Emerging Litigation Podcast
Cryptocurrency with Stephen Palley
Cryptocurrency with Stephen Palley Joining me to discuss this paradigm-shattering model is Anderson Kill Partner Stephen D. Palley, a seasoned trial lawyer and litigator with extensive experience in complex commercial disputes like insurance recovery, securities litigation, and corporate governance. Stephen has significant hands-on software development and design experience. Based in the firm’s D.C. office, he is co-chair of its cross-disciplinary blockchain and virtual currency group. At several points during our conversation I referred to an article co-written by Stephen and his New York colleague Joshua Gold, titled Protecting Cryptocurrency Assets. Stephen earned his J.D. from Washington University, his M.A. from the University of Delaware, and his B.A. (cum laude) from Tufts University (Go Jumbos!). This podcast is the audio companion to the Journal on Emerging Issues in Litigation, a collaborative project between HB Litigation Conferences and the Fastcase legal research family, which includes Full Court Press, Law Street Media, Docket Alarm and, most recently, Judicata. If you have comments or wish to participate in one our projects, or want to tell me how insightful and informative Stephen is, please drop me a note at Editor@LitigationConferences.com. I hope you enjoy the interview, especially when Leo, my cat, knocked over my microphone and when Stephen educated me on the existence of the Weird Beard Festival and other whisker-based celebrations. --Tom Hagy Cryptocurrency assets now exceed $1.5 trillion globally. What a great innovation, as is the magic that makes these transactions possible. Of course, I’m talking about blockchain. The possibilities are endless on both counts. No central authority. No regulators. But (there’s always a but), thanks to the world’s miscreants, desperados and other baddies there is escalating potential for theft of these assets whether they are held in Bitcoin or other forms of digital currency. What should businesses consider if they plan to invest in virtual assets? How might they mitigate risk? What security measures should they have [...]
How Artificial Intelligence is Changing Litigation and Even Preventing it with Arthur Crivella
How Artificial Intelligence is Changing Litigation and Even Preventing it with Arthur Crivella Artificial intelligence has the capability to truly revolutionize how litigators work, and also how companies can avoid litigation in the first place. It can not only do the work of hundreds of people in mere seconds but can be used to predict liabilities before they become liabilities, and outcomes when disputes arise. Joining me to discuss the incredible present-day applications of AI in law and business, as well as the potential to do much more if humans will let it, is Arthur Crivella of Crivella Technologies Limited. For decades Art has been a leader in developing and applying advanced software engineering, systems engineering and AI methodologies, and holds numerous foundation patents in the field. Art has helped create nationally recognized engineering achievements in weaponry as well as in the metals, rubber and food industries. He was principal design engineer in developing advanced weapons direction systems and wrap-around simulation systems for naval guided missiles. Crivella Tech supports corporations in managing risk and law firms in assessing liabilities. The company also supports law firms in class action and mass tort litigation. This podcast is the audio companion to the Journal on Emerging Issues in Litigation, a collaborative project between HB Litigation Conferences and the Fastcase legal research family, which includes Full Court Press, Law Street Media, Docket Alarm and, most recently, Judicata. If you have comments or wish to participate in one our projects, or want to tell me how insightful and informative Art is, please drop me a note at Editor@LitigationConferences.com. I hope you enjoy the interview, particularly my observation that you cannot hurt a robot's feelings. --Tom Hagy
The Age of Social Disparagement with Charlie Kingdollar
The Age of Social Disparagement with Charlie Kingdollar It was my pleasure to interview Charlie Kingdollar for our first episode of the Emerging Litigation Podcast. Charlie spent more than four decades with General Reinsurance, three-quarters of which as the company’s Emerging Issues Officer. One colleague described him as “one of the most prescient and gifted industry futurists I have met in my 36 year professional career within the insurance industry. Entertaining and insightful, his ability to digest and communicate complex issues, many before they are readily apparent, is both a gift and a talent.” This interview is based on his article on social disparagement coming out in the inaugural issue of the Journal on Emerging Issues in Litigation in January 2021. The Journal is a collaborative project between HB and Fastcase. If you have comments or wish to participate in one our projects, or want to tell me how awesome Charlie is, drop me a note at Editor@LitigationConferences.com. We hope you enjoy the interview. Are the risks posed by social media — which has added jet fuel to one person’s ability to smear another — adequately addressed by the insurance market?
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
Flying Cameras: Gaps in Drone Regulation and How Courts Can Fill Them … at Least for Now
Authors With deep experience in the law and regulation of unmanned aerial vehicles, Kathryn practices in the Providence, R.I., offices of Robinson+Cole. She is a member of the firm’s groups that focus on business litigation, data privacy and security, and drone compliance. Kathryn is also a member of the Editorial Board of Advisors for the Journal on Emerging Issues in Litigation and the Emerging Litigation Podcast. Blair Robinson is a cybersecurity intern at Robinson+Cole. She will graduate in 2023 with a J.D. from the Roger Williams University School of Law to complement her Masters of Science degree in Cybersecurity also from Roger Williams University. Get CLE Flying Cameras: Gaps in Drone Regulation and How Courts Can Fill Them … at Least for Now Drones have rapidly transformed dozens of industries since hitting the commercial market. International aid groups use medical drones to deliver life-saving medications and vaccines to remote areas. Agricultural drones have revolutionized how farmers tend their fields. Film and television producers embrace drones for their ability to capture once prohibitively expensive or outright impossible camera shots. Hobbyists love the technology for a variety of recreational purposes. However, as drones have become increasingly commonplace, lawmakers and policymakers have struggled with effectively regulating this emerging domain. In addition, no federal law, state law, or industry best practice adequately addresses the unique privacy and cybersecurity risks drone operations pose. Until federal regulation catches up with the technology, lawyers could move courts to mitigate the issue by arguing for strict liability for drone operators and manufacturers. Although drones may seem like traditional aircraft, they actually pose unique privacy concerns. Drone systems rely on real-time and simultaneous data exchanges between the operator, GPS positioning, cloud-based processing and telemetry, and the drone itself. Each facet in such a complex system presents a new opportunity for attackers. Besides the vulnerability [...]
Full Ninth Circuit Removes Unwarranted Hurdles to Class Certification
The Authors Co-founding partner at MoginRubin LLP, Jonathan Rubin focuses his legal practice exclusively on antitrust and competition law and policy. Based in Washington, DC, he has litigated and led trial teams in major antitrust cases throughout the country. He has published in influential academic journals and has spoken to numerous professional groups, including the Directorate General for Competition of the European Commission, the Antitrust Section of the American Bar Association, and the American Antitrust Institute. Dan Mogin, founding and managing partner of MoginRubin LLP, concentrates his practice on antitrust, unfair competition and complex business litigation. He has served as lead counsel in numerous large antitrust cases, chaired the Antitrust Section of the California Bar, taught antitrust law and was editor-in-chief of a leading competition law treatise. Explore more from MoginRubin LLP! Blog: Emboldened by New Resources and Expanded Authority, Feds Continue 10-Year Look Back at Chinese Investment. By Dan Mogin, Jonathan Rubin, Jennifer Oliver, and Timothy LaComb. List OnDemand CLE Webinar: The Antitrust Case Against Google. Dan Mogin, Jonathan Rubin, Jennifer Oliver, Timothy LaComb, John Newman, Dr. Alan Grant Blog: FTC’s Case Against Facebook Will Test the Flexibility of U.S. Antitrust Law.Authors: Jonathan Rubin and Jennifer Oliver, MoginRubin LLP Blog: Full Ninth Circuit Removes Unwarranted Hurdles to Class Certification. Jonathan Rubin, Dan Mogin. Journal: Policy Derailed: Can U.S. Antitrust Policy Toward Standard Essential Patents Get Back on Track by Jonathan Rubin Webinar: Class Certification After Olean v. Bumble Bee with Jonathan Rubin, James Bogan lll, Jonathan Cohn, Bradley Hamburger. Journal: FTC v. Amazon: Market Definitions and Section 5 of the FTC Act Podcast: Algorithmic Software Facilitated Price Fixing with Jonathan Rubin Plus, additional insights from the MoginRubin Blog. Full Ninth Circuit Removes Unwarranted Hurdles to Class Certification “Nothing in Rule 23 suggests that the presence of more than a de minimis number of uninjured class members affects whether questions affecting only individual class [...]
Overconfidence: A Risky but Pervasive Phenomenon in Litigated Disputes
The Author Jeff Trueman (jt@jefftrueman.com) is an experienced, full-time mediator and arbitrator. He helps parties resolve a wide variety of litigated and pre-suit disputes and interpersonal problems concerning catastrophic injuries, wrongful death, professional malpractice, employment, business dissolution, real property, and domestic relations. Jeff is a past Director of Dispute Resolution for the Circuit Court for Baltimore City where he oversaw over 70 retired judges and senior attorneys conducting over 1,500 mediations, settlement conferences, and neutral evaluations per year. He is a Distinguished Fellow of the International Academy of Mediators, an invitation-only membership organization consisting of some of the most successful commercial mediators in the world. 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. Overconfidence: A Risky but Pervasive Phenomenon in Litigated Disputes “Lady Justice symbolizes fairness and impartiality as she oversees the adjudication process. Although she may hold the scales of justice in one hand, she also carries a large sword in her other hand. And she’s blindfolded. Knowing that, how confident should you be?” Abstract: “Overconfidence” may have negative connotations, but it can be beneficial in competitive situations like litigation where parties compete for resources. Nonetheless, posturing and overconfidence of opposing parties and counsel are common frustrations felt by lawyers and claims professionals. Most litigants fail to see themselves as overconfident even though that can result in miscalculations and erroneous risk assessments. Litigants can employ techniques to improve decision making but sometimes going to trial is considered the right decision for reasons that are considered more important than whether the result is better than the last settlement demand or offer. In addition to focusing on legal and financial threats that are external to themselves, litigants might also consider threats of their own [...]
HB Webinars on CeriFi LegalEdge
Content Partners
