Expert Analysis

• Ill. Justices' Ruling Answers Corporate Defamation Questions

  

  The Illinois Supreme Court's recent unanimous decision in Project44 v. FourKites provides needed certainty and direction for lower courts considering defamation cases involving communications to corporate officers from third parties outside the corporation, which could result in fewer unwarranted motions to dismiss in trial courts and nonmeritorious appeals, says Phillip Zisook at Schoenberg Finkel.

• As Arbitrator Bias Claims Rise, Disclosure Standards Evolve

  

  The growth in post-award challenges based on arbitrators' alleged conflicts of interest has led to the release of new guidance and new case law on the topic — both supporting the view that professional familiarity alone does not translate to a lack of impartiality, say attorneys at Skadden.

• 6th Circ. Bias Ruling Shows Job Evaluations Are Key Defense

  

  In Wehrly v. Allstate, the Sixth Circuit recently declined to revive a terminated employee’s federal and state religious discrimination and retaliation claims, illustrating that an employer’s strongest defense in such cases is a documented employment evaluation history that justifies an adverse action, says Michael Luchsinger at Segal Mccambridge.

• Social Media Free Speech Issues Are Trending At High Court

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision examining what constitutes state action on social media can be viewed in conjunction with oral arguments in two other cases to indicate that the court sees a need for more clarity regarding how social media usage implicates the First Amendment, say attorneys at Kean Miller.

• The Fed. Circ. In April: Hurdles Remain For Generics

  

  The Federal Circuit’s recent Salix v. Norwich ruling — where Salix's brand-name drug's patents were invalidated — is a reminder to patent practitioners that invalidating a competitor's patents may not guarantee abbreviated new drug application approval, say Sean Murray and Jeremiah Helm at Knobbe Martens.

• Bankruptcy Ruling Shifts Lease Rejection Claim Calculation

  

  A New York federal court’s recent ruling in In re: Cortlandt provides guidance on how to calculate a landlord's damages claim when a bankruptcy debtor rejects a lease, changing from an approach that considers the remaining rent due under the lease to one that considers the remaining time, say Bethany Simmons and Noah Weingarten at Loeb & Loeb.

• Don't Use The Same Template For Every Client Alert

  

  As the old marketing adage goes, consistency is key, but law firm style guides need consistency that contemplates variety when it comes to client alert formats, allowing attorneys to tailor alerts to best fit the audience and subject matter, says Jessica Kaplan at Legally Penned.

• 10b-5 Litigation Questions Follow Justices' Macquarie Ruling

  

  Last month, the U.S. Supreme Court held in Macquarie v. Moab that pure omissions are not actionable under U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Rule 10b–5(b), creating a slightly higher bar for plaintiffs and setting the stage for further litigation over several issues, say Steve Quinlivan and Sean Colligan at Stinson.

• Series

  Walking With My Dog Makes Me A Better Lawyer

  

  Thanks to my dog Birdie, I've learned that carving out an activity different from the practice of law — like daily outdoor walks that allow you to interact with new people — can contribute to professional success by boosting creativity and mental acuity, as well as expanding your social network, says Sarah Petrie at the Massachusetts Attorney General’s Office.

• What Calif. Eviction Ruling Means For Defaulting Borrowers

  

  A California appellate court's recent decision in Homeward Opportunities v. Taptelis found that a defaulting borrower could not delay foreclosure with an improperly served notice of pendency of action, but leaves open a possibility for borrowers to delay eviction proceedings merely by filing lawsuits, say Anne Beehler and Krystal Anderson at Holland & Knight.

• Think Like A Lawyer: Follow The Iron Rule Of Trial Logic

  

  Many diligent and eager attorneys include every good fact, point and rule in their trial narratives — spurred by the gnawing fear they’ll be second-guessed for leaving something out — but this approach ignores a fundamental principle of successful trial lawyering, says Luke Andrews at Poole Huffman.

• Court Clerk Error Is No Excuse For A Missed Deadline

  

  Two recent Virginia Court of Appeals decisions in which clerical errors led to untimely filings illustrate that court clerks can be wrong about filing deadlines or the date an order was entered, underscoring the importance of doing one's own research on filing requirements, says Juli Porto at Blankingship & Keith.

• Circuit Split Brews Over Who's A Securities Seller Under Act

  

  A Securities Act section that creates private liability for the sale of an unregistered security is rapidly becoming a favored statute for plaintiffs to wield against participants in both the digital asset and traditional securities markets, but the circuit courts have diverged on who may be held liable for these violations, say Jeffrey L. Steinfeld and Daniel Aronsohn at Winston & Strawn.

• Fed. Circ. Ruling Shows Difficulty Of Proving Deceptive Intent

  

  The Federal Circuit’s recent Freshub v. Amazon decision demonstrates how proving the deceptive intent requirement for inequitable conduct can be challenging, even when there is a five-year delay after abandonment before revival, say attorneys at BCLP.

• Banks Have Won Syndicated Loan Battle, But Not The War

  

  Though the U.S. Supreme Court's recent denial of certiorari in Kirschner v. JPMorgan preserves the status quo that syndicated loans are not securities, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission's discomfort suggests that the underlying issues have not been fully resolved, say attorneys at Crowell & Moring.