Expert Analysis

• 4 Tips On Expert Gatekeeping From J&J Talc Deal

  

  Johnson & Johnson's successful campaign to exclude plaintiff-side oncologist testimony about whether its talcum powder caused ovarian cancer, which prompted the recent resolution of 70,000 claims, offers lessons on how product liability defendants can reshape risk calculation by rigorously applying expert admissibility rules, say attorneys at Hollingsworth.

• Series

  Playing Bid Whist Makes Me A Better Lawyer

  

  As a child, I viewed bid whist as a family tradition and a source of friendly card game competition, but as a lawyer, I see it as a tool that has helped me cultivate skills like communication, teamwork, risk assessment and composure, says Keyonn Pope at Riley Safer.

• Opinion

  Calif. Bill Goes Too Far In Trying To Regulate Attorney AI Use

  

  California’s first-in-the-nation act regulating how attorneys and arbitrators use generative artificial intelligence will likely soon become law, but read broadly, the provisions may dissuade lawyers from employing AI at all, thereby depriving them of key work tools, says Joshua Wurtzel at Schlam Stone.

• Hims & Hers Suit Spotlights Health Data-Sharing Privacy Risks

  

  Regulators' complaint against telehealth company Hims & Hers alleging deceptive practices serves as a reminder that the privacy principles developed under consumer protection laws and predating omnibus statutes remain in force, and sensitive data governance continues to be a crucial component of compliance, say attorneys at Venable.

• Reel Justice: 'The Furious' And Journalistic Evidence

  

  Viewing "The Furious” from a litigator’s perspective highlights nuances that arise when gathering evidence from journalistic investigations, serving as a reminder to not only ask whether evidence is relevant, but also what legal framework governs the person or entity holding it, says Veronica Finkelstein at Widener-Delaware Law.

• Resetting For Success After Corporate Litigation Loses Focus

  

  Corporate litigation that has lost strategic coherence may barrel disastrously ahead if counsel’s understanding of the matter drifts from the client’s goals, but cases can be wrenched back on track by diagnosing how facts have evolved, determining where resources are justified and deploying practical strategies for restoring discipline, says Jonathan Morris at Gordon Rees.

• How Bifurcation And Verdict Forms Can Sway Jury Outcomes

  

  The bifurcated trial structure used in a Nevada personal injury case — where the jury recently awarded the plaintiff more than $56 million — highlights a strategic option that litigators often overlook and raises considerations about the potential advantage of carefully assembled verdict forms, says litigation consultant Clint Townson.

• A Texas Ruling May Offer Guidance On Freight Broker Liability

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Montgomery v. Caribe Transport removed federal preemption defenses to freight broker negligent-selection claims, and a July verdict in Texas against C.H. Robinson raised further questions about how brokers can achieve compliance — but another recent Texas decision involving Home Depot may offer some answers, say attorneys at Baker Donelson.

• Meta Deal Highlights Advisory Jury Issues, Litigation Risk

  

  The $17 billion settlement of youth safety claims brought against Meta offers lessons for all consumer-facing companies because the court made the rare move of empaneling an advisory jury and the case was built on what the company learned from its own studies, says Mark Morgan at McCarter & English.

• Harvard Morgue Deal Shows Stakes Of Good Faith Immunity

  

  Harvard's recent $53 million payment to settle lawsuits concerning body part thefts from its medical school morgue spotlights the state’s Uniform Anatomical Gift Act, which only extends good faith immunity to anatomical donation stakeholders if certain conditions are met, says Christina Strong at Dilworth Paxson.

• 2nd Circ. Tylenol MDL Ruling Clarifies Court Gatekeeper Role

  

  The Second Circuit’s recent decision in multidistrict litigation over alleged links between Tylenol and developmental disorders, holding that the trial court improperly excluded expert witnesses, preserves meaningful judicial gatekeeping while making clear that judges may not resolve legitimate scientific disputes themselves, say attorneys at Lowenstein Sandler.

• Series

  Law School's Missed Lessons: Cultivating Good Judgment

  

  Law schools generally overlook the role that solid judgment skills play in real-world practice, but attorneys can bridge the gap by strengthening their abilities to assess a case’s strengths and weaknesses, develop and execute effective strategies, and provide clear recommendations to clients, says Manny Caixeiro at Venable.

• NJ Justices' Walmart Ruling Clarifies Future Snowstorm Duty

  

  A recent New Jersey Supreme Court decision, that a contractor's spreading of salt on a minimal snow accumulation in a Walmart parking lot did not create liability, delivers important clarity on the state's ongoing-storm rule, says Maxx Johnson at Stradley Ronon.

• What Trial Teams Should Know About AI Jury Research Tools

  

  Using artificial intelligence for jury research is quickly becoming part of the litigation consulting landscape, and can be a useful part of a case assessment toolkit — but litigators must understand what these systems are built to measure, and what conclusions can reasonably be drawn from their output, say Bill Kanasky and Steve Wood at Courtroom Sciences.

• Attorneys Using AI May Have Ethical Duty To Redact Docs

  

  The trajectory of legal ethics guidance in recent years strongly suggests that as redaction technology becomes more accessible, the failure to use it when uploading highly confidential materials into artificial intelligence tools will become increasingly difficult to defend as reasonable, say attorneys at Lewis Brisbois.