Expert Analysis

• Opinion

  It's Time For A BigLaw Associates' Union

  

  As BigLaw faces a steady stream of criticism about its employment policies and practices, an associates union could effect real change — and it could start with law students organizing around opposition to recent recruiting trends, says Tara Rhoades at The Sanity Plea.

• How Calif. Justices' Prop 22 Ruling Affects The Gig Industry

  

  The California Supreme Court's recent upholding of Proposition 22 clarifies that Uber, Lyft, DoorDash and other companies in the gig industry can legally classify their drivers as independent contractors, but it falls short of concluding some important regulatory battles in the state, says Mark Spring at CDF Labor.

• How Justices Upended The Administrative Procedure Act

  

  In its recent Loper Bright, Corner Post and Jarkesy decisions, the U.S. Supreme Court fundamentally changed the Administrative Procedure Act in ways that undermine Congress and the executive branch, shift power to the judiciary, curtail public and business input, and create great uncertainty, say Alene Taber and Beth Hummer at Hanson Bridgett.

• Classwide Calculations May Get Price Premium Damages Wrong

  

  In many consumer class actions, plaintiffs assert that they overpaid for a product because of a misrepresented or defective product feature, and that a single price premium estimate can be applied classwide — but failure to account for differences in price premiums across a putative class may lead to improper damage awards, say economists at Ankura Consulting.

• Mirror, Mirror On The Wall, Is My Counterclaim Bound To Fall?

  

  A Pennsylvania federal court’s recent dismissal of the defendants’ counterclaims in Morgan v. Noss should remind attorneys to avoid the temptation to repackage a claim’s facts and law into a mirror-image counterclaim, as this approach will often result in a waste of time and resources, says Matthew Selmasska at Kaufman Dolowich.

• Insurance Lessons From 11th Circ. Ruling On Policy Grammar

  

  The Eleventh Circuit's recent decision in ECB v. Chubb Insurance, holding that missing punctuation didn't change the clear meaning of a professional services policy, offers policyholder takeaways about the uncertainty that can arise when courts interpret insurance policy language based on obscure grammatical canons, say Hugh Lumpkin and Garrett Nemeroff at Reed Smith.

• Series

  Playing Dungeons & Dragons Makes Me A Better Lawyer

  

  Playing Dungeons & Dragons – a tabletop role-playing game – helped pave the way for my legal career by providing me with foundational skills such as persuasion and team building, says Derrick Carman at Robins Kaplan.

• Mercon Coffee Ch. 11 Ruling Shows Insider Releases' Limits

  

  A New York bankruptcy court’s recent ruling in Mercon Coffee’s Chapter 11 case highlights the stringent requirements for retention-related transfers to insiders, even in cases where no creditor has objected, say Robert Klyman and Scott Shelley at DLA Piper.

• Illinois BIPA Reform Offers Welcome Relief To Businesses

  

  Illinois' recent amendment to its Biometric Information Privacy Act limits the number of violations and damages a plaintiff can claim — a crucial step in shielding businesses from unintended legal consequences, including litigation risk and compliance costs, say attorneys at Taft.

• Gilead Drug Ruling Creates Corporate Governance Dilemma

  

  If upheld, a California state appellate court's decision — finding that Gilead is liable for delaying commercialization of a safer HIV drug to maximize profits on another drug — threatens to undermine long-standing rules of corporate law and exposes companies to liability for decisions based on sound business judgment, says Shireen Barday at Pallas.

• Rebuttal

  Cancer Research Org. Is Right To Avoid Corporate Influence

  

  While a previous Law360 guest article criticizes the International Agency for Research on Cancer's processes, its reliance on peer-reviewed literature is proper and its refusal to allow corporate influence is sound science, say Lance Oliver and Ridge Mazingo at Motley Rice.

• How Courts' Differing Views On Standing Affect PFAS Claims

  

  Two recent opinions from New York federal courts — in Lurenz v. Coca-Cola, and Winans v. Ornua Foods North America — illustrate how pivotal the differing views on standing held by different courts will be for product liability litigation involving per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, particularly consumer claims, say attorneys at Hollingsworth.

• E-Discovery Quarterly: Rulings On Hyperlinked Documents

  

  Recent rulings show that counsel should engage in early discussions with clients regarding the potential of hyperlinked documents in electronically stored information, which will allow for more deliberate negotiation of any agreements regarding the scope of discovery, say attorneys at Sidley.

• Loper Bright Limits Federal Agencies' Ability To Alter Course

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision to dismantle Chevron deference also effectively overrules its 2005 decision in National Cable & Telecommunications Association v. Brand X, greatly diminishing agencies' ability to change regulatory course from one administration to the next, says Steven Gordon at Holland & Knight.

• Defamation Suit Tests Lanham Act's Reach With Influencers

  

  Recently filed in the Northern District of Texas, Prime Hydration v. Garcia, alleging defamation and Lanham Act violations based on the defendant's social media statements about the beverage brand, allows Texas courts and the Fifth Circuit to take the lead in interpreting the act as it applies to influencers, says attorney Susan Jorgensen.