Expert Analysis

• Reverse Veil-Piercing Ruling Will Help Judgment Creditors

  

  A New York federal court’s recent decision in Citibank v. Aralpa Holdings, finding two corporate entities liable for a judgment issued against a Mexican businessman, shows the value of reverse veil piercing as a remedy for judgment creditors to go after sophisticated debtors who squirrel away assets, says Gabe Bluestone at Omni Bridgeway.

• Risks Of Rejecting Hotel Mgmt. Agreements Via Bankruptcy

  

  In recent years, hotel owners have paid a high price when they attempted to use bankruptcy proceedings to prematurely terminate their hotel management agreements, highlighting that other options may be preferable, say attorneys at Jenner & Block.

• Address Complainants Before They Become Whistleblowers

  

  A New York federal court's dismissal of a whistleblower retaliation claim against HSBC Securities last month indicates that ignored complaints to management combined with financial incentives from regulators create the perfect conditions for a concerned and disgruntled employee to make the jump to federal whistleblower, say attorneys at Cooley.

• Perspectives

  Justices' Forfeiture Ruling Resolves Nonexistent Split

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in McIntosh v. U.S., holding that a trial court’s failure to enter a preliminary criminal forfeiture order prior to sentencing doesn’t bar its entry later, is unusual in that it settles an issue on which the lower courts were not divided — but it may apply in certain forfeiture disputes, says Stefan Cassella at Asset Forfeiture Law.

• What Have We Learned In The Year Since Warhol?

  

  In the almost year since the U.S. Supreme Court decided Andy Warhol Foundation v. Goldsmith, which was widely seen as potentially chilling to creative endeavors, seven subsequent decisions — while illuminating to some extent — do not indicate any trend toward a radical departure from prior precedents in fair use cases, says ​​​​​​​Jose Sariego at Bilzin Sumberg.

• The Practical Effects Of Justices' Arbitration Exemption Ruling

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision in Bissonnette v. LePage Bakeries, that a transportation worker need not work in the transportation industry to be exempt from the Federal Arbitration Act, may negatively affect employers' efforts to mitigate class action risk via arbitration agreement enforcement, say Charles Schoenwetter and Eric Olson at Bowman and Brooke.

• Binance Ruling Spotlights Muddled Post-Morrison Landscape

  

  The Second Circuit's recent decision in Williams v. Binance highlights the judiciary's struggle to apply the U.S. Supreme Court's Morrison v. National Australia Bank ruling to digital assets, and illustrates how Morrison's territorial limits on the federal securities laws have become convoluted, say Andrew Rhys Davies and Jessica Lewis at WilmerHale.

• Sorting Circuit Split On Foreign Arbitration Treaty's Authority

  

  A circuit court split over whether the New York Convention supersedes state law barring arbitration in certain disputes — a frequent issue in insurance matters — has left lower courts to rely on conflicting decisions, but the doctrine of self-executing treaties makes it clear that the convention overrules state law, says Gary Shaw at Pillsbury.

• Why Corporate DEI Challenges Increasingly Cite Section 1981

  

  As legal challenges to corporate diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives increase in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling on race-conscious college admissions last year, Section 1981 of the Civil Rights Act is supplanting Title VII as conservative activist groups' weapon of choice, say Mike Delikat and Tierra Piens at Orrick.

• Surveying Legislative Trends As States Rush To Regulate AI

  

  With Congress unlikely to pass comprehensive artificial intelligence legislation any time soon, just four months into 2024, nearly every state has introduced legislation aimed at the development and use of AI on subjects from algorithmic discrimination risk to generative AI disclosures, say David Kappos and Sasha Rosenthal-Larrea at Cravath.

• A Look At Ex Parte Seizures 8 Years Post-DTSA

  

  In the eight years since the Defend Trade Secrets Act was enacted, not much has changed for jurisprudence on ex parte seizures, but a few seminal rulings show that there still isn’t a bright line on what qualifies as extraordinary circumstances warranting a seizure, say attorneys at Finnegan.

• Series

  Whitewater Kayaking Makes Me A Better Lawyer

  

  Whether it's seeing clients and their issues from a new perspective, or staying nimble in a moment of intense challenge, the lessons learned from whitewater kayaking transcend the rapids of a river and prepare attorneys for the courtroom and beyond, says Matthew Kent at Alston & Bird.

• This Earth Day, Consider How Your Firm Can Go Greener

  

  As Earth Day approaches, law firms and attorneys should consider adopting more sustainable practices to reduce their carbon footprint — from minimizing single-use plastics to purchasing carbon offsets for air travel — which ultimately can also reduce costs for clients, say M’Lynn Phillips and Lisa Walters at IMS Legal Strategies.

• The Shifting Landscape Of Physician Disciplinary Proceedings

  

  Though hospitals have historically been able to terminate doctors' medical staff privileges without fear of court interference, recent case law has demonstrated that the tides are turning, especially when there is evidence of unlawful motivations, say Dylan Newton and Michael Horn at Archer & Greiner.

• Oracle Ruling Underscores Trend Of Mootness Fee Denials

  

  The Delaware Chancery Court’s recent refusal to make tech giant Oracle shoulder $5 million of plaintiff shareholders' attorney fees illustrates a trend of courts raising the standard for granting the mootness fee awards once ubiquitous in post-merger derivative disputes, say attorneys at Troutman Pepper.