Expert Analysis

• What 4th Circ.-Approved DEI Ban Means For Employers

  

  The Fourth Circuit’s recent lifting of the injunction against two executive orders banning recipients of federal funds from conducting diversity, equity and inclusion programs means employers should conduct audits to minimize their risk of violating federal antidiscrimination laws or the False Claims Act, says Jonathan Segal at Duane Morris.

• AI-Generated Doc Ruling Guides Attys On Privilege Risks

  

  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.

• 11th Circ. Ruling Offers Guidance On Compensable Work Time

  

  In Villarino v. Pacesetter Personnel Service, the Eleventh Circuit recently ruled that commuting does not become compensable simply because an employer offers transportation, emphasizing that courts will examine whether employees retain meaningful choice and how policies operate, says Lauren Swanson at Hinshaw.

• The Law Firm Merger Diaries: Leadership Strategy After Day 1

  

  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

  DC Circ. Gag Order Rulings Reveal A Digital Privacy Paradox

  

  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.

• 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.

• Methods For Challenging State Civil Investigative Demands

  

  Ongoing challenges to enforcement actions underscore the uphill battle businesses face in arguing that a state investigation is prohibited by federal law, but when properly deployed, these arguments present a viable strategy to resist civil investigative demands issued by state attorneys general, say attorneys at Troutman Pepper.

• Emerging Themes In Post-Groff Accommodation Decisions

  

  Nearly three years after the U.S. Supreme Court's seminal decision in Groff v. DeJoy reshaped the legal framework for religious accommodations, lower court decisions and agency guidance have begun to reveal how this heightened standard operates in practice, and the pitfalls for unwary employers, says Helen Jay at Phelps Dunbar.

• 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.

• 4th Circ. D&O Ruling Shows Why Textual Policy Args Are Best

  

  The Fourth Circuit's recent decision in favor of the insurer in Navigators Insurance v. Under Armour highlights how plain-text policy interpretation protects party autonomy and improves predictability to the benefit of both insurers and insureds, say attorneys at Zelle.

• 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.

• An Instructive Reminder On Appealing ITC Determinations

  

  A recent Federal Circuit decision, partially dismissing Crocs' appeal of a U.S. International Trade Commission verdict as untimely, offers a powerful reminder that the ITC is a creature of statute and that practitioners would do well to interpret those statutes conservatively, says Derrick Carman at Robins Kaplan.

• Decoding Arbitral Disputes: US Cert Denial And EU Strategy

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court recently denied certiorari in Russia v. Hulley Enterprises, leaving in place the D.C. Circuit's opinion supporting jurisdiction in the $50 billion arbitration award challenge, and intensifying litigation exposure for the European Union's strategy of contesting the enforceability of intra-EU awards abroad, says Josep Galvez at 4-5 Gray's Inn.

• 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.

• OCC Mortgage Escrow Rules Add Fuel To Preemption Debate

  

  Two rules proposed in December by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, which would preempt state laws requiring national banks to pay interest on mortgage escrow accounts, are a bold new federal gambit in the debate over how much authority Congress intended to hand state regulators under the Dodd-Frank Act, says Christian Hancock at Bradley Arant.