Expert Analysis

• 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.

• The Art Of Asking: Leveraging Your Contacts For Referrals

  

  Though attorneys may hesitate to ask for referral recommendations to generate new business, research shows that people want to help others they know, like and trust, so consider who in your network you should approach and how to make the ask, says Rebecca Hnatowski at Edwards Advisory.

• Trending At The PTAB: Permissible New Reply Arguments

  

  In the time since the Federal Circuit’s Axonics ruling, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board has allowed petitioners to raise new unpatentability grounds in response to unforeseeable claim constructions in petitions, and reiterated that a petition need not anticipate every argument that may be raised in the response, say Joseph Myles and Timothy May at Finnegan.

• Class Actions At The Circuit Courts: April Lessons

  

  In this month's review of class action appeals, Mitchell Engel at Shook Hardy discusses three notable circuit court decisions on topics from the Class Action Fairness Act to consumer fraud — and provides key takeaways for counsel on issues including CAFA’s local controversy exception and Article III standing to seek injunctive relief.

• A Deep Dive Into High Court's Permit Fee Ruling

  

  David Robinson and Daniel Golub at Holland & Knight explore the U.S. Supreme Court's recent ruling that a local traffic impact fee charged to a California property owner may be a Fifth Amendment taking — and where it leaves localities and real estate developers.

• Opinion

  The Case For Overturning Florida Foreclosure Ruling

  

  A Florida appellate court's recent decision in Desbrunes v. U.S. Bank National Association will potentially put foreclosure cases across the state in jeopardy, and unless it is reconsidered, foreclosing plaintiffs will need to choose between frustrating and uncertain options in the new legal landscape, say Sara Accardi and Paige Knight at Bradley.

• McKesson May Change How AKS-Based FCA Claims Are Pled

  

  The Second Circuit’s analysis in U.S. v. McKesson, an Anti-Kickback Statute-based False Claims Act case, provides guidance for both relators and defendants parsing scienter-related allegations, say Li Yu at Dicello Levitt, Ellen London at London & Stout, and Erica Hitchings at Whistleblower Law.

• Fed. Circ. Defines Foreign IP Damages, Raises New Questions

  

  In Brumfield v. IBG, the Federal Circuit recently clarified which standard determines the extraterritoriality of the patent statute after the U.S. Supreme Court's WesternGeco decision, opening a new avenue of damages for foreign activities resulting from certain domestic activities while also creating some thorny questions, say Amol Parikh and Ian Howard at McDermott.

• 9th Circ. Arbitration Ruling Could Have Int'l Implications

  

  In Patrick v. Running Warehouse, the Ninth Circuit's recent matter-of-fact invocation of an unusual California rule in a domestic arbitration context raises choice of law questions, and could make California law a strategic option for some international arbitration parties, says Jerry Roth at FedArb.

• 5 Employer Actions Now Risky After Justices' Title VII Ruling

  

  Last week in Muldrow v. St. Louis, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that harm didn't have to be significant to be considered discriminatory under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, making five common employer actions vulnerable to litigation, say Kellee Kruse and Briana Scholar at The Employment Law Group.