Expert Analysis

• What Justices Left Unsaid About The Federal Tort Claims Act

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision in Martin v. U.S. rejected the Eleventh Circuit's interpretation of the Federal Tort Claims Act in the case of a botched police raid — but left unresolved many questions about plaintiffs' ability to hold the government accountable for officers' misdeeds, says Scott Brooks at Levy Firestone.

• Opinion

  Bar Exam Reform Must Expand Beyond A Single Updated Test

  

  Recently released information about the National Conference of Bar Examiners’ new NextGen Uniform Bar Exam highlights why a single test is not ideal for measuring newly licensed lawyers’ competency, demonstrating the need for collaborative development, implementation and reform processes, says Gregory Bordelon at Suffolk University.

• Texas High Court Decision Could Reshape Contract Damages

  

  The Texas Supreme Court recently held that an order of specific performance for a real property transaction doesn't preclude a damage award, establishing a damages test for this scenario while placing the onus on lower courts to correctly determine the proper remedies and quantum of damages, say attorneys at Fried Frank.

• The Patent Eligibility Eras Tour: 11 Years Of Post-Alice Tumult

  

  A survey of recent twists and turns in patent eligibility law highlights the confusion created by the U.S. Supreme Court's 2014 Alice decision and reveals that the continually shifting standards have begun to diverge in fundamental ways between the Federal Circuit and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, says Michael Shepherd at Fish & Richardson.

• Justices Could Clarify Post-Badgerow Arbitration Jurisdiction

  

  If the U.S. Supreme Court grants a certiorari petition in Jules v. Andre Balazs Properties, it could provide some welcome clarity on post-arbitration award jurisdiction, an issue lingering since the court's 2022 decision in Badgerow v. Walters, says David Pegno at Dewey Pegno.

• A Simple Way Courts Can Help Attys Avoid AI Hallucinations

  

  As attorneys increasingly rely on generative artificial intelligence for legal research, courts should consider expanding online quality control programs to flag potential hallucinations — permitting counsel to correct mistakes and sparing judges the burden of imposing sanctions, say attorneys at Lankler Siffert & Wohl and Connors.

• Strategies For ICE Agent Misconduct Suits In The 11th Circ.

  

  Attorneys have numerous pathways to pursue misconduct claims against U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents in the Eleventh Circuit, and they need not wait for the court to correct its misinterpretation of a Federal Tort Claims Act exception, says Lauren Bonds at the National Police Accountability Project.

• Opinion

  SEC Should Restore Its 2020 Proxy Adviser Rule

  

  Due to concerns over proxy advisers' accuracy, reliability and transparency, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission should reinstate its 2020 rule designed to suppress the influence that they wield in shareholder voting, says Kyle Isakower at the American Council for Capital Formation.

• Surveying The Changing Overdraft Fee Landscape

  

  Despite recent federal moves that undermine consumer overdraft fee protections, last year’s increase in fee charges suggests banks will face continued scrutiny via litigation and state regulation, says Amanda Kurzendoerfer at Bates White.

• What's At Stake In High Court Review Of Funds' Right To Sue

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court's upcoming review of FS Credit Opportunities v. Saba Capital Master Fund, a case testing the limits of using Investment Company Act Section 47(b) to give funds a private right of action to enforce other sections of the law, could either encourage or curb similar activist investor lawsuits, say attorneys at Goodwin.

• The Evolving Legal Landscape For THC-Infused Beverages

  

  A recent Eighth Circuit ruling, holding that states may restrict the sale of intoxicating hemp-derived products without violating federal law, combined with ongoing regulatory uncertainty at both the federal and state levels, could alter the trajectory of the THC-infused beverage market, say attorneys at Pashman Stein.

• How Securities Defendants Might Use New Wire Fraud Ruling

  

  Though the Second Circuit’s recent U.S. v. Chastain decision — vacating the conviction of an ex-OpenSea staffer — involved the wire fraud statute, insider trading defendants might attempt to import the ruling’s reasoning into the securities realm, says Jonathan Richman at Brown Rudnick.

• Cos. Must Tailor Due Diligence As Trafficking Risks Increase

  

  As legislators, prosecutors and plaintiffs attorneys increasingly focus on labor and sex trafficking throughout the U.S., companies must tailor their due diligence strategies to protect against forced labor trafficking risks in their supply chains, say attorneys at Steptoe.

• Unpacking The Supreme Court's Views On Judgment Finality

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court's June opinion in BLOM Bank SAL v. Honickman reaffirmed that the bar for reopening a final judgment remains exceptionally high — even when the movant seeks to amend their complaint based on a new legal development, say attorneys at Venable.

• Asbestos Ruling Cements All Sums Coverage Precedent In SC

  

  With its recent decision in Protopapas v. Travelers, the South Carolina Court of Appeals becomes the highest court in South Carolina to adopt the all sums allocation approach for long-tail claims, providing key appellate precedent to support policyholders' efforts to maximize their coverage, say attorneys at Anderson Kill.