Expert Analysis

• Lessons From EEOC Suit Over Coca-Cola Women-Only Event

  

  The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's recent lawsuit alleging that Coca-Cola Northeast violated federal law by having a professional development retreat for female employees demonstrates that the EEOC is scrutinizing DEI-related practices with unprecedented intensity, so even the most well-intentioned programs may be challenged, say attorneys at Venable.

• High Court's FCC Fine Ruling Reframes Agency Enforcement

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision in Federal Communications Commission v. AT&T sweeps aside uncertainty about what kinds of regulatory enforcement trigger a Seventh Amendment right, say attorneys at Squire Patton.

• After Durnell, Connecting Science And Causation Will Be Key

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court's June 25 decision in Monsanto v. Durnell narrowed label-based failure-to-warn claims — meaning that going forward, viable theories will depend even more on whether experts can reliably connect scientific evidence to the causal proposition the law requires, says Alex Smolak at Weill Cornell Medicine-Qatar.

• Series

  Choral Singing Makes Me A Better Lawyer

  

  Singing in the New York City Bar Chorus — a hobby partly inspired by the late U.S. District Judge Richard Owen, who infused my clerkship year with opera music — has improved my legal career by refining my abilities to listen, exude confidence and develop emotional intelligence, says Bonnie Baker at Friedman Kaplan.

• Attorney Mental Health Is An Ethical Obligation In The AI Era

  

  As attorneys cope with the increasing unpredictability that artificial intelligence and constant policy changes have created, particularly in practice areas where they carry the emotional weight of clients’ most consequential life events, otherwise soft discussions about self-care are a matter of professional competence, says attorney Jack Jrada.

• Series

  Power To The Paralegals: Burnout As A Structural Problem

  

  Law firm leadership can best retain their paralegals not by encouraging self-care, but by seeking top-down structural solutions for the quiet proliferation of responsibilities and the vicarious exposure to client trauma that particularly drive burnout in this vital role, says Erika Sneeringer at Brockstedt Mandalas.

• Fed. Circ. In May: Being Precise About 'About'

  

  The Federal Circuit's decision in Enviro Tech v. Safe Foods last month illustrates the danger in attempting to expand claim scope with words of approximation, potentially causing claims to be invalid for lack of definiteness, say attorneys at Knobbe Martens.

• Ill. Law Firm MSO Bill Clashes With Court Power, Ethics Rules

  

  An Illinois bill prohibiting law firms from certain business arrangements with management service organizations, sent to the governor for signature last week, encroaches upon the courts' constitutional powers and goes beyond the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct in regulating investment in law-related services, says Matthew O’Hara at Smith Gambrell.

• Opinion

  State Courts Must Be Gatekeepers Of Expert Testimony

  

  Based on my experience in the state judiciary, emulating federal courts' role as gatekeepers of expert witness testimony would help state court judges maintain the appearance of impartiality and assist juries, thus enhancing the overall confidence people have in their justice system, says Lorie Gildea at Greenberg Traurig.

• Series

  Moshing Makes Me A Better Lawyer

  

  Entering a mosh pit is much like entering the practice of law — it is difficult, you have to know both the written and unwritten rules, and conduct yourself according to the expectations of each community, says Christopher Deubert at Constangy Brooks.

• Why Highly Specialized Experts May Risk Exclusion At Trial

  

  Expert witnesses with highly specific areas of focus may be vulnerable to exclusion in court, making it important for attorneys to check how potential witnesses' qualifications can be bolstered by their publications and other professional activities, say Evan Weisberg and Christopher Cunio at Hunton, and Kevin Cahill at FTI Consulting.

• Gatorade Suit Offers Lessons On Product Performance Claims

  

  A proposed class action in New York federal court disputing PepsiCo's claim that Gatorade "hydrates better than water" presents a broad challenge to the way food and beverage companies communicate product benefits — and the risks that arise when marketing claims outpace the evidence supporting them, says Pejman Javaheri at Juris Law Group.

• Opinion

  FTC's Clinical Trial Requirement Threatens Food Claim Rules

  

  The Federal Trade Commission's general requirement for randomized controlled trials for most health-benefit claims, recently embraced by the National Advertising Review Board, lacks legal basis and endangers the existing statutory framework Congress created for marketing food and dietary supplements versus drugs, say attorneys at Keller & Heckman.

• Drawing A Line Between Settlement Pressure And Extortion

  

  U.S. v. Luo, pending in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, may force courts to address anew when settlement negotiations become criminal extortion, particularly in the age of easily fabricated digital evidence, says attorney Denis Kiely.

• Why Ultra-Processed Foods May Be The Next Big Mass Tort

  

  With multiple federal lawsuits filed already this year over the alleged harms caused by ultra-processed foods, and policymakers targeting UPFs for increasingly strict regulation, the sector exhibits the same structural characteristics identified historically in major mass torts, say Ruth Levy at Womble Bond and Elizabeth Epes at Financial Asset Recovery Analytics.