Are social media platforms the next Big Tobacco? A major lawsuit argues they’re designed to be addictive—will the courts agree? Find out more from guest contributor, Justin Ward.
The author, Tim Zyla details a lawsuit filed by 22 states against New York over a $75 billion climate change fund, challenging its constitutionality and the imposition of liability on energy producers for climate-related damages. Get the full scoop here!
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’s new textile import ban is disrupting supply chains—find out how businesses can protect themselves with insurance coverage from expert attorneys Diana Gliedman, Dennis Nolan, and Fiona Hogan of Anderson Kill. Learn more now!
With federal PFAS regulations in limbo, lawsuits targeting “forever chemicals†are expanding—what does this mean for businesses and consumers? Writer Justin Ward provides the details.
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.
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."
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.
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 westâ€-style use by employees without governance approval".
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 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.
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".
