Loading...
  • Unraveling “Reverse Discrimination” with Leah Stiegler

    What happens when workplace discrimination claims come from members of majority groups? In this episode of the Emerging Litigation Podcast, attorney Leah Stiegler of Woods Rogers unpacks the Supreme Court’s unanimous decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services. The Court’s ruling—eliminating the “background circumstances rule”—marks a major shift in how discrimination cases are evaluated, reinforcing that Title VII protects everyone equally. Leah shares insights from mock jury trials, explores how geography and community values affect verdicts, and breaks down what employers should know about evolving discrimination standards.

  • Authentic Business Development for Litigators: Stop Chasing Cases and Start Building Clients with John Reed

    What if waiting for lawsuits is the worst growth strategy a litigator can have? In this episode of the Emerging Litigation Podcast, host Tom Hagy speaks with John Reed, founder of Rain BDM and host of Sticky Lawyers, about how litigators can build authentic, lasting client relationships instead of chasing the next case. John shares practical insights on defining your professional brand, using emotional intelligence in business development, and adapting your natural style—especially for introverts or those navigating remote mentorship. Whether you’re a new associate or a seasoned partner, this episode offers a roadmap for making your practice more resilient, visible, and genuinely client-centered.

  • New and Improved Antitrust Whistleblowing Incentives with Julie Bracker and Dan Mogin

    Can whistleblowers reshape antitrust enforcement the way they’ve exposed fraud in other industries? In this episode of the Emerging Litigation Podcast, host Tom Hagy talks with Julie Keeton Bracker of Bracker & Marcus and Dan Mogin of Mogin Law about the Department of Justice’s new push to encourage insider reporting in antitrust cases. They explore the history of qui tam actions, the power of the False Claims Act, and how individuals could soon play a bigger role in uncovering price-fixing, bid-rigging, and other anti-competitive schemes.

  • Resolving Business Disputes Without Burning Bridges Featuring Judge Alan Fine

    In this episode of the Emerging Litigation Podcast, retired Judge Alan Fine of Private Resolutions explores how businesses can resolve disputes without destroying valuable relationships. Drawing on decades of experience on the bench and in commercial litigation, Judge Fine explains the pros and cons of mediation, arbitration, and “private judging,” which allows parties to choose their own judge and resolve matters quickly and confidentially. He shares how aligning your dispute resolution strategy with business objectives—rather than emotions—can preserve partnerships, save time, and achieve fair results.

  • Insurance Coverage Litigation’s Modern Mayhem with Jeremy Moseley

    Insurance coverage litigation isn’t what it used to be. In this episode of the Emerging Litigation Podcast, Jeremy Moseley of Spencer Fane unpacks how automation, AI, climate change, and “social inflation” are reshaping risks and fueling high-stakes disputes. From thermonuclear verdicts to dangerous policy gaps, Jeremy offers sharp, practical insights into what insurers, policyholders, and lawyers should expect next.

  • Federal Courts Issue Contrasting Rulings on AI Training and Copyrighted Books Fair Use

    Federal courts in California just issued conflicting rulings on whether training AI models with copyrighted books qualifies as fair use. In Bartz v. Anthropic, the court protected training on lawfully purchased works but rejected the use of pirated copies. In contrast, Kadrey v. Meta allowed AI training on pirated books, calling it “highly transformative.” Tom Hagy explains that with more than 50 similar lawsuits pending, these decisions underscore the legal uncertainty facing tech companies, publishers, and creators—and could reshape the future of AI development and copyright law.

  • Artificial Intelligence Meets Copyright Law with Ryan Phelan and Tiffany Gehrke

    What happens when artificial intelligence collides with copyright law? In this episode of the Emerging Litigation Podcast, intellectual property attorneys Ryan Phelan and Tiffany Gehrke of Marshall, Gerstein & Borun LLP unpack two landmark court decisions on fair use and AI training data. They explain why courts found AI training to be “transformative use,” how judges are treating legally obtained versus pirated data, and why algorithmic outputs could be the real battleground ahead. With deep expertise in technology and IP law, Ryan and Tiffany offer practical insights into how these rulings may shape the future of AI, copyright, and innovation.

  • Subway Surfing Suit Against Meta and TikTok: Setting the Stage for Social Media Liability

    Social media platforms are under mounting legal pressure as courts scrutinize how algorithms amplify dangerous viral trends. In Nazario v. ByteDance Ltd., a New York judge allowed a wrongful death lawsuit against Meta and TikTok to move forward after a teen died attempting a “subway surfing” stunt allegedly promoted by their platforms. In this article, Tom Hagy examines how the decision challenges long-standing Section 230 protections and signals a shift toward treating social media as potentially defective products when design and targeting harm young users. This case—and others involving viral challenges and youth safety—may redefine platform liability for years to come.

  • Climate Change Law: Tension Increases Over Governmental and Corporate Responsibility

    The world’s leaders still don’t agree on what, if anything, to do about climate change – despite mounting evidence that, as a planet, we are in the soup. A major ruling from the International Court of Justice says states have an obligation to save the planet, as the U.S. president is enthusiastically sprinting the other way, inspiring cheers from his base and jeers from scientists. As for domestic litigation designed to pin liability on the fossil fuel industry, a case in South Carolina faltered as another in Hawaii is clearing hurdles. Read the update from Tom Hagy.

Emerging Litigation Podcast

PFAS Regulation, Litigation, and Differentiation

In this episode, we give you some history of the PFAS compounds, discuss some of their important differences, review what litigation we're seeing (including the various claims and defenses), note what we can learn from recent settlement structures, forecast the impact of any new regulation, and predict what litigation might be next. Listen to our guests David Marmins and Morgan Harrison of Arnall Golden Gregory LLP.

ESG Programs and the Lawyer’s Role

In this episode, we discuss the role of attorneys and in-house counsel in the courageous new world of Environment, Social, and Governance Issues, or ESG. How can law firms themselves adopt ESG practices and what role do they play with clients? How can in-house counsel drive ESG initiatives? What are the pitfalls and risks? And have you ever wondered how rating organizations work? Listen now!

Natural Gas Bans and Bans on Bans

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals recently struck down Berkeley, California's ban on natural gas infrastructure in new buildings as a violation of federal law. As we will continue to see more such bans, our guest shares insights on how similar cases may be treated -- and much more.

A Shameless Plug for Our Content Services

Your content marketing is everything you’ve ever dreamed of. Right?

White Label Critical Legal Content for your organizationSara is marketing director at a boutique law firm. When we asked her how their blog was going, she made a sad face. But then, we made Sara smile.*

Critical Legal Content was founded by Tom Hagy, former Editor & Publisher of Mealey’s Litigation Reports and VP at LexisNexis, founder of HB, current litigation podcaster and editor-in-chief. CLC’s mission is to help smaller firms and service providers not only create content — blogs, articles, papers, webinars, podcasts (like the stuff on this site) — but also to get it out there. How? Via social media, this website, your website, and potential via our podcast and journal which we publish in collaboration with vLex Fastcase and Law Street Media. The goal is to attract readers and dizzy them with your brilliance.

*Inspired by actual events.

Create content like a real legal publisher.

Emerging Litigation Journal

FTC v. Amazon: Market Definitions and Section 5 of the FTC Act

Traditional antitrust economics face significant challenges grappling with the relatively new digital economy. The author, Jonathan Rubin examines these and other issues raised in the case of FTC v. Amazon, which he anticipates will be a crucial test for antitrust and the FTC Act.

PFAS Regulation: EPA Ushers in Next Era of Mass Tort and Environmental Litigation

PFAS claims are the next frontier of mass tort and environmental litigation. With the EPA poised to finally enact the first regulation of these chemicals, that frontier is ripe for exploration. This article explores PFAS and the origin of litigation around the substances as well as the state of PFAS litigation and regulation today. It concludes with some thoughts on what to expect when it comes to PFAS litigation going forward.

TVPRA, State Statutes Open Door for Civil Damage Claims by Human-Trafficking Victims

Since 2003, when Congress opened the door for human-trafficking victims to sue for civil damages under the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 (TVPRA), the TVPRA and similarly drafted state statutes have allowed for human-trafficking victims to seek civil damages against any party that has benefited from their trafficking. Given this expansive inclusion of third-party liability, more and more businesses, especially those in the hospitality industry, are ultimately the ones left to pay for the criminal acts of human traffickers. In this article, the authors, Coryne Leyendecker and Pamela Lee discuss the evolving litigation around human-trafficking claims and offer guidance on how businesses can build a foundation for their own defense while simultaneously helping prevent human-trafficking crimes from occurring in the first place.

HB Webinars on CeriFi LegalEdge

Contract Drafting Fundamentals

Register Now Contract Drafting Fundamentals: What I Wish They Taught Me in Law School Speaker: Will Marshall | Partner UBM Law LLP Date: Thursday | July 23, 2020 Time: 2pm ET 1pm CT 12pm MT 11am PT Duration: 75 minutes Price: Early Bird Registration: $75 After July 14: $95 Special: Complimentary with discount code! What you get: CLE credit Course materials Webinar recording Answers to your questions! Contact CLE Manager Get practical insights on contract drafting. For new and seasoned attorneys alike, this 75-minute program will cover core, practical aspects of contract drafting, including a broad range of fundamental concepts, skills, and tips.  The program is designed to make you a more deliberate drafter and improve your ability to assess the purpose and effectiveness of each provision in your contract.  We will discuss not only what is on the page, but external dynamics that affect drafting and negotiation. Finally, we will reserve time to answer your questions. I am offering this program for free to my network to help you develop these foundational skills. If you haven't received it, please contact me directly for the complimentary pass code.  -- Will Marshall,  Partner, UBM Law Group LLP Key topics:  The goals and challenges of good drafting. The anatomy and building blocks of a contract. Categories of contract language. Typical sources of ambiguity. Tips on everything from file naming conventions to how to draft a nested signature block and what a tipping basket is. Your questions via live chat or by email before or and after the event. Send Will a Question Meet our panelist. Will Marshall | Partner UBM Law Group, LLC Will is a co-founder of UBM Law Group. He has substantial experience in drafting and negotiating a wide range of commercial contracts, including [...]

The Intersection of Antitrust & Privacy | A MoginRubin Webinar | 10.31.2019

[two-fifths-first] Recorded: Oct. 31, 2019 Duration: 100 minutes Presented by:  MoginRubin LLP Produced by: HB Litigation Conferences The Panel Moderator Daniel J.  Mogin | Managing Partner, MoginRubin LLP Speakers Jennifer M. Oliver, CIPP/US | Partner, MoginRubin LLP Thomas N. Dahdouh | Director, Western Region, Federal Trade Commission Franklin M. Rubinstein | Partner, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati Randi W. Singer, CIPP/US, CIPT | Partner, Weil, Gotshal & Manges Contributor Dina Srinivasan | Independent Researcher & Author of The Antitrust Case Against Facebook Dina was unable to present but we thank her for her content contributions.  What you will get: At least 1 hour of CLE credit. Answers to your questions via email. The opportunity to share with others on your team. The complete Powerpoint. The Antitrust Case Against Facebook Dina Srinivasan's statement to the House Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Antitrust, Commercial, and Administrative Law The Chicago Booth School Stigler Center Committee on Digital Platforms Final Report Write to us at CLE@LitigationConferences.com to: Ask about CLE Request the materials Send a question for the speakers [/two-fifths-first][three-fifths] Market Behavior and Data-Driven Market Power Highly publicized cases and investigations in the U.S. and Europe of big technology, e-commerce, and social media companies demonstrate how anti-competition laws are being used to scrutinize and challenge not only how these corporations conduct themselves in the marketplace, but the very core of their colossal success: the mass collection and utilization of user data. Are the privacy and antitrust worlds beginning to cross over? Or do they simply run parallel while addressing entirely different types of conduct? Whatever the answer, data is the raw material that drives the likes of Google, Facebook, Apple and Amazon, so how it is handled is a critical question when counseling clients on mergers and acquisitions. Meanwhile, there is increasing pressure on antitrust enforcers to consider privacy issues when conducting merger reviews. Antitrust laws [...]

Settlement Psychology: Who is in Control? Homer Simpson or Mr. Spock? | Complimentary Webinar

Settlement Psychology Who's in charge? Homer Simpson or Mr. Spock? Cognitive obstacles to finding common ground. [two-fifths-first] Complimentary On-Demand Webinar From HB! 1 CLE credit CLE questions? CLE@LitigationConferences.com Questions for speakers? Questions@LitigationConferences.com SPEAKERS Jeff Trueman Mediator / Negotiator John Philip Miller Baltimore City Circuit Judge (ret.) This course is also available via the West LegalEdcenter. [/two-fifths-first] [three-fifths] Improve your negotiation strategy and outcomes. Mediator, arbitrator and settlement conference neutral Jeff Trueman says the lawyer’s mind can sometimes play tricks on them when it comes time to settle a claim. “The central question on the minds of counsel, their clients, and insurance professionals in civil litigation is, of course, ‘What’s the case worth?’ For mature torts there is enough historical settlement and verdict data exist for counsel to argue why a particular case should or should not fit within a certain settlement range. In the midst of these discussions, the human brain plays tricks on us. For example, litigators sometimes assume that their trial experience can determine how jurors will negotiate with one another and resolve factual discrepancies after closing arguments. This assumption is a ‘heuristic’ – a cognitive shortcut called attributional error or illusion of control.” Backed by his decades of psychological and economic sciences research, Trueman says there is a lot of room for attorneys to change their mindset when moving into settlement mode. Litigation Chicken “When differences over case value intensify, litigators return to threats of relinquishing control: ‘Maybe we have to try this case;’ or ‘We feel good about our chances in front of a jury.’ Underneath the games of litigation chicken that are the hallmark of settlement negotiation, heuristics lead to erroneous valuations and assessments of risk.” He says attorney would be well served, and would serve their clients well, if they make adjustments depending on their role at a given point in [...]

Content Partners

Go to Top