Emerging Litigation Podcast
Pixel Litigation Tests Old Privacy Law
New litigation alleging violations of the Video Privacy Protection Act -- which came well before online video streaming -- demonstrates how plaintiff attorneys are creatively applying traditional causes of action to litigate modern privacy issues in the absence of a federal law. Listen now for insights.
Hair Relaxer Injury Litigation
Last year the Aylstock, Witkin, Kreis & Overholtz law firm filed the first class action against L’Oréal and Softsheen-Carson for injuries, primarily to Black women, allegedly caused by hair relaxers and straighteners. Now, many cases are consolidated in multidistrict litigation. Listen for unique insights from a leading plaintiff attorney.
The Light and Dark Sides of Auto-GPT
Businesses must understand how Auto-GPT technologies use data, the potential for biased results, and how to responsibly leverage these powerful technologies. Listen to my interview with Jason I. Epstein, Partner at Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough, as we explore this emerging field.
A Shameless Plug for Our Content Services
Your content marketing is everything you’ve ever dreamed of. Right?
Sara 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
Spotting the Risk, Reaping Rewards: Avoiding Increased Antitrust Scrutiny
The Authors Katie has favorably represented antitrust clients in matters involving monopolization, conspiracy, price fixing, exclusive dealing, and other competition-related disputes, including trade secrets and non-compete actions. She has extensive knowledge of the regulatory hurdles and obligations her clients face. Katie earned her J.D. from the New York University School of Law, cum laude. Natalie West represents sophisticated clients in complex commercial disputes. She regularly serves as the lead brief writer in antitrust cases, employment and consumer class actions, and appellate matters. Natalie graduated with high honors from the University of Texas School of Law, where she served as a member of the Texas Law Review and was elected to the Order of the Coif. Interviews with leading attorneys and other subject matter experts on new twists in the law and how the law is responding to new twists in the world. Avoiding Antitrust Scrutiny Spotting the Risk, Reaping Rewards The increase in aggressive antitrust enforcement has certainly received significant attention. For the moment, juries are not rewarding the prosecutors. That said, even an unsuccessful government investigation is itself costly and can motivate plaintiffs’ lawyers. Best practices involve not only following the law but also maintaining solid optics to avoid the need for an expensive, if ultimately successful, defense. Abstract: A decade ago, few lawyers across the country spent significant time thinking about antitrust law. But, since then, there has been an onslaught of antitrust attacks on businesses and executives across all sectors of the economy. Enforcement efforts have skyrocketed following President Biden’s July 2021 executive order directing a “whole of government” crackdown on competition abuses—and the trend shows no sign of letting up. Today, no matter the industry or the size of the business, everyone needs to understand these risks and have strategies to minimize them. This article will walk [...]
International Discovery Tool Kit Aims to Facilitate Discovery in Both Domestic and Foreign Litigation
The Authors Benjamin Daniels advises financial institutions and global corporations about litigation and dispute resolution. As a member of the Business Litigation Group, Ben provides creative and ardent advocacy during litigation, enforcement actions, investigations, crisis management, and white-collar defense matters. Ben’s clients often face complex, cross-border disputes. He has deep experience with the interplay between domestic and international courts, including discovery disputes and Hague convention proceedings. He also represents clients in international arbitrations and mediations. Jenna Scoville is a member of the firm’s Business Litigation Group. She focuses her practice on all aspects of general business litigation and dispute resolution, as well as government enforcement matters, and appellate work. She helps companies respond to a variety of business disputes, including claims for breach of contract, unfair trade practices and fraud. Jenna also has extensive appellate experience. Prior to joining the firm, she clerked for the Honorable Peter W. Hall of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. Interviews with leading attorneys and other subject matter experts on new twists in the law and how the law is responding to new twists in the world. International Discovery Tool Kit Aims to Facilitate Discovery in Both Domestic and Foreign Litigation "At a time when litigants have increasingly relied on U.S. federal courts to obtain otherwise unobtainable evidence from entities located within the United States, the U.S. Supreme Court has decisively closed the door to U.S.-style discovery in private arbitrations abroad. That means U.S. companies will no longer face the time, exposure, and expense of U.S.-style discovery that § 1782 had injected into those proceedings." Abstract: Business knows no borders. Every year companies increase their global reach and open new offices both domestically and abroad. The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated this process—remote employees spread documents and witnesses from Chicago to Shanghai to Sumatra. This [...]
The Use—and Abuse—of Rule 41(a) to Destroy Federal Question Jurisdiction Post-Removal
The Authors John defends manufacturers in product liability litigation involving a range of products, e.g., ATVs, RVs, institutional chemicals, medical devices, and pharmaceuticals. From single cases to mass tort litigation and class actions, John has defended clients in courtrooms around the country. Michael is General Counsel of Thor Motor Coach Inc., a final-stage manufacturer of motor homes headquartered in Elkhart, Indiana. He is also an adjunct professor of commercial law at the Notre Dame Law School. Taryn focuses her practice on litigation. She has experience dealing with products liability, discovery issues, corporate structure and governance, wealth management, private and commercial lending, real estate, and Indian affairs for lobbying both on state and federal levels. Taryn contributed valuable research to this article. Interviews with leading attorneys and other subject matter experts on new twists in the law and how the law is responding to new twists in the world. The Use—and Abuse—of Rule 41(a) to Destroy Federal Question Jurisdiction Post-Removal "A plaintiff seeking to divest the court of subject matter jurisdiction post-removal should at least comply with the requirements of the rule they have relied on. Glossing over those requirements undermines the purpose and intent of both the rule and removal statutes. The case should stay put in federal court in the absence of compliance." Abstract: Defendants in civil litigation can level the often uneven state court playing field by removing cases to federal court through federal question removal. In those cases in which the plaintiff has alleged a claim grounded in federal law, the defendant may remove the case to an often more impartial federal forum. Once removed, the plaintiff has few options for defeating removal. About the only option available to the plaintiff is to forgo the federal claim and divest the court of federal question jurisdiction, forcing remand to [...]
HB Webinars on CeriFi LegalEdge
PFOA: Science & Litigation | 11/15/2018
[one-third-first] DATE: Nov. 15, 2018 TIME: 2 p.m. EDT; 1 p.m. CDT; 12 p.m. MDT; 11 a.m. PDT PLACE: Your computer or mobile device PRICE: $197* per dial-in site *Price is good through Oct. 31. After that it's $247. GROUPS ARE GOOD: Registering qualifies you to multiple attendees at your location. CLE: 1 credit Please send CLE questions to CLE@LitigationConferences.com speakers Michael Dourson, Ph.D., DABT, FATS, FSRA Director of Science Toxicology Excellence for Risk Assessment (TERA) Register now and get: Access for multiple colleagues at your location. Practical insights from a board-certified toxicologist. A through and informative PowerPoint presentation for later reference. Answers to your questions via live chat. CLE credit. And more! [/one-third-first] [two-thirds] PFOA Toxicology: What's a Safe Level for the Environment? What toxic tort and environmental attorneys need to know about this ubiquitous compound. Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) has been described as more toxic than methyl mercury. Yet not all organizations tasked with developing safe-dose levels agree on the best approach for PFOA, resulting in recommended levels that are more than 100-times apart. Differences in these recommended safe-dose levels result in cleanup costs that vary by billions of dollars. Background Environmental contamination with PFOA has been known for some time. In the early 2000s safe doses in drinking water were considered to be in the range of 30-to-50 parts per billion. Recent safe-dose assessments by EPA, ATSDR and several states have significantly lowered these safe doses to parts-per-trillion measurements. PFOA, also known as C8, is used to make Teflon® and similar chemicals known as fluorotelomers. According to the American Cancer Society, PFOA is “burned off during the [manufacturing] process and is not present in significant amounts in the final products.” However, the American Cancer Society says, “PFOA has the potential to be a health concern because it can stay in the environment and in the human body for long periods of time. Studies have found that it is present worldwide at [...]
Complex Post-Settlement Liens | CLE Course | Recorded July 26, 2018
[two-fifths-first] Two ways to access this session. Get it direct from HB for just $197 for the video -- audio synced with slides. Or, it's included in your West LegalEdcenter (Thomson Reuters) subscription. ____________________ Speakers Franklin Solomon Solomon Law Firm Brett Newman Lien Resolution Group [/two-fifths-first] [three-fifths] Complex Post-Settlement Liens: Beyond Traditional Medicare and Medicaid Issues Take this highly practical course with two deeply experienced practitioners who share insights on issues that impact the cases on your desk today. Learn about the newest case law, agency positions and litigation tactics affecting health and disability plan reimbursement claims, including how to protect your clients and your practice in this rapidly developing area. Our speakers discuss: Medicare Advantage Plans Federal Employees Health Benefits Act (FEHBA) Plans Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) Claims Medicare set-asides TRICARE Veterans Administration Claims Speaker Bios Franklin P. Solomon | Solomon Law Firm Franklin Solomon has a nationwide practice focused on evaluation, litigation and resolution of healthcare lien/reimbursement claims. He represents personal injury victims and their attorneys in defending against claims by health plans and government benefits programs seeking payment out of tort recoveries. Most recently, he was plaintiffs’ counsel in two federal appellate court cases decided last summer: Wurtz v. The Rawlings Company, ___ F.3d ___, (2d Cir. 2014), a class action challenging New York insurers’ reimbursement claims against their insureds, and Taransky v. Sec. U.S. Dept. of Health & Human Svcs., ___ F.3d ___ (3d Cir. 2014), a class action challenging Medicare’s claims for reimbursement out of New Jersey tort recoveries. Brett Newman | The Lien Resolution Group Brett Newman is known nationally by plaintiff attorneys for his expertise on claims avoidance and reduction. Recognizing the ever-growing nature of lien resolution and the ever-increasing associated liability, Brett established The Lien Resolution Group and The Newman Structured Settlement Group to assist both individual claimants of personal injury lawsuits and mass [...]
Content Partners
