Expert Analysis

• Considering The Logical Extremes Of Your Legal Argument

  

  Recent oral arguments in the federal election interference case against former President Donald Trump highlighted the age-old technique of extending an argument to its logical limit — a principle that is still important for attorneys to consider in preparing their cases, says Reuben Guttman at Guttman Buschner.

• Storytelling Strategies To Defuse Courtroom Conspiracies

  

  Misinformation continues to proliferate in all sectors of society, including in the courtroom, as jurors try to fill in the gaps of incomplete trial narratives — underscoring the need for attorneys to tell a complete, consistent and credible story before and during trial, says David Metz at IMS Legal Strategies.

• Lessons From Rare Post-Verdict Healthcare Fraud Acquittal

  

  A Maryland federal court recently overturned a jury verdict that found a doctor guilty of healthcare fraud related to billing levels for COVID-19 tests, providing defense attorneys with potential strategies for obtaining acquittals in similar prosecutions, says attorney Andrew Feldman.

• Calif. Disclosure Update Adds To Employer Trial Prep Burden

  

  Though California’s recently updated litigation disclosure procedures may streamline some aspects of employment suits filed in the state, plaintiffs' new ability to demand a wider range of information on a tighter timeline will burden companies with the need to invest more resources into investigating cases much earlier in the process, says Jeffrey Horton Thomas at Fox Rothschild.

• EDNY Ruling Charts 99 Problems In Rap Lyric Admissibility

  

  A New York federal court’s recent ruling in U.S. v. Jordan powerfully captures courts’ increasing skepticism about the admissibility of rap lyrics as evidence in criminal trials, particularly at a time when artists face economic incentives to embrace fictional, hyperbolic narratives, say attorneys at Sher Tremonte.

• 3 Principles For Minimizing The Risk Of A Nuclear Verdict

  

  In one of the latest examples of so-called nuclear verdicts, a single plaintiff was awarded $2.25 billion in a jury trial against Monsanto — revealing the need for defense attorneys to prioritize trust, connection and simplicity when communicating with modern juries, say Jenny Hergenrother and Mia Falzarano at Alston & Bird.

• Series

  Coaching High School Wrestling Makes Me A Better Lawyer

  

  Coaching my son’s high school wrestling team has been great fun, but it’s also demonstrated how a legal career can benefit from certain experiences, such as embracing the unknown, studying the rules and engaging with new people, says Richard Davis at Maynard Nexsen.

• Takeaways From 9th Circ. Nix Of Ex-GOP Rep.'s Conviction

  

  The Ninth Circuit recently reversed the conviction of former Rep. Jeff Fortenberry, R-Neb., for lying to the FBI, showing that the court will rein in aggressive attempts by the government to expand the reach of criminal prosecutions — and deepening a circuit split on an important venue issue, say attorneys at Skadden.

• SG's Office Is Case Study To Help Close Legal Gender Gap

  

  As women continue to be underrepresented in the upper echelons of the legal profession, law firms could learn from the example set by the Office of the Solicitor General, where culture and workplace policies have helped foster greater gender equality, say attorneys at Ocean Tomo.

• A Closer Look At Novel Jury Instruction In Forex Rigging Case

  

  After the recent commodities fraud conviction of a U.K.-based hedge fund executive in U.S. v. Phillips, post-trial briefing has focused on whether the New York federal court’s jury instruction incorrectly defined the requisite level of intent, which should inform defense counsel in future open market manipulation cases, say attorneys at Lankler Siffert.

• Googling Prospective Jurors Is Usually A Fool's Errand

  

  Though a Massachusetts federal court recently barred Google from Googling potential jurors in a patent infringement case, the company need not worry about missing evidence of bias, because internet research of jury pools usually doesn’t yield the most valuable information — voir dire and questionnaires do, says Sarah Murray at Trialcraft.

• A Look Into How Jurors Reach High Damages Awards

  

  In the wake of several large jury awards, Richard Gabriel and Emily Shaw at Decision Analysis shed light on challenges that jurors have in deciding them, the nonevidentiary and extra-legal methods they use to do so, and new research about the themes and jury characteristics of high-damages jurors.

• What To Know About WDTX Standing Order For Patent Cases

  

  Patent litigators should review and ensure compliance with the standing order recently issued by U.S. District Judge Alan Albright of the Western District of Texas — a popular patent litigation venue — which encompasses new deadlines, seeks to streamline discovery disputes, and further reflects the court's existing practices, says Archibald Cruz at Patterson + Sheridan.

• 10 Lessons From A Deep Dive Into IP Damages

  

  Decisions on challenging an intellectual property expert's opinion can benefit from the in-depth study of court rulings on admissibility grounds, where the findings include the fact that patent cases see the most challenges of any IP area, say Deepa Sundararaman and Cleve Tyler at Berkeley Research.

• Managing Competing Priorities In Witness Preparation

  

  There’s often a divide between what attorneys and witnesses want out of the deposition process, but litigation teams can use several strategies to resolve this tension and help witnesses be more comfortable with the difficult conditions of testifying, say Ava Hernández and Steve Wood at Courtroom Sciences.