Expert Analysis

• Florida Throws A Wrench Into Interstate Trucking Torts

  

  Florida's recent request to file a bill of complaint in the U.S. Supreme Court against California and Washington, asserting that the states' policies conflict with the federal English language proficiency standard for truck drivers, transforms a conventional wrongful death case into a high-stakes constitutional challenge, say attorneys at Farah & Farah.

• Series

  The Law Firm Merger Diaries: How To Build On Cultural Fit

  

  Law firm mergers should start with people, then move to strategy: A two-level screening that puts finding a cultural fit at the pinnacle of the process can unearth shared values that are instrumental to deciding to move forward with a combination, says Matthew Madsen at Harrison.

• Mulling Differing Circuit Rulings On Gender-Affirming Care

  

  Despite the Eleventh Circuit's recent holding in Lange v. Houston County that a health plan's exclusion for gender-affirming surgery did not violate Title VII, employers should be mindful of other court decisions suggesting that different legal challenges may still apply to blanket exclusions for such care, say attorneys at Smith Gambrell.

• Why Justices Must Act To End Freight Broker Liability Split

  

  The Sixth Circuit's recent ruling in Cox v. Total Quality Logistics Inc., affirming states' authority over negligence claims against transportation brokers, deepens an existing circuit split, creating an untenable situation where laws between neighboring states conflict in seven distinct instances — and making U.S. Supreme Court intervention essential, says Steven Saal at Lucosky Brookman.

• Latisse Ruling's Lessons On Avoiding Chemical Patent Pitfalls

  

  The Federal Circuit's decision in Duke v. Sandoz, reversing a $39 million infringement claim for selling a generic Latisse product, reinforces a fundamental truth in chemical patent strategy: Broad genus claims rarely survive without clear evidence of possession of specific embodiments, says Kimberly Vines at Stites & Harbison.

• 2nd Circ. Decision Offers Securities Fraud Pleading Insights

  

  In Gimpel v. Hain Celestial, the Second Circuit’s recent finding that investor plaintiffs adequately alleged a food and personal care company made actionable misrepresentations and false statements presents a road map for evaluating securities fraud complaints that emphasizes statements made and scienter, rather than pure omissions, say attorneys at Nixon Peabody.

• Considerations When Invoking The Common-Interest Privilege

  

  To successfully leverage the common-interest doctrine in a multiparty transaction or complex litigation, practitioners should be able to demonstrate that the parties intended for it to apply, that an underlying privilege like attorney-client has attached, and guard against disclosures that could waive privilege and defeat its purpose, say attorneys at DLA Piper.

• 1st Circ. Offers Diversity Jurisdiction Lessons For Assignees

  

  A recent First Circuit opinion in Gore v. SLSCO, dismissing a case after years of litigation, serves as a cautionary tale about what can go wrong if an assignee has not alleged sufficient facts to demonstrate there is complete diversity jurisdiction, says Ray Gauvreau at Robinson & Cole.

• Motorola Ruling Solidifies Discretionary Authority Of USPTO

  

  The Federal Circuit's latest ruling in In re: Motorola Solutions Inc. underscores the finality and discretionary nature of the finality of Patent Trial and Appeal Board institution decisions, and clarifies that neither interim guidance nor shifting administrative policy creates substantive rights for petitioners, say attorneys at Morgan Lewis.

• How Marsy's Law Has Been Applied In Unexpected Ways

  

  Since Marsy’s Law was first passed in California 17 years ago, 12 states have passed similar laws to protect crime victims’ rights, but recent developments show that it’s being applied in ways that its original proponents may never have anticipated — with implications for all legal practitioners, says Tom Jones at Berk Brettler.

• Series

  The Law Firm Merger Diaries: Making The Case To Combine

  

  When making the decision to merge, law firm leaders must factor in strategic alignment, cultural compatibility and leadership commitment in order to build a compelling case for combining firms to achieve shared goals and long-term success, says Kevin McLaughlin at UB Greensfelder.

• What To Know As Rulings Limit NLRB's Expanded Remedies

  

  Two recent appellate decisions strongly rebuke the National Labor Relations Board's expansion of remedies beyond reinstatement and back pay under Thryv, which compensated employees for all direct or foreseeable pecuniary harms, signaling increased judicial skepticism toward the board's broadened remedial authority, says Shay Billington at CDF Labor.

• Opinion

  Despite Deputy AG Remarks, DOJ Can't Sideline DC Bar

  

  Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche’s recent suggestion that the D.C. Bar would be prevented from reviewing misconduct complaints about U.S. Department of Justice attorneys runs contrary to federal statutes, local rules and decades of case law, and sends the troubling message that federal prosecutors are subject to different rules, say attorneys at HWG.

• Workers' Comp Ruling May Expand Ohio Employer Liability

  

  The Ohio Supreme Court's recent decision in State ex rel. Berry v. Industrial Commission marks a shift in Ohio workers' compensation law by reducing judicial deference to the Industrial Commission's interpretations of the state's specific safety requirements and potentially expanding employer exposure, say attorneys at Benesch.

• 10th Circ. Debtor Ruling May Expand Wire Fraud Law Scope

  

  The Tenth Circuit’s recent U.S. v. Baker decision, holding that federal fraud law can reach deceptive schemes designed to prevent a creditor from collecting on a debt, may represent an expansive new theory of wire fraud — even as the ruling reaffirmed the requirements of the interstate commerce element, say attorneys at ArentFox Schiff.