Journal on Emerging Issues in Litigation

Legal Analysis & Commentary

This quarterly litigation journal offers practical and insightful commentary on a variety of topics — new legal theories or areas of litigation — that plaintiff attorneys, defense counsel, corporations, risk professionals, and others will want to be aware of. A typical issue comprises several analytical pieces by practicing attorneys and subject matter experts. Articles often form the basis of podcast episodes and webinars. This quarterly print and digital publication is published by Fastcase Full Court Press, now part of vLex.

Fall bellwether trials for social media addiction cases to test novel legal theories

March 3rd, 2025|Categories: Business Litigation, HB Tort Notes, Journal, Mass Torts, New Featured Post for Home Page, News|Tags: , , , , |

Are social media platforms the next Big Tobacco? A major lawsuit argues they’re designed to be addictive—will the courts agree? Justin Ward explores the upcoming bellwether trials against major social media platforms like Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat, and YouTube. The consolidated lawsuits, involving over 1,900 claims, argue these platforms are deliberately designed to exploit young users and cause addiction—drawing comparisons to cases against nicotine and opioids. Ward examines the complex legal challenges, including First Amendment issues and Section 230 protections, as courts determine whether these claims of negligence and failure to warn will move forward. The trials could set major precedents for social media regulation and corporate accountability.

22 States Sue New York Over Climate Fund, Calling It an ‘Unconstitutional Shakedown’

March 3rd, 2025|Categories: Corporate Compliance, Environmental Torts, HB Tort Notes, Journal, New Featured Post for Home Page, News|Tags: , , , , |

Tim Zyla examines the high-stakes legal battle between New York and a coalition of 22 states, led by West Virginia, over the state’s newly enacted Climate Change Superfund Act. The law requires energy producers to pay $75 billion over 25 years to fund climate damage recovery efforts. The lawsuit, filed in federal court, argues that New York’s law is unconstitutional, overreaches state authority, and unfairly targets out-of-state energy companies. Plaintiffs claim the Act violates multiple constitutional provisions, including the Commerce Clause, Due Process, and Equal Protection Clauses, as well as federal environmental law. Meanwhile, a pro se West Virginia resident has filed a motion to dismiss the case, defending New York’s actions as necessary for public health and climate accountability. Zyla highlights how this case could set a major precedent for state-level climate initiatives and corporate liability for environmental damage.

When Litigation Financing Goes Wrong, Who Pays?

February 27th, 2025|Categories: Complex Business Litigation, Emerging Litigation & Risk, HB Tort Notes, Journal, Mass Torts, New Featured Post for Home Page, News|Tags: , , , , |

The bankruptcy of Houston's AkinMears LLP highlights the risks of relying too heavily on third-party litigation financing and the broader implications for transparency, regulation, and financial sustainability in mass torts. The firm filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy citing more than $200 million in debt owed to litigation funding companies Virage SPV 1 and Rocade Capital. According to Bloomberg Law’s U.S. Bankruptcy Tracker, AkinMears LLP was the only U.S. law firm filing for bankruptcy in January 2025 with $50 million or more in liabilities. In total, 12 large law firms declared bankruptcy in January 2025, up from seven in January 2024 but slightly below the 17 cases recorded in January 2023. Read our report by guest contributor Jennifer Holmes.

Mexico Bans Imports of Foreign Textiles: Does My Insurance Policy Cover That?

February 25th, 2025|Categories: Corporate Compliance, Emerging Litigation & Risk, HB Tort Notes, Insurance, Journal, New Featured Post for Home Page, News|Tags: , , , , |

Diana Gliedman, Dennis Nolan, and Fiona Hogan examine the impact of Mexico’s recent presidential decree banning certain foreign textile imports through the IMMEX program and increasing tariffs on textile products. The ban has disrupted operations for textile companies and third-party logistics providers, leading to unexpected costs, rerouting challenges, and supply chain delays. The authors outline how businesses may find relief through insurance policies such as Supply Chain Insurance, Business Interruption, Contingent Business Interruption, and Marine Cargo/Stock Throughput Insurance. They emphasize the need for swift action to review coverage, notify insurers, and document losses to maximize potential claims.

Trump’s rollback of draft PFAS regulation means uncertain future for ‘forever chemicals’ torts

February 21st, 2025|Categories: Emerging Litigation & Risk, Environmental Torts, HB Tort Notes, Journal, Mass Torts, New Featured Post for Home Page, News|Tags: , , , , |

With federal PFAS regulations in limbo, lawsuits targeting “forever chemicals” are expanding—what does this mean for businesses and consumers? Justin Ward examines the uncertain future of PFAS (“forever chemicals”) regulation and litigation after former President Trump rolled back a draft rule expanding Biden-era guidelines. The rising PFAS lawsuits are increasingly targeting consumer product manufacturers alongside chemical companies. Despite concerns over deregulation, several states have enacted their own strict PFAS rules, ensuring continued legal challenges and regulatory pressure. Read our report by guest contributor Justin Ward.

