Expert Analysis

• Mich. Ruling Gives Consumer Protection Law Its Teeth Back

  

  The Michigan Supreme Court's recent decision in Attorney General v. Eli Lilly, overruling key holdings in two earlier cases, means that Michigan businesses can no longer defeat allegations of deceptive conduct under the state's consumer protection law simply by pointing to any governmental regulation of the business, say attorneys at DiCello Levitt.

• Series

  Law School's Missed Lessons: Surviving A Long Trial

  

  Most of law school trial advocacy is geared toward the sprint of trying a short case, but beyond managing a cross-examination or closing argument, effectively handling the marathon of a lengthy trial requires the ability to maintain composure, organization and credibility with the jury, says Mihir Elchuri at Hirschler.

• AI Chatbot's Medical Claims Highlight Enforcement Risks

  

  The Pennsylvania State Board of Medicine's recent lawsuit against Character Technologies, arguing that an artificial intelligence chatbot engaged in the unlicensed practice of medicine, may provide other state licensing boards with a road map for going after AI platforms, and counsel should advise clients to calibrate compliance accordingly, say attorneys at Cooley.

• 7th Circ. Ruling May Reduce Litigation Risk For Text Marketers

  

  The recent Seventh Circuit holding in Steidinger v. Blackstone Medical Services that unwanted marketing text messages are not telephone calls under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act may strengthen companies' responses to presuit demand letters and early-stage litigation claims premised on do-not-call text theories, say attorneys at Holland & Knight.

• How Calif. Ruling Defines Drug Cos.' R&D Responsibilities

  

  The California Supreme Court's recent ruling in the Gilead Tenofovir Cases, which held that drugmakers have no duty to bring allegedly safer alternatives to market more quickly, is a win for pharmaceutical companies — but not a grant of blanket immunity for all early-stage drug development decisions, say attorneys at King & Spalding.

• Calif. Justices' Ruling Reshapes Midcase Appeal Strategy

  

  The California Supreme Court's recent decision in Maniago v. Desert Cardiology Consultants holds that voluntary dismissal cannot be used as a shortcut to appellate review of interlocutory orders, resolving a long-running appellate split and pushing litigants to use alternative procedural tools, says Josh Patashnik at Ashurst Perkins Coie.

• Midyear Trends, Takeaways As Securities Class Actions Surge

  

  High numbers of securities class actions through June suggest filings will stay elevated, with factors like changing enforcement attitudes, media scrutiny and the proliferation of potential defendants serving as both cause and effect in increased litigation involving AI-related disclosures, health and tech companies, and foreign issuers, say attorneys at Alston & Bird.

• Series

  Going To Hardcore Shows Makes Me A Better Lawyer

  

  While government contracts law and the hardcore scene may seem entirely unrelated, in my experience, both are about community, focus, being prepared for the unexpected and managing chaos, says Isaac Natter at Fluet.

• Brace For Expanding Scrutiny Of Dark Patterns In Healthcare

  

  Recent reporting and regulatory developments highlight growing concern surrounding so-called dark patterns in healthcare — user interface designs that improperly influence consumer decision-making — and represent an important evolution of how healthcare professionals should evaluate consent processes, say attorneys at Clark Hill.

• How Home Infusion Providers Can Adapt To Enrollment Pause

  

  Recent Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services moratoria on new enrollments of home health agencies, medical equipment companies and hospices make home infusion providers' compliance obligations more complex and ambiguous, requiring new careful consideration of specific enrollment requirements and limitations, say attorneys at Quarles & Brady.

• AI Data Mining Is Changing FCA Enforcement

  

  With False Claims Act investigations increasingly emerging from statistical anomalies identified by data miners, companies need to consider what conclusions an outsider armed with artificial intelligence might draw from public-facing data and be ready to explain any anomalies if questions arise, say attorneys at Cohen & Gresser.

• Lessons From 5 Months Of DOJ Corporate Policy Deals

  

  Recent declinations and prosecution agreements between the U.S. Department of Justice and corporations since the March unveiling of the corporate enforcement and voluntary disclosure policy provide takeaways for management considering how to respond to corporate misconduct, says Brendan Quigley at Baker Botts.

• Opinion

  2nd Circ. Tylenol Ruling Misapplies Daubert Gatekeeping

  

  The Second Circuit's recent ruling in Rutledge v. Walgreen Co., holding that a lower court should not have excluded experts alleging links between prenatal acetaminophen use and autism, threatens to swallow the Daubert standard by limiting courts' consideration of scientific consensus in assessing reliability of expert testimony, say attorneys at Benesch.

• 5 Antitrust Lessons On Bundled Discounts After Medtronic

  

  The recent California federal court decision upholding a $381.7 million verdict against Medtronic offers practitioners a clearer road map for navigating bundled discount claims under Section 2 of the Sherman Act, and the practical implications are substantial, say attorneys at Norton Rose.

• Justices' FTC Ruling Weakens Qui Tam's Constitutional Base

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court’s holding in Trump v. Slaughter, expanding presidential control over those exercising executive power, suggests that courts may be receptive to arguments challenging the constitutional foundations of the False Claims Act’s qui tam mechanism, says Daniel Passeser at Wiggin.