Expert Analysis

• Your Next Litigation Hold Should Cover AI Chat Logs

  

  The Delaware Chancery Court’s recent decision in Fortis Advisors v. Krafton to treat a CEO’s artificial intelligence chats as substantive evidence is being read as a discovery warning to litigators, but there is a second duty-to-preserve lesson that is especially pertinent to in-house counsel, say attorneys at Faegre Drinker.

• Studying Foreign Languages Makes Me A Better Lawyer

  

  Studying Italian and Japanese has shown me that learning a new language can benefit a legal career in several ways, including by demonstrating the importance of approaching problems from a fresh perspective and the value of practicing patience with colleagues and clients, says Anna King at Genworth Financial.

• Class Actions At The Circuit Courts: May Lessons

  

  In this month's review of class action appeals, Mitchell Engel at Shook Hardy discusses four recent rulings from cases involving allegations of Title VII violations, the Employment Retirement Income Security Act, prison dental care violations and overcharging for PACER access.

• NY Times Word Puzzles Make Me A Better Lawyer

  

  Every morning I let The New York Times humble me with word games, which offer a chance to recalibrate my brain before the day's chaos arrives and remind me that a solution — whether to a puzzle or employment law issue — almost always exists once I find the right angle, says Amy Epstein Gluck at Pierson Ferdinand.

• Law School's Missed Lesson: Diagnose Before Arguing

  

  Law school often skips over explicitly teaching students how to determine what kind of problem a case presents before they commit to a particular doctrinal path, which risks building arguments that are internally coherent but externally misaligned, says Melanie Oxhorn at Kobre & Kim.

• Judges On AI: How Courts Can Survive The Tech Revolution

  

  Colorado Supreme Court Justice Maria Berkenkotter and Colorado Court of Appeals Judge Lino Lipinsky de Orlov discuss how artificial intelligence has already fundamentally altered the legal system and offer tips for courts navigating deepfakes, hallucinations and a gap in access to AI tools.

• 'Skinny Label' Arguments Spotlight Induced Infringement Risk

  

  Recent oral arguments before the U.S. Supreme Court in Hikma Pharmaceuticals v. Amarin Pharma highlight the uncertain boundary between lawful generic competition through so-called skinny labels and induced patent infringement, with potential implications for patent holders’ communication, enforcement and causation strategies across industries, says Anton Hopen at Trenam.

• 3 AI Adoption Mistakes GCs Should Avoid

  

  The pressure in-house legal teams face to quickly adopt artificial intelligence tools, combined with budget constraints and the need to evaluate a crowded market of options, sets the stage for implementation mistakes that are often difficult to undo, says former 23andMe general counsel Guy Chayoun.

• 4 Emerging Approaches To AI Protective Order Language

  

  Over the last year, at least five federal district courts have issued or analyzed specific protective order provisions restricting the use of generative artificial intelligence platforms with protected materials, establishing that proactive AI-specific provisions are now standard practice and demonstrating that no single model works for every case, says Joel Bush at Kilpatrick.

• What Justices Are Focusing On In 'Skinny Label' Patent Case

  

  Though Hikma v. Amarin appears to be a patent dispute that could reshape inducement doctrine in the pharmaceutical context, oral argument suggests the U.S. Supreme Court may treat this as primarily a pleading-stage dispute, with important unresolved questions lurking beneath the surface, says Shashank Upadhye at Upadhye Tang.

• Heppner Ruling Left AI Privilege Risk For Lawyers Unresolved

  

  While a New York federal judge’s recent ruling in U.S. v. Heppner resolved a privilege question surrounding client-side artificial intelligence use, it did not address how to mitigate the risks that can arise when confidential information enters the operative context of an AI system used by an attorney, says Jianfei Chen at Quarles & Brady​​​​​​​.

• Suit's Dismissal Would Not Settle Gold Card Visa's Legality

  