California’s climate disclosure laws withstand initial US Chamber of Commerce challenge

February 20th, 2025|Categories: Corporate Compliance, Emerging Litigation & Risk, Environmental Torts, HB Tort Notes, Journal, New Featured Post for Home Page, News|Tags: , , , , |

California’s groundbreaking climate disclosure laws just overcame a major legal challenge—what does this mean for businesses and the future of corporate transparency? Writer Justin Ward will fill you in.

AI Litigation Risks in Employment by Gerald L. Maatman Jr., Alex W. Karasik, and George J. Schaller

April 25th, 2024|Categories: Corporate Compliance, Emerging Litigation & Risk, Employment, HB Tort Notes, Journal, New Featured Post for Home Page, News|Tags: , , , , |

The authors, Gerald L. Maatman Jr., Alex W. Karasik, and George J. Schaller analyze two novel AI lawsuits and highlight recent governmental guidance related to AI use in the employment context and the implications of possible discriminatory conduct stemming from the use of AI tools. "AI is here to stay," they write. "Whether companies choose AI technology for any 'employment decision,' companies must keep themselves up to date on any issued guidance and must actively monitor AI tools to prevent any possible discriminatory outputs."

Protecting Policyholders as AI Is Developed for Insurance Claims Handling by Marshall Gilinsky and Madison Marlow

April 23rd, 2024|Categories: Corporate Compliance, Emerging Litigation & Risk, HB Tort Notes, Insurance, Journal, New Featured Post for Home Page, News|Tags: , , , , |

The authors, Marshall Gilinsky and Madison Marlow discuss the integration of artificial intelligence (AI) within the insurance industry and outline the potential consequences of diminished human oversight in AI-driven insurance claims handling, highlighting the need for watchdogs and regulators to demand that AI tools under development afford “explainability” and protect policyholder rights.

Adapting to AI: Taking a Practical Approach to Governance by Blair Robinson

April 19th, 2024|Categories: Corporate Compliance, Emerging Litigation & Risk, HB Tort Notes, Journal, New Featured Post for Home Page, News, Technology Law|Tags: , , , , |

The author, Blair Robinson of Robinson+Cole discusses the need for a practical AI governance framework that businesses must embrace to harness AI’s transformative promise responsibly, encompassing a diligent, strategic, and technically nuanced governance approach. As she notes, "taking a methodical and use-case-driven approach may allow a business to embrace the transformative power of AI in critical areas while managing “wild west”-style use by employees without governance approval".

JEIL S24 Top Legal Risks with Generative AI by Graham Reynolds, Robin Sagstetter, and Damon W.D. Wright

April 19th, 2024|Categories: Corporate Compliance, Emerging Litigation & Risk, HB Tort Notes, Journal, New Featured Post for Home Page, News, Technology Law|Tags: , , , , |

The authors, Graham Reynolds, Robin Sagstetter, and Damon W.D. Wright discuss recent court cases which have brought to the forefront the top legal risks associated with the use of Generative AI.

The Use and Abuse of the Pollution Exclusion by Robert D. Chesler, Dennis J. Artese, and Jamie O’Neill

April 19th, 2024|Categories: Emerging Litigation & Risk, Environmental Torts, HB Tort Notes, Insurance, Journal, New Featured Post for Home Page, News|Tags: , , , , |

The authors, Robert Chesler, Dennis Artese, and Jamie O'Neill of Anderson Kill examine recent court decisions and ongoing cases that have brought to the forefront the critical issue of the reach of pollution exclusions in insurance policies.

Cracking the College Sports “Cartel”: Good for Athletes, Competition, and the Games by Joy Sidhwa and Tim LaComb

February 13th, 2024|Categories: Complex Business Litigation, Emerging Litigation & Risk, HB Tort Notes, Journal, Mass Torts, New Featured Post for Home Page, News|Tags: , , , , |

Momentum in the national debate over whether a college athlete should profit from licensing deals for their “names, images, and likenesses,” or NILs, swung in favor of players on June 21, 2021, when the Supreme Court ruled for the athletes in NCAA v. Alston. Authors Joy Sidhwa and Tim LaComb of MoginRubin, LLP discuss the impacts of the decision and subsequent court decisions and state legislation which have further cemented and defined the changing amateurism rules in college sports. As the authors note, "the ultimate test of whether amateurism drives demand will come after new state laws allow compensation unrelated to education. If compensation doesn’t trigger a drop in demand, the NCAA will lose its procompetitive justification for the restriction and likely bring an end to amateurism rules".

Go to Top