Loading...
  • 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.

  • CEO Depositions and the Apex Doctrine with Rachel Lary

    Can a CEO be forced to sit for a deposition? In this episode of the Emerging Litigation Podcast, national trial lawyer Rachel M. Lary of Lightfoot, Franklin & White unpacks the Apex Doctrine—a legal standard designed to shield high-ranking executives from unnecessary depositions. Rachel explains how courts assess executive knowledge, alternative discovery options, and the growing body of case law shaping this issue across jurisdictions. A must-listen for litigators navigating discovery strategy in high-stakes cases.

  • From Socks to Strategy: What Zoom Focus Groups Reveal About Your Case with Elizabeth Larrick

    Trial attorney and litigation consultant Elizabeth Larrick shares what more than 1,000 virtual focus groups have taught her about trial prep, from testing case narratives to refining jury selection. In this episode of the Emerging Litigation Podcast, discover how Zoom-based sessions reveal surprising insights into witness credibility, evidence presentation, and what really resonates with jurors—yes, even their take on orange socks.

  • people standing at a window overlooking a city

    DEI Programs as a Source of Liability for Law Firms and Other Businesses

    Two recent cases against international law firms point to an emerging trend in litigation that could have wide-spread implications for diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs. The author, William "Billy" Jones examines these recent cases filed against the law firms for their DEI fellowships and the potential impacts for law firms and other private businesses.

  • Judge finds flaws in motion for an injunction against Trump’s wind turbine order

    While Trump’s freeze on offshore wind permits faces legal challenge, a federal judge isn’t convinced the states bringing the case have shown enough harm. In this article, guest contributor Justin Ward explains why the motion for an injunction was denied, what it means for the broader battle over renewable energy, and how executive power could stall green infrastructure without ever breaking the law.

  • Sexual Abuse & Insurance

    Join Marshall Gilinsky and John Lacey of Anderson Kill, along with Brian Della Torre of ARMR, for a CLE webinar focused on navigating sexual abuse claims through insurance recovery. Learn how to locate and leverage historic liability policies, understand allocation and occurrence issues, and overcome common insurer defenses. Discover how institutions can access valuable coverage through strategic claims, litigation tactics, and insurance archaeology.

  • Apple Watch band PFAS lawsuit highlights health and safety concerns

    Class action alleges Ziploc misled consumers about harmful microplastics in its products

    Amid rising concerns about toxic chemicals in consumer products, Apple finds itself under scrutiny. Guest contributor Justin Ward examines the controversy surrounding Apple’s smartwatch bands after researchers detected elevated levels of PFAS, or “forever chemicals.” While Apple insists its products are safe, a class action lawsuit alleges deceptive marketing and health risks, raising broader questions about accountability and chemical transparency in tech and apparel.

Emerging Litigation Podcast

Algorithmic Software Facilitated Price Fixing with Jonathan Rubin

Everyone knows that price fixing is against the law, chiefly Section 1 of the federal Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890. Competitors may not collude to set prices. However, there are relatively new price-calculation tools that some companies maintain take them out of the equation. With these tools, shared across an industry, firms do not have to directly swap private information with competitors. Instead, they feed their data to a third-party which uses algorithms to come up with prices. In this episode, we discuss what algorithmic or software-facilitated pricing is, what the law says about price collusion, how this new pricing mechanism violates the law, and recent developments in litigation. Our guest highly regarded antitrust attorney Jonathan Rubin, Partner and Co-Founder of MoginRubin LLP.

Biometric Privacy Litigation and Coverage Disputes with John Leonard and Cort Malone

Biometric data is big business. In many cases it even helps make our lives better.  It also presents  significant risks for a variety of parties, in addition to those of us who surrender our data. Companies collecting,  storing, utilizing, and monetizing the data face penalties and litigation bolstered by the increasing number of states enacting biometric information privacy acts, or BIPAs, the first of which was in Illinois. In this episode, we discuss the state of biometric privacy litigation, the regulatory landscape, insurance coverage considerations, and recent rulings with guests John Leonard and Cort Malone of Anderson Kill P.C.

Mitigating Greenwashing Litigation Risks with Ramya Ravishankar

In this episode, we discuss mitigating greenwashing litigation risks with guest Ramya Ravishankar, General Counsel at HowGood, an independent research firm that helps the world’s largest food brands meet their sustainability commitments. Listen and learn 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

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

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’

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?

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.

HB Webinars on CeriFi LegalEdge

The Medical Monitoring Tort Remedy: Advanced Level

The medical monitoring tort remedy – allowing for medical monitoring without physical injury – is recognized in 14 states and not allowed in 23. The law is divided in two states while the rest have not specifically addressed the issue. States that allow medical monitoring to do so when a group of claimants is at increased risk of disease or injury due to exposure to a known hazardous substance or a dangerous product as the result of a defendant’s conduct. Under this tort remedy, claimants are tested periodically, for an agreed or decided period, usually between 10 and 40 years. In this CLE webinar, Gentle Turner & Benson LLC attorneys Edgar (“Ed”) C. Gentle III and Katherine (“Kip”) A. Benson discuss the evolution of the medical monitoring tort, related cases, tests to determine whether the tort should be applied, types of monitoring, and the arguments for an against medical monitoring.

Avoiding the Nuclear Verdict or the Defense Verdict

According to professionals in the insurance industry and the defense bar, the number of nuclear verdicts, or verdicts that exceed $10M, is on the rise. Although the defense may prevail over plaintiffs more often at trial, when the defense loses, they lose big. And plaintiffs who could have obtained needed resources in settlement, sometimes "roll the dice" at trial and get less, or nothing at all. Do clients really want to engage in such high stakes showdowns? Is there a better way to administer "justice?" In this CLE webinar, Mediator Arbitrator Jeff Trueman and Negotiation Educator and Author, John Lowry discuss these very questions. Register for the on-demand webinar today!

Content Partners

Go to Top