Expert Analysis

• Notable Q1 Updates In Insurance Class Actions

  

  Notable insurance class action decisions from the first quarter of the year included reminders about the statute of limitations as a key defense for claims relating to allegedly deficient forms, the importance of focus on the specific contract at issue and further guidance on the contours of Rule 23, says Kevin Zimmerman at BakerHostetler.

• Surveying The CFTC Campaign To Control Prediction Markets

  

  The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission is simultaneously asserting exclusive jurisdiction over prediction markets and signaling aggressive enforcement within them, a combination that will reshape the regulatory landscape for event contract platforms — pending the outcome of several court cases throughout the country and a likely circuit split, say attorneys at Paul Weiss.

• Safeguarding RWI Coverage As Materiality Focus Persists

  

  As first-quarter broker claims reports reveal that materiality disputes remain a key driver of representations and warranties insurance claims, the scarce case law in this area indicates that including a materiality scrape provision in an RWI policy may aid policyholders with recovery, say attorneys at Reed Smith.

• Series

  Speed Jigsaw Puzzling Makes Me A Better Lawyer

  

  My passion for speed puzzling — I can complete a 500-piece jigsaw puzzle in under 50 minutes — has sharpened my legal skills in more ways than one, with both disciplines requiring patience, precision and the ability to keep the bigger picture in mind while working through the details, says Tazia Statucki at Proskauer.

• How Oregon Ruling Affects Federal Gender Care Crackdown

  

  In a favorable development for healthcare providers, an Oregon federal court recently vacated certain U.S. Department of Health and Human Services restrictions on gender-affirming care for minors, but the government's broader campaign against this care, including proposed rulemaking and agency investigations, leaves significant uncertainty, say attorneys at Arnold & Porter.

• A Core Weakness In The Challenge To Birthright Citizenship

  

  The government’s recent oral arguments against birthright citizenship in Trump v. Barbara would have the Supreme Court use modern immigration classifications as markers for a constitutional boundary that is not expressed in the Fourteenth Amendment, making the theory easier to administer but weaker as a matter of text and history, says attorney Tara Kennedy.

• Building Codes Ruling May Inform AI Copyright Arguments

  

  The Third Circuit's recent decision in ASTM v. UpCodes, finding that republication of copyrighted building codes incorporated into binding law likely constitutes fair use, may help shape intellectual property strategy for standards organizations, rights holders and potentially even AI stakeholders, says Mitesh Patel at Reed Smith.

• DOJ's Stance On Antitrust And Patent Law Reflects Balance

  

  Recent statements of interest in patent litigation and a speech from a key U.S. Department of Justice official communicate the view that strong patent rights and competition policy are complementary, and offer important guidance for intellectual property practitioners and businesses navigating patent enforcement, standard‑setting and licensing, say attorneys at Wiley.

• 2 AI Snafus Show Why Attys Can't Outsource Judgment

  

  The recent incident involving Sullivan & Cromwell where citations in a filed motion were fabricated by artificial intelligence, as well as a punitive ruling from the Sixth Circuit in U.S. v. Farris, demonstrate that the obligation to supervise AI has belonged and always will belong to lawyers, says John Powell at the Kentucky School Boards Association.

• Series

  Playing Magic: The Gathering Makes Me A Better Lawyer

  

  The competitive card game Magic: The Gathering offers me a training ground for the strategic thinking skills crucial to litigation, challenging me to adapt to oft-updated rules, analyze text as complicated as any statute and anticipate my opponent’s next moves, says Christopher Smith at Lash Goldberg.

• Why Product-Based Public Nuisance Claims May Be Waning

  

  The Maryland Supreme Court's recent decision in Express Scripts v. Anne Arundel County is the latest in a national trend of rulings rejecting product-based public nuisance claims — but other forms of government litigation against companies that allegedly increase the cost of public services are likely to continue, say attorneys at Simpson Thacher.

• Improving Well-Being In Law, 10 Years After Landmark Study

  

  An important 2016 study revealed significant substance abuse and mental health issues among lawyers, and while the findings helped normalize the conversation around these topics, a decade later, structural change is still needed, says Denise Robinson at PLI.

• 8 Reasons To Consider Maryland As A 'DExit' Option

  

  While Nevada and Texas have garnered the most attention as alternative states of incorporation for companies considering leaving Delaware, Maryland offers considerable benefits too, including a predictable statutory framework, robust anti-takeover protections, sophisticated business courts with decades of experience, and more, say attorneys at Miles & Stockbridge.

• Opinion

  Exxon's Retail Voting Program Is A Trap For Retail Investors

  

  The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission approved Exxon Mobil's first-of-its-kind proxy voting program last September, but ahead of the company's annual shareholder meeting next month, it's clear that retail shareholders have delegated their voice to the entity their vote exists to check, says Christina Sautter at Southern Methodist University.

• High Court 'Skinny Label' Case Will Matter To Tech Litigators

  

  Hikma v. Amarin, set for oral argument in the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday, has potential to affect not just generic drug label-based evidence in patent cases, but also how technology inducement cases are presented and proven, says attorney Abdul Abdullahi.