-
Series
Law school provides doctrine, cases and hypotheticals, but when lawyers step into the courtroom, they must learn the importance of clarity, credibility, memorability and preparation — in other words, how to tell simple, effective stories, say Nicholas Steverson and Danielle Trujillo at Wheeler Trigg, and Lisa DeCaro at Courtroom Performance.
-
The Southern District of New York’s recent fraud indictments against executives of bankrupt companies Tricolor and First Brands have seemingly revived the Continuing Financial Crimes Enterprise statute, and if the cases succeed, prosecutors across the country will have ample reason to reach for this long-dormant tool, say attorneys at Lankler Siffert & Wohl.
-
The New York City Bar Association’s recently issued formal opinion, providing ethical guidance on artificial intelligence-assisted recording, transcription and summarization, raises immediate questions about data governance and e-discovery for companies that use Microsoft 365 and Copilot, say Staci Kaliner, Martin Tully and John Collins at Redgrave.
-
The trial underway in a California state court against Meta and Google is unprecedented, because it marks the first time a jury has been asked to consider whether social media platforms' engagement-maximizing design can be treated as a product safety issue, or whether it is inseparable from protected expression, says Gary Angiuli at Angiuli & Gentile.
-
A New York federal court’s recent U.S. v. Heppner decision, holding that a defendant’s use of Claude was not privileged, only addressed one narrow artificial intelligence system, but lawyers must recognize that the spectrum of AI tools raises different confidentiality and privilege questions, says Heidi Nadel at HP.
-
A Mississippi federal court's recent decision to let a jury decide a fired worker's discrimination claims illustrates that having a manager of the same race is not necessarily a defense, that jokes can be discriminatory, and that the good faith honest belief rule doesn't always protect employers, says Robin Shea at Constangy Brooks.
-
A Florida federal court's recent decision in De Ford v. Koutolas, declining to rule definitively whether LGBCoin is a security, is notable for how it refused to give deference to U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission guidance on meme coins, which may strengthen the ongoing industry push for clear rules-based regulatory frameworks, say attorneys at Goodwin.
-
Opinion
As tribunals and arbitral institutions increasingly use artificial intelligence tools in their decision-making processes, clear disclosure standards and procedural safeguards are necessary to ensure that efficiency gains do not erode the fairness principles on which arbitration depends, says Alexander Lima at Wesco International.
-
Series
Playing piano and practicing law share many parallels relating to managing complexity: Just as hearing an entire musical passage in my head allows me to reliably deliver the message, thinking about the audience's impression helps me create a legal narrative that keeps the reader engaged, says Michael Shepherd at Fish & Richardson.
-
A California federal court's conviction last month of an ex-Google engineer who stole artificial intelligence trade secrets for the benefit of China is the latest in a series of foreign economic espionage cases and illustrates the urgent need for U.S. companies to implement robust security measures, says attorney Peter Toren.
-
Many legal arguments are riddled with reasoning flaws that can effectively distract or persuade the fact-finder, but these tactics lose much of their power when attorneys recognize and strategically shine a light on them, says Allison Rocker at Baker McKenzie.
-
A New York federal court's ruling, in U.S. v. Heppner, that documents created by a defendant using an artificial intelligence tool were not privileged, can serve as a guide to attorneys for retaining attorney-client or work-product privilege over client documents created with AI, say attorneys at Sher Tremonte.
-
For law firm leaders, ensuring a newly combined law firm lives up to its promise, both in its first days of operation and well after, includes tough decisions, clear and specific communication, and cheerleading, says Peter Michaud at Ballard Spahr.
-
Perspectives
A pair of rulings from the D.C. Circuit reveal a growing dilemma in digital privacy jurisprudence for investigative targets, technology companies and transparency advocates — even when courts set the bar higher for broad nondisclosure requests, the public may never be allowed to learn why orders get approved, say attorneys at RJO.
-
The Federal Circuit's recent decision in Barry v. DePuy, addressing whether expert testimony is admissible even if it does not strictly adhere to the court's claim construction, suggests that exclusion via a Daubert motion is appropriate only when the line to improper testimony is clearly crossed, say attorneys at Knobbe Martens.