Expert Analysis

• Series

  Home Canning Makes Me A Better Lawyer

  

  Making my own pickles and jams requires seeing a process through from start to finish, as does representing clients from the start of a dispute at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board through any appeals to the Federal Circuit, says attorney Kevin McNish.

• Navigating The Bankruptcy Terrain After Purdue Pharma

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court’s June ruling in Harrington v. Purdue Pharma is having a significant impact on bankruptcies, with recent cases addressing nonconsensual third-party releases and opt-out mechanisms, and highlighting strategies practitioners can employ to avoid running afoul of the decision, say Brett Axelrod and Agostino Zammiello at Fox Rothschild.

• An Update On Legal Issues In The Drone Market

  

  Marialuisa Gallozzi and Alex Slawson at Covington examine recent developments in the legal issues surrounding the growing drone market, including possible First Amendment protections, Fourth Amendment surveillance, and litigation involving criminal and civil penalties, evidentiary pursuits, and insurance.

• Key Insurance Implications Of Hawaii's Historic GHG Ruling

  

  In Aloha Petroleum v. National Union Fire Insurance, the Hawaii Supreme Court became the first state court to classify greenhouse gasses as pollutants barred from insurance coverage, a ruling likely to be afforded great weight by courts across the country, say Scott Seaman and Gar Lauerman at Hinshaw & Culbertson.

• Use The Right Kind Of Feedback To Help Gen Z Attorneys

  

  Generation Z associates bring unique perspectives and expectations to the workplace, so it’s imperative that supervising attorneys adapt their feedback approach in order to help young lawyers learn and grow — which is good for law firms, too, says Rachael Bosch at Fringe Professional Development.

• Opinion

  Congress Can And Must Enact A Supreme Court Ethics Code

  

  As public confidence in the U.S. Supreme Court dips to historic lows following reports raising conflict of interest concerns, Congress must exercise its constitutional power to enact a mandatory and enforceable code of ethics for the high court, says Muhammad Faridi, president of the New York City Bar Association.

• Pop Culture Docket: Justice Lebovits On Gilbert And Sullivan

  

  Characters in the 19th century comic operas of Gilbert and Sullivan break the rules of good lawyering by shamelessly throwing responsible critical thought to the wind, providing hilarious lessons for lawyers and judges on how to avoid a surfeit of traps and tribulations, say acting New York Supreme Court Justice Gerald Lebovits and law student Tara Scown.

• Opinion

  To Shrink Jury Awards, Address Preventable Medical Errors

  

  While some health industry leaders complain about large malpractice awards — like the recent $45 million verdict in Hernandez v. Temple University Hospital — these payouts are only a symptom of the underlying problem: an epidemic of preventable medical errors, says Eric Weitz at The Weitz Firm.

• State Of The States' AI Legal Ethics Landscape

  

  Over the past year, several state bar associations, as well as the American Bar Association, have released guidance on the ethical use of artificial intelligence in legal practice, all of which share overarching themes and some nuanced differences, say Eric Pacifici and Kevin Henderson at SMB Law Group.

• Defining All-Risk: Despite $30M Loss, Loose Bolt Not 'Damage'

  

  A Massachusetts federal court’s recent ruling in AMAG Pharmaceuticals v. American Guarantee and Liability Insurance Co., denying coverage for $30 million in damages claimed when a loose bolt caused an air leak, highlights an ongoing debate over the definition of “direct physical loss or damage,” say Josh Tumen and Paul Ferland at Cozen O'Connor.

• 8 Childhood Lessons That Can Help You Be A Better Attorney

  

  A new school year is underway, marking a fitting time for attorneys to reflect on some fundamental life lessons from early childhood that offer a framework for problems that no legal textbook can solve, say Chris Gismondi and Chris Campbell at DLA Piper.

• Sublimit And Policy Interpretation Lessons From Amtrak Case

  

  The recently settled dispute between Amtrak and its insurers over sublimit coverage illustrates that parties with unclear manuscript policies may wish to avoid litigation in favor of settlement — as the New York federal court declined to decide the case by applying prior term interpretations, says Laura Maletta at Chartwell Law.

• Opinion

  This Election, We Need To Talk About Court Process

  

  In recent decades, the U.S. Supreme Court has markedly transformed judicial processes — from summary judgment standards to notice pleadings — which has, in turn, affected individuals’ substantive rights, and we need to consider how the upcoming presidential election may continue this pattern, says Reuben Guttman at Guttman Buschner.

• Mental Health Parity Rules: Tips For Plans And Issuers

  

  Following federal agencies' release of final mental health parity rules, plan sponsors and health insurance issuers should develop protocols for preparing compliant nonquantitative treatment limitation comparative analyses, say attorneys at Ropes & Gray.

• Series

  Playing Diplomacy Makes Us Better Lawyers

  

  Similar to the practice of law, the rules of Diplomacy — a strategic board game set in pre-World War I Europe — are neither concise nor without ambiguity, and weekly gameplay with our colleagues has revealed the game's practical applications to our work as attorneys, say Jason Osborn and Ben Bevilacqua at Winston & Strawn.