Expert Analysis

• Carbon Health Settlement Highlights Why Evidence Is Key

  

  The California Attorney General's Office's first-of-its-kind settlement with Carbon Health, imposing penalties for alleged corporate practice of medicine violations, shows that friendly professional corporation challenges usually hinge not on the parties' management services agreement, but on whether the operational record matches it, says Ben Dubin at VC Expert Services.

• Remote Work Rulings Show ADA Fights Hinge On Process

  

  Two opposite outcomes in recent Fifth Circuit and D.C. federal court cases underscore that the legality of denying employees' disability accommodation requests for remote work depends less on broad policy and more on how it's applied, says Paul Sweeney at Ice Miller.

• Series

  Being A Magician Makes Me A Better Lawyer

  

  The skills I've developed as a lifelong magician have translated directly into tangible benefits in the courtroom because performing magic and trying cases both live at the intersection of psychology, storytelling, timing and disciplined rehearsal, says Mark Dombroff at Fox Rothschild.

• Fed. Circ. Ruling Highlights The Cost Of Incorrect Inventorship

  

  The Federal Circuit's recent decision in Fortress Iron v. Digger Specialties, affirming that a fencing company's patents were invalid due to a missing co-inventor, is a reminder that confirming correct inventorship should be a critical part of every patent invalidity workup, say attorneys at Neal Gerber.

• Series

  Bass Fishing Makes Me A Better Lawyer

  

  Landing a trophy striped bass and closing a big deal both require cultivating the patience to finesse — not force — your way to desired outcomes, changing course when your old approach isn’t working and learning from the ones that got away, says Jon Ruiss at Alston & Bird.

• How Reincorporating In Texas May Alter Earnout Disputes

  

  While the DExit debate has focused on shareholder suits, far less attention has been paid to what reincorporating in Texas means for M&A disputes, making it particularly important to understand the nuances between Delaware and Texas earnout jurisprudence, say attorneys at Selendy Gay.

• Roundup

  The Most Talked-About Supreme Court Decisions Of 2026

  

  This term, 11 U.S. Supreme Court decisions quickly became hot topics among Law360's guest writers.

• A New Defense For Medicaid Fraud Cases In Texas

  

  The Texas Supreme Court decision in LabCorp v. Texas last month, finding that the state's False Claims Act requires proof that an omission is material, is among the first to establish that the government's lack of reaction to the defendant's disclosures rendered alleged omissions immaterial, say attorneys at Sheppard.

• Justices' Cuba Ruling Narrowly Recasts Sovereign Immunity

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court recently allowed Exxon Mobil's bid for $1 billion in damages for Cuban-seized property to proceed, but the ruling's doctrinal significance is in treating the Helms-Burton Act as a later, specific and self-contained statutory displacement of the default jurisdictional immunity regime, says Josep Galvez at 4-5 Gray's Inn.

• Texas Business Court Rulings Show Deal Terms Paramount

  

  As the courts within the Texas Business Court system have begun reaching the substantive merits of the cases before them, they are persuasively demonstrating they will not only enforce the terms of transactions as written, but will also embrace a holistic approach to complex transaction documentation interpretation, says Christopher Pace at Winston Taylor.

• Immigration Ruling Maps Alternative To Universal Injunctions

  

  A Rhode Island federal court's decision in Dorcas International Institute of Rhode Island v. USCIS vacating policies that froze key immigration adjudications for nationals of 39 countries, and paused asylum applications altogether, suggests how practitioners might press for the Administrative Procedure Act's bad faith exception to record review and seek vacatur as a viable alternative to universal injunctions, says Kemal Hepsen at Mandamus Lawyers.

• Justices' Concurrences Foretell Fault Line On Appeal Waivers

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court recently ruled 8-1 in Hunter v. U.S. that appeal waivers that produce a miscarriage of justice are unenforceable, but the decision's concurrences indicate future divisions over whether this exception will be used as a rare safety valve or to police ordinary but troubling plea errors, say attorneys at RJO.

• 10 Years, 150 Cases: The Rise And Fall Of Post-Halo Damages

  

  When the U.S. Supreme Court decided Halo v. Pulse in 2016, patent practitioners predicted that enhanced damages would become easier to win, but analysis of every contested district court ruling on a motion for enhanced damages in the last 10 years shows that courts have shown increasing restraint, say attorneys at Reichman Jorgensen.

• High Court's FCC Fine Ruling Reframes Agency Enforcement

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision in Federal Communications Commission v. AT&T sweeps aside uncertainty about what kinds of regulatory enforcement trigger a Seventh Amendment right, say attorneys at Squire Patton.

• Opinion

  Exxon Shareholders Were Right To Save New Voting Program

  

  Following Exxon shareholders’ recent vote that rejected a bid to dismantle the company’s new retail voting program, other companies should replicate it as a way to lower the friction for shareholders who already vote with the board to keep doing so without wrestling a ballot every spring, says J.W. Verret at the Antonin Scalia Law School.