Emerging Litigation Podcast
Automation Comes to Our Litigation Nation with James Lee
In this episode, we discuss litigation automation and another case in which innovators are using artificial intelligence to transform legal operations with guest James M. Lee, co-founder and CEO of LegalMation. Listen and learn more!
Mental Wellbeing and Fulfillment for Litigators: Sara Lord Interviews Gary Miles
In this episode, Sara Lord of Legal Metrics speaks with Gary Miles, success coach and former litigator. about the professional dissatisfaction litigators experience when the pursuit of fulfillment clashes with high-stress demands, and practical strategies for managing anxiety and embracing mindfulness. Listen and learn.
Litigation Prognostication with Dan Rabinowitz
In this episode, Dan Rabinowitz, Co-Founder and CEO of Pre/Dicta, discusses how the power of technology will make predicting litigation as commonplace as predicting the weather. He also shares insights into a study Pre/Dicta conducted that tested assumptions about judges based on their political affiliations. Listen and learn!
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
Mexico Bans Imports of Foreign Textiles: Does My Insurance Policy Cover That?
Diana Gliedman, Dennis Nolan, and Fiona Hogan examine the impact of Mexico’s recent presidential decree banning certain foreign textile imports through the IMMEX program and increasing tariffs on textile products. The ban has disrupted operations for textile companies and third-party logistics providers, leading to unexpected costs, rerouting challenges, and supply chain delays. The authors outline how businesses may find relief through insurance policies such as Supply Chain Insurance, Business Interruption, Contingent Business Interruption, and Marine Cargo/Stock Throughput Insurance. They emphasize the need for swift action to review coverage, notify insurers, and document losses to maximize potential claims.
Trump’s rollback of draft PFAS regulation means uncertain future for ‘forever chemicals’ torts
With federal PFAS regulations in limbo, lawsuits targeting “forever chemicals” are expanding—what does this mean for businesses and consumers? Justin Ward examines the uncertain future of PFAS (“forever chemicals”) regulation and litigation after former President Trump rolled back a draft rule expanding Biden-era guidelines. The rising PFAS lawsuits are increasingly targeting consumer product manufacturers alongside chemical companies. Despite concerns over deregulation, several states have enacted their own strict PFAS rules, ensuring continued legal challenges and regulatory pressure. Read our report by guest contributor Justin Ward.
California’s climate disclosure laws withstand initial US Chamber of Commerce challenge
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.
HB Webinars on CeriFi LegalEdge
Property Insurance Coverage for Emerging Risk of Underground Climate Change
In this CLE webinar, Anderson Kill attorneys, Dennis J. Artese, Ethan Middlebrooks, and Thomas Dupont and professional engineer, Kenneth R. Quigley discuss permutations of policy language and state law that may affect coverage for damage caused by underground climate change, including how state law treats anti-concurrent causation clauses, whether “human-caused” exceptions to earth movement exclusions may apply to underground climate change, and whether “abrupt collapse” exceptions to exclusions for building collapse may apply when undetected structural damage triggered by underground climate change triggers collapse.
PFAS Litigation: Predicted Trends Given Regulatory Changes
Every week, the PFAS litigation and regulatory landscape changes dramatically. The EPA presses forward full steam ahead with numerous PFAS regulations, while the states have proposed hundreds of pieces of legislation related to PFAS in the last three years. Meanwhile, class action litigation, environmental pollution litigation, and greenwashing suits are being filed against companies at a dramatically increasing rate year after year. In this CLE webinar, CMBG3 Law attorney John Gardella discusses the latest on regulatory and litigation issues related to PFAS and how they will impact corporations.
The Medical Monitoring Tort Remedy
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.
Content Partners
