Expert Analysis

• Fed. Circ. In Jan.: On The Validity Of Expert Testimony

  

  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.

• Reel Justice: 'Sentimental Value' And Witness Anxiety

  

  "Sentimental Value" reminds us that anxiety can interfere with performance, but unlike actors, witnesses cannot rehearse their lines or control the script, so a lawyer's role is not to eliminate stress, but to create conditions where the accuracy of a witness's testimony survives under pressure, says Veronica Finkelstein at Wilmington University.

• Calif.'s Civility Push Shows Why Professionalism Is Vital

  

  The California Bar’s campaign against discourteous behavior by attorneys, including a newly required annual civility oath, reflects a growing concern among states that professionalism in law needs shoring up — and recognizes that maintaining composure even when stressed is key to both succeeding professionally and maintaining faith in the legal system, says Lucy Wang at Hinshaw.

• Series

  Trivia Competition Makes Me A Better Lawyer

  

  Playing trivia taught me to quickly absorb information and recognize when I've learned what I'm expected to know, training me in the crucial skills needed to be a good attorney, and reminding me to be gracious in defeat, says Jonah Knobler at Patterson Belknap.

• Opinion

  Bridging The Bench And Bars To Uphold The Rule Of Law

  

  In a moment when the judiciary faces unprecedented partisan attacks and public trust in our courts is fragile, and with the stakes being especially high for mass tort cases, attorneys on both sides of the bench have a responsibility to restore confidence in our justice system, say Bryan Aylstock at Aylstock Witkin and Kiley Grombacher at Bradley/Grombacher.

• Clarifying A Persistent Misconception About Settlement Talks

  

  An Indiana federal court’s recent Cloudbusters v. Tinsley ruling underscores the often-misunderstood principle that Rule 408 of the Federal Rules of Evidence does not bar parties from referencing prior settlement communications in their pleadings — a critical distinction when such demands further a fraudulent or bad faith scheme, say attorneys at Hanson Bridgett.

• Series

  Law School's Missed Lessons: What Cross-Selling Truly Takes

  

  Early-career attorneys may struggle to introduce clients to practitioners in other specialties, but cross-selling becomes easier once they know why it’s vital to their first years of practice, which mistakes to avoid and how to anticipate clients' needs, say attorneys at Moses & Singer.

• Tick, Tock: Maximizing The Clock, Regardless Of Trial Length

  

  Whether a judge grants more or less time for trial than an attorney hoped for, understanding how to strategically leverage the advantages and attenuate the disadvantages of each scenario can pay dividends in juror attentiveness and judicial respect, says Clint Townson at Townson Litigation.

• Mass. Ruling Raises Questions About Whistleblower Status

  

  In Galvin v. Roxbury Community College, Massachusetts' top appellate court held that an individual was protected from retaliation as a whistleblower, even though he engaged in illegal activity, raising questions about whether whistleblowers who commit illegal acts are protected and whether trusted employees are doing their job or whistleblowing, say attorneys at Littler.

• Ariz. Uber Verdict Has Implications Beyond Ride-Hailing Cos.

  

  When an Arizona federal jury in Jaylyn Dean v. Uber Technologies recently ordered Uber to pay $8.5 million to a woman who said she was sexually assaulted by her driver, their most important finding — that the driver was Uber's agent — could have huge consequences for future litigation involving platform-based businesses, says Michael Epstein at The Epstein Law Firm.

• Series

  Judges On AI: Practical Use Cases In Chambers

  

  U.S. Magistrate Judge Allison Goddard in the Southern District of California discusses how she uses generative artificial intelligence tools in chambers to make work more efficient and effective — from editing jury instructions for clarity to summarizing key documents.

• Opinion

  Criminalizing Officials' Speech Erodes Trust In Justice System

  

  Federal prosecutors reportedly investigating whether Minnesota officials’ public statements illegally impeded immigration enforcement is a dangerous overextension of obstruction law that would criminalize dissent and sow public distrust in law enforcement, say Marc Levin and Khalil Cumberbatch at the Council on Criminal Justice.

• Series

  Trail Running Makes Me A Better Lawyer

  

  Navigating the muddy, root-filled path of trail marathons and ultramarathons provides fertile training ground for my high-stakes fractional general counsel work, teaching me to slow down my mind when the terrain shifts, sharpen my focus and trust my training, says Eric Proos at Next Era Legal.

• Opinion

  Justices' Monsanto Decision May Fix A Preemption Mistake

  

  In Monsanto Co. v. Durnell, the U.S. Supreme Court will address whether federal law preempts states' label-based failure-to-warn claims when federal regulators have not required a warning — and its decision could correct a long-standing misinterpretation of a prior high court ruling, thus ending myriad meritless state law personal injury claims, says Lawrence Ebner at Capital Appellate.

• Malpractice Claim Assignability Continues To Divide Courts

  

  Recent decisions from courts across the country demonstrate how different jurisdictions balance competing policy interests in determining whether legal malpractice claims can be assigned, providing a framework to identify when and how to challenge any attempted assignment, says Christopher Blazejewski at Sherin & Lodgen.