Expert Analysis

• Why Highly Specialized Experts May Risk Exclusion At Trial

  

  Expert witnesses with highly specific areas of focus may be vulnerable to exclusion in court, making it important for attorneys to check how potential witnesses' qualifications can be bolstered by their publications and other professional activities, say Evan Weisberg and Christopher Cunio at Hunton, and Kevin Cahill at FTI Consulting.

• How NEPA Review Has Changed Since Seven County

  

  A year after the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County instituted major changes to judicial review under the National Environmental Policy Act, courts are effectively applying the decision, but where things go from here may be up to agencies and project proponents, say attorneys at Venable.

• Drawing A Line Between Settlement Pressure And Extortion

  

  U.S. v. Luo, pending in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, may force courts to address anew when settlement negotiations become criminal extortion, particularly in the age of easily fabricated digital evidence, says attorney Denis Kiely.

• Opinion

  Md., Colo. Climate Rulings Point To Need For Federal Solution

  

  As the U.S. Supreme Court prepares to review the Colorado Supreme Court's 2025 ruling in Boulder County v. Suncor U.S. Inc., which green-lit a state-level climate lawsuit, a recent conflicting ruling from the Maryland Supreme Court underscores why a uniform federal answer on climate litigation is needed now, says Phil Goldberg at Shook Hardy.

• Series

  Founding An Autism Academy Made Me A Better Lawyer

  

  Starting a nonprofit autism school with no building, no funding model and no guarantee that families would trust us taught me the importance of mission, patience and purpose — lessons that sharpened my practice and showed how meaningful work outside the office can make lawyers better, says Phillip Russell at Ogletree Deakins.

• Insurance Ruling Extends NY Bad Faith To 3rd-Party Coverage

  

  In Renergy v. Mt. Hawley Insurance, a New York federal court recently granted a policyholder leave to amend its complaint to clarify a bad faith claims handling cause of action, confirming, after nearly 20 years, that bad faith damages are available in the third-party liability context, say attorneys at Barnes & Thornburg.

• Opinion

  Rule Of Law Requires Gov't Engagement With Bar, Not Retreat

  

  A federal agency's absence from national and local bar conferences, most recently illustrated by the U.S. Department of Justice's withdrawal from a New York City Bar Association white collar conference, disserves the bar, the government lawyers themselves and, ultimately, the administration of justice, says Muhammad Faridi at Linklaters.

• Regulatory Rollbacks Complicate Car Co. Compliance Plans

  

  As federal fuel economy and emissions regulations undergo seismic changes, and gas prices surge, automakers seeking to position their product lines for the future face a difficult strategic choice: whether to treat today's regulatory rollback as a lasting shift or as a temporary opening in an uncertain market, says Thomas Healy at Honigman.

• The Paradoxical Duty To Adopt AI When You Can't Bill For It

  

  Both billing for hours saved using artificial intelligence and preserving billable time by not adopting AI may violate rules of professional conduct, but until bar associations' ethics rules catch up to this emerging economic dilemma, firms must decide how to adjust fee structures themselves, says Ines Lassalle at Peyrot & Associates.

• Raptors Ruling Shows Risks Of Calif. Enviro Suit Intervention

  

  Intervention in California environmental litigation can allow businesses to help defend agency approvals, but after a state appeals court's recent ruling in Raptors Are the Solution v. CropLife America, it is clear that intervention also carries a price — and that courts will hold parties accountable for the full arc of their litigation conduct, says Thierry Montoya at FBT Gibbons.

• Reel Justice: 'Tuner' And Modern Juror Sympathy

  

  In “Tuner,” the main character’s criminal behavior is framed as an extension of his vulnerability, talent and loyalty, demonstrating how narratives of sympathy shape perceptions of culpability, and why jurors may reinterpret wrongdoing through story and emotion rather than evidence and doctrine, says Veronica Finkelstein at WilmU Law.

• How Federal PFAS Bill Would Expand Liability For Companies

  

  Recently proposed federal legislation governing per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances would not only phase out nonessential uses of PFAS and prohibit detectable environmental releases, but would also expand liability in ways that will matter to companies with current or historical PFAS exposure, says Ayodeji Ayolola at Gordon Rees.

• Trump Admin's Agency Records Purge Tests Judicial Notice

  

  While courts commonly take judicial notice of data in government websites and reports, the Trump administration's recent modification or wholesale deletion of these sources means that litigants must look elsewhere to support trial admission of this information, says Jon Gryskiewicz at Lewis Baach.

• Series

  Cow Horse Makes Me A Better Lawyer

  

  Moving an unwilling 800-pound cow while riding a horse at high speed is exhilarating, a little unhinged and, at least for me, a surprisingly effective training ground for litigation — both demand focus, preparation over rigid planning and the willingness to act despite fear, says Ashley Zitrin at Glenn Agre.

• What Prop 65 Listings For Welding Fumes, Drugs Mean For Cos.

  

  With California poised to add welding chemicals and three medications to its list of known carcinogens under Proposition 65, businesses must assess risks from nontraditional pharmaceutical dispensing, occupational and environmental exposures to welding operations, and downstream exposures from the manufacture of both types of substances, says Gregory Berlin at Alston & Bird.