Expert Analysis

• When Leaked Settlement Talks Complicate High-Profile Cases

  

  A recent sexual harassment case involving JPMorgan Chase highlights how leaked settlement offers can affect public perception of litigation, reminding parties that a confidentiality label does not automatically create an enforceable obligation because evidentiary exclusion is limited and purpose-specific, say attorneys at Lowenstein Sandler.

• How High Court Pepsi Case Could Brew TM Strategy Shift

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court's forthcoming decision in RiseandShine v. PepsiCo will determine whether a judge or jury decides trademark strength in infringement disputes, which could meaningfully change early-stage motion practice, discovery and what evidence is needed to prove a mark is strong, says Rachel Scobie at Merchant & Gould.

• Discovery Ruling Shows How Extant Rules Mesh With AI Tools

  

  A California federal court’s recent ruling in Schulte v. LinkedIn reinforces that existing discovery rules can and should accommodate emerging artificial intelligence technologies, providing litigants with confidence that well-designed AI-enabled workflows can satisfy reasonableness and proportionality standards, say attorneys at WilmerHale.

• Series

  Judges On AI: Examining Administrative, Organizational Uses

  

  U.S. District Judge Alan Albright of the Western District of Texas examines how artificial intelligence could transform a court's ability to deal with administrative work and organize materials when preparing for hearings or drafting opinions, thereby affording judges more time to resolve contested issues.

• Series

  Being A Singer Makes Me A Better Lawyer

  

  Before law school, I spent seven years trying to make it as a professional singer in Los Angeles, and nearly everything I learned about preparation, humility, confidence and more has followed me into my legal practice, says Jessica Caterina at Moses & Singer.

• How Justices Stayed Off The Geofence In Location Data Case

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court's recent Chatrie v. United States decision reaffirms Fourth Amendment protections for location data but avoids more complicated questions about geofence warrants, say attorneys at Adams Duerk.

• 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.

• Reel Justice: 'Obsession' And The Importance Of Precision

  

  In “Obsession,” the main character’s failure to define the limits of his wish results in an unexpectedly horrifying outcome, highlighting for attorneys why careful word choice is essential not only in briefs, but also in charging decisions, statutory interpretation and all stages of criminal litigation, says Veronica Finkelstein at Widener-Delaware Law.

• A 3-Part Blueprint For Sentencing Variance Arguments

  

  Tom Goldstein’s upcoming sentencing provides a useful lens for defense practitioners seeking a variance from the guidelines range, serving as a reminder to distinguish those requests from guidelines challenges and build an evidence-based case well before the hearing, says Joseph De Gregorio of Sentencing Advocacy Group.

• 4 Methods To Quantify Moral Damages In Int'l Arbitrations

  

  To aid tribunals in making informed decisions in quantifying moral damages, legal teams can look at four economic approaches that can value a monetary reparation for the victim commensurate with the harm suffered, say economists at Berkeley Research Group.

• 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.

• PacifiCorp Ruling Shows Limits Of Aggregate Wildfire Loss Models

  

  An Oregon appeals court's recent decision in James v. PacifiCorp illustrates that in litigation involving multiple wildfires, materially different causation theories, and evidence tied to particular fires and locations, a single undifferentiated damages model is vulnerable to attack, say Paige Van Oosten and Jason Kim at Hunton and Kevin Cahill at FTI Consulting.

• 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.

• Fighting The Evidentiary Risks Of Deepfakes In Court

  

  Though courts and federal rules are only slowly developing frameworks for assessing digital evidence that could have been created or generated by artificial intelligence, litigators should understand what steps they'll likely need to take to successfully challenge potentially deepfaked exhibits — and fight questions about the authenticity of their own, say attorneys at MoFo.

• What Durnell Ruling Means For Mo. Roundup Settlement

  

  While the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent ruling in Monsanto v. Durnell forecloses the failure-to-warn theory that carried most of the claims against Monsanto in a pending class action in Missouri state court, it leaves untouched the question of whether the class was assembled merely to contain the defendant's liability, says attorney Gregg Goldfarb.