traction In Del. And Federal Courts

  

  The Delaware Chancery's recent decision in Anderson v. Magellan Health deals a significant blow to plaintiffs attorneys seeking mootness fees for merger litigation brought in that state, and federal courts are trending in the same direction, say Paul Marino and Michael Fialkoff at Day Pitney.

• Opinion

  Justices' Job Transfer Review Should Hold To Title VII Text

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court's upcoming decision in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis should hold that a job transfer can be an adverse employment action, and the analysis should be based on the straightforward language of Title VII rather than judicial activism, say Lynne Bernabei and Alan Kabat at Bernabei & Kabat.

• Immigration Program Pitfalls Exacerbate Physician Shortages

  

  Eliminating shortcomings from U.S. immigration regulations and policies could help mitigate the national shortage of physicians by encouraging foreign physicians to work in medically underserved areas, but progress has been halted by partisan gridlock, say Alison Hitz and Dana Schwarz at Clark Hill.

• Perspectives

  Mallory Gives Plaintiffs A Better Shot At Justice

  

  Critics of the U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision in Mallory v. Norfolk Southern claim it opens the door to litigation tourism, but the ruling simply gives plaintiffs more options — enabling them to seek justice against major corporations in the best possible court, say Rayna Kessler and Ethan Seidenberg at Robins Kaplan.