Expert Analysis

• The Paradoxical Duty To Adopt AI When You Can't Bill For It

  

  Both billing for hours saved using artificial intelligence and preserving billable time by not adopting AI may violate rules of professional conduct, but until bar associations' ethics rules catch up to this emerging economic dilemma, firms must decide how to adjust fee structures themselves, says Ines Lassalle at Peyrot & Associates.

• 4 Emerging Limits Of Employer Mental Health Notice Defense

  

  A California appeals court's recent decision in Husband v. Target, addressing when an employer knows about an employee's undisclosed disability, leaves open questions about how changes in mental health awareness and workforce monitoring tools may raise the bar for what employers can claim not to know, says Benjamin Heller at RFZ Law.

• Raptors Ruling Shows Risks Of Calif. Enviro Suit Intervention

  

  Intervention in California environmental litigation can allow businesses to help defend agency approvals, but after a state appeals court's recent ruling in Raptors Are the Solution v. CropLife America, it is clear that intervention also carries a price — and that courts will hold parties accountable for the full arc of their litigation conduct, says Thierry Montoya at FBT Gibbons.

• Sripetch May Prove To Be An Empty Victory For The SEC

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision in Sripetch v. U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission held that the SEC need not prove pecuniary harm for disgorgement, but if the commission must still identify victims and distribute funds in a compensatory way, it faces the same economic problem as before the ruling, says Erin Smith at Compass Lexecon.

• 9th Circ. Cooler Ruling Chills 1st Mover Lanham Act Claims

  

  The Ninth Circuit's recent decision in Vericool World v. Igloo Products that Vericool's claim of being first-to-market with an ecocooler was not actionable under the Lanham Act largely foreclosed false advertising litigation over first mover status, so potential plaintiffs should instead look to patent counseling or intellectual property strategy for these claims, say attorneys at Manatt.

• Mapping 5 Fronts Of The Prediction Markets Regulatory Battle

  

  The legal framework governing prediction markets is under simultaneous challenge in five independent areas, and the outcomes will determine not just who can operate prediction markets, but the compliance obligations of every participant in the ecosystem, says Ivor Wolk at Manatt.

• Using Past Tech Transitions As A Lens For Calif. Worker AI Bill

  

  Examining previous workplace automation battles reveals the goals of a California bill that would impose obligations on employers for layoffs and hiring cessations caused by artificial intelligence, and illustrates where it may prove difficult to administer and how to prepare for its enactment, say attorneys at Skadden.

• How A Founder's AI Pitch Deck Can Become A Crime Scene

  

  As recent indictments and prosecutions against tech executives illustrate, AI washing is a criminal enforcement priority, not a regulatory formality, highlighting the importance of ensuring that founders don't overstate what their artificial intelligence does, particularly in the initial pitch deck to investors, says attorney Alan N. Walter.

• SEC Disgorged Fund Distribution Is Next Query After Sripetch

  

  Following the Supreme Court's Sripetch v. U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission decision, investor harm isn't required for the SEC to obtain a disgorgement award, but future cases must resolve whether the commission will be freed from a requirement to distribute disgorged funds to the victims of alleged misconduct, says Daniel Walfish at Katsky Korins.

• New State AI Laws Create Dual Misrepresentation Risk

  

  As artificial intelligence transparency laws are enacted across the country and the volume and specificity of compliance records increase, companies will be required to speak more often, more precisely and to more audiences about the same systems, compounding the risk of litigation, say attorneys at Cooley.

• Trump Admin's Agency Records Purge Tests Judicial Notice

  

  While courts commonly take judicial notice of data in government websites and reports, the Trump administration's recent modification or wholesale deletion of these sources means that litigants must look elsewhere to support trial admission of this information, says Jon Gryskiewicz at Lewis Baach.

• Series

  Cow Horse Makes Me A Better Lawyer

  

  Moving an unwilling 800-pound cow while riding a horse at high speed is exhilarating, a little unhinged and, at least for me, a surprisingly effective training ground for litigation — both demand focus, preparation over rigid planning and the willingness to act despite fear, says Ashley Zitrin at Glenn Agre.

• Vax Ruling Offers Employer Tips For Handling Political Speech

  

  A California appeals court's recent decision in Rademacher v. ABC, rejecting a "General Hospital" actor's suit alleging he was terminated for opposing a vaccine policy, demonstrates the importance of the employer's process, including neutral policies, documentation, and evidence of who knew what and when, say attorneys at Krevolin Horst.

• PowerSchool Data Breach Ruling Underscores PE Liability

  

  The recent California federal court decision in PowerSchool, where Bain Capital was unable to dismiss claims relating to a data breach based in part on Bain's preinvestment activities, is an important addition to the line of cases addressing investor liability for acts of a portfolio company, says Mark Kelley at MoloLamken.

• What Prop 65 Listings For Welding Fumes, Drugs Mean For Cos.

  

  With California poised to add welding chemicals and three medications to its list of known carcinogens under Proposition 65, businesses must assess risks from nontraditional pharmaceutical dispensing, occupational and environmental exposures to welding operations, and downstream exposures from the manufacture of both types of substances, says Gregory Berlin at Alston & Bird.