ÃÛÌÒÊÓƵ

Expert Analysis

• A Changing Playbook For Fighting Records Requests In Del.

  

  The Delaware Supreme Court's recent decision in Wong v. Amazon, reversing the denial of an inspection demand brought by a stockholder, serves as a stark warning to corporations challenging books and records requests, making clear that companies cannot defeat such demands solely by attacking the scope of their stated purpose, say attorneys at Duane Morris.

• Tesla Verdict May Set New Liability Benchmarks For AV Suits

  

  The recent jury verdict in Benavides v. Tesla is notable not only for a massive payout — including $200 million in punitive damages — but because it apportions fault between the company's self-driving technology and the driver, inviting more scrutiny of automated vehicle marketing and technology, says Michael Avanesian at Avian Law Group.

• Demystifying The Civil Procedure Rules Amendment Process

  

  Every year, an advisory committee receives dozens of proposals to amend the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, most of which are never adopted — but a few pointers can help maximize the likelihood that an amendment will be adopted, says Josh Gardner at DLA Piper.

• How The 5th, DC Circuits Agreed On FCC Forfeiture Orders

  

  The Fifth and D.C. Circuits split this year on the Federal Communications Commission's process for adjudicating enforcement actions, but both implicitly recognized the problem with penalizing a party based on a forfeiture order that has not yet been challenged in any way in court, says Jared Marx at HWG.

• With Obligor Ruling, Ohio Justices Calm Lending Waters

  

  A recent decision by the Ohio Supreme Court, affirming a fundamental principle that lenders have no duty to disclose material risks to obligors, provides clarity for commercial lending practices in Ohio and beyond, and offers a reminder of the risks presented by guarantee arrangements, says Carrie Brosius at Vorys.

• Bankruptcy Courts May Offer Relief For Tariff-Driven Distress

  

  The Bankruptcy Code and the customs laws interact in complex ways that make bankruptcy a powerful, albeit limited, tool for companies that are dealing with tariff-related financial distress, says Eitan Arom at KTBS Law.

• 'Solicit' Ruling Offers Proxy Advisers Compliance Relief

  

  The D.C. Circuit recently found that proxy voting advice does not fall under the legal definition of "solicitation," significantly narrowing the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission's regulatory power over such advisers, offering stability to the proxy advisory industry and providing temporary relief from new compliance burdens, say attorneys at Sheppard Mullin.

• Evaluating The SEC's Rising Whistleblower Denial Rate

  

  The rising trend of U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission whistleblower award claim denials represents a departure from the SEC's previous track record and may reflect a more conservative approach to whistleblower award determinations under the current administration, say attorneys at Troutman Pepper.

• State Crypto Regs Diverge As Federal Framework Dawns

  

  Following the Genius Act's passage, states like California, New York and Wyoming are racing to set new standards for crypto governance, creating both opportunity and risk for digital asset firms as innovation flourishes in some jurisdictions while costly friction emerges in others, say attorneys at Sheppard Mullin.

• Parenting Skills That Can Help Lawyers Thrive Professionally

  

  As kids head back to school, the time is ripe for lawyers who are parents to consider how they can incorporate their parenting skills to build a deep, meaningful and sustainable legal practice, say attorneys at Alston & Bird.

• Series

  Teaching Trial Advocacy Makes Us Better Lawyers

  

  Teaching trial advocacy skills to other lawyers makes us better litigators because it makes us question our default methods, connect to young attorneys with new perspectives and focus on the needs of the real people at the heart of every trial, say Reuben Guttman, Veronica Finkelstein and Joleen Youngers.

• The Crucial Question Left Unanswered In EpicentRx Decision

  

  The California Supreme Court recently issued its long-awaited decision in EpicentRx Inc. v. Superior Court, resolving a dispute regarding the enforceability of forum selection clauses, but the question remains whether private companies can trust that courts will continue to consistently enforce forum selection clauses in corporate charters, says John Yow at Yow PC.

• Why Civil RICO Claims Are Gaining Traction With Plaintiffs

  

  A Texas federal court's recent $71 million verdict in Point Bridge Capital v. Johnson demonstrates that, when used properly, civil lawsuits under the Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act can be a devastating weapon — and increasingly favorable for plaintiffs, says Akiva Shapiro at Gibson Dunn.

• Navigating Brazil's Regulations, Incentives For Green Projects

  

  Brazil's evolving environmental regulatory framework and ongoing moves to attract international capital for climate-focused projects may appeal to U.S.-based companies and investors interested in sustainable development — but taking advantage of these opportunities requires careful planning and meaningful stakeholder engagement, says Milena Angulo at Guimarães.

• Why EpicentRx Ruling Is A Major Win For Business Certainty

  

  The California Supreme Court's recent decision in EpicentRx v. Superior Court removes a significant source of uncertainty that plagued commercial litigation in California by clarifying that forum selection clauses shouldn't be invalidated solely because the selected forum lacks the right to a jury trial, say attorneys at Clark Hill.