Expert Analysis

• The Case For Using Final-Offer Damages Forms In IP Suits

  

  Recent Federal Circuit decisions, such as Ollnova v. Ecobee, that scrutinize verdict forms in patent infringement disputes potentially render the final-offer damages selection procedure more attractive, though it should not be seen as a replacement for patent damages doctrine, says Brandon Theiss at Addy Hart.

• More Cos. Will Copy SpaceX's Shareholder Proposal Opt-Out

  

  For more than 80 years, the shareholder proposal looked like a federal right guaranteed to all public company investors, but after SpaceX opted out before its recent initial public offering, other companies are likely to follow, says Mohsen Manesh at the University of Oregon School of Law.

• 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.

• A Framework For Volume Dispute Damages In Oil, Gas M&A

  

  With every major upstream oil and gas consolidation in recent years having resulted in minimum volume commitment disputes, experts testifying in such litigation must use a five-step framework for calculating lost profits that accounts for the option structure embedded in the contract, says Robert Foss at Hinds Feat Advisors.

• 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.

• The Future Of WDTX Patent Litigation After Judge Albright

  

  With U.S. District Judge Christopher Wolfe set to take over much of Judge Alan Albright's patent infringement docket in the Western District of Texas later this year, attorneys should prepare for potential differences in Judge Wolfe's approach to the court's high volume of patent litigation, say attorneys at Sidley Austin.

• 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.

• High Court Ruling Casts Doubt On Status-Based Gun Bans

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent ruling in U.S. v. Hemani demonstrates that the justices are increasingly skeptical of broad theories of categorical disarmament and clarifies that dangerousness cannot simply be presumed from one's status or membership in a statutory category, such as illegal drug use, says Lee Francis at Widener Law.

• 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.

• A Midyear Look At Antiterrorism Act Jurisprudence And Policy

  

  Plaintiffs have filed comparably fewer new actions under the Antiterrorism Act this year, though a handful of key decisions further defined the statute’s aiding-and-abetting standard and highlighted continuing risks for financial services companies, say attorneys at Skadden.

• Texas Rule Change Could Speed Trucking Case Dismissals

  

  The Texas Supreme Court's recent comprehensive amendments to Rule 166a, governing summary judgment procedure and standards in Texas state courts, will fundamentally reshape dispositive motion practice, permitting defendants in trucking cases to weaponize the rule against unwitting plaintiffs, and requiring more aggressive early discovery efforts, say attorneys at Hamilton Wingo.

• 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.

• Responding To US Labeling Brazilian Gangs As Terrorist Orgs

  

  The Trump administration's recent designation of two Brazilian criminal organizations as foreign terrorists affects companies in multiple sectors that must now assess their exposure and enhance their sanctions, know-your-customer and anti-money-laundering screening programs, say attorneys at King & Spalding.

• Wire Fraud Ruling May Upend White Collar Enforcement

  

  A Texas federal court’s recent decision in U.S. v. Garza, dismissing wire fraud charges arising from an alleged $1 billion tax shelter scheme, advances a broader constitutional principle that could affect sentencing and reshape charging practices across white collar criminal cases involving specialized statutory regimes, say attorneys at Benesch.