Expert Analysis

• Opinion

  Thomas Report Is Final Straw — High Court Needs Ethics Code

  

  As a recent report on Justice Clarence Thomas' ongoing conflicts of interest makes evident, Supreme Court justices should be subject to an enforceable and binding code of ethics — like all other federal judges — to maintain the credibility of the institution, says Erica Salmon Byrne at Ethisphere.

• Joint Representation Ethics Lessons From Ga. Electors Case

  

  The Fulton County district attorney's recent motion to disqualify an attorney from representing her elector clients, claiming a nonconsentable conflict of interest, raises key questions about representing multiple clients related to the same conduct and highlights potential pitfalls, say Hilary Gerzhoy and Grace Wynn at HWG.

• Lawyer Discernment Is Critical In The World Of AI

  

  In light of growing practical concerns about risks and challenges posed by artificial intelligence, lawyers' experience with the skill of discernment will position them to help address new ethical and moral dilemmas and ensure that AI is developed and deployed in a way that benefits society as a whole, says Jennifer Gibbs at Zelle.

• 5 Tips For Filing Gov't Notices After Insurance Producer M&A

  

  As insurance producer acquisition activity picks up in 2023, requiring a daunting process of notifying information changes to each Department of Insurance where the entity is licensed, certain best practices will help buyers alleviate frustration and avoid administrative actions and fines, say attorneys at Foley & Lardner.

• Policyholder Lessons From Sandy No-Coverage Decision

  

  A New York federal court recently decided that in the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy, Madelaine Chocolate knew Great Northern Insurance’s all-risk policy offered no coverage for storm surge — an important reminder that policyholders should review policy language for ambiguities or anti-concurrent causation clauses, say Dennis Artese and Joshua Zelen at Anderson Kill.

• Seeking IRS Accountability For Faulty Microcaptive Notice

  

  Like the taxpayers in Standard Insurances v. U.S. seeking to expand earlier wins in microcaptive insurance cases that limit IRS use of improperly obtained information, others should consider ways to hold the agency accountable and provide incentive for it to follow the law going forward, says Joshua Smeltzer at Gray Reed.

• Don't Forget Alumni Engagement When Merging Law Firms

  

  Neglecting law firm alumni programs after a merger can sever the deep connections attorneys have with their former firms, but by combining good data management and creating new opportunities to reconnect, firms can make every member in their expanded network of colleagues feel valued, say Clare Roath and Erin Warner at Troutman Pepper.

• Without Stronger Due Diligence, Attys Risk AML Regulation

  

  Amid increasing pressure to mitigate money laundering and terrorism financing risks in gatekeeper professions, the legal industry will need to clarify and strengthen existing client due diligence measures — or risk the federal regulation attorneys have long sought to avoid, says Jeremy Glicksman at the Nassau County District Attorney’s Office.

• Insureds' Notice Pleading May Be Insufficient In Federal Court

  

  A recent New Jersey federal court ruling in Bauman v. Hanover Insurance held that bare-bones notice pleading was insufficient and dismissed the policyholder's coverage complaint, a reminder that courts may require more than an expression of general disagreement with an insurance company's denial letter to proceed with the case, says Eugene Killian at The Killian Firm.

• 5th Circ. Offers Expert Opinion Guidance For Insurance Cases

  

  A recent Fifth Circuit decision in Majestic Oil v. Lloyd's of London provides insight into how Texas' concurrent causation doctrine could affect insurance cases where the cause of damage is at issue, and raises considerations for litigants faced with new or revised expert reports after the deadline has passed, say Brian Scarbrough and Cianan Lesley at Jenner & Block.

• Every Lawyer Can Act To Prevent Peer Suicide

  

  Members of the legal industry can help prevent suicide among their colleagues, and better protect their own mental health, by learning the predictors and symptoms of depression among attorneys and knowing when and how to get practical aid to peers in crisis, says Joan Bibelhausen at Minnesota Lawyers Concerned for Lawyers.

• DUI Liability Ruling Affirms SC Isn't Direct Action-Friendly

  

  The Supreme Court of South Carolina's recent decision in Denson v. National Casualty not only clarifies the state's jurisprudence surrounding private rights of action and negligence per se, but also tacitly reinforces that South Carolina is not a direct-action state, say Anna Cathcart and Turner Albernaz at Phelps Dunbar.

• Building On Successful Judicial Assignment Reform In Texas

  

  Prompt action by the Judicial Conference could curtail judge shopping and improve the efficiency and procedural fairness of the federal courts by implementing random districtwide assignment of cases, which has recently proven successful in Texas patent litigation, says Dabney Carr at Troutman Pepper.

• AmEx Ruling Proves A Double-Edged Sword In Labor Antitrust

  

  Though the U.S. Supreme Court's 2018 decision in Ohio v. American Express was a defense victory, both the plaintiff and defense bars have learned to use the case's holdings to their advantage, with particularly uncertain implications for labor antitrust cases, say Lauren Weinstein and Robert Chen at MoloLamken.

• Peephole Cam Case Lowers The Bar On NY Negligence Claims

  

  A New York state appeals court's recent decision in Brown v. New York Design Center is significant because, barring a contrary state high court ruling, claims of negligent infliction of emotional distress need not demonstrate extreme and outrageous conduct, which could result in an uptick in such claims, say attorneys at Cahill Gordon.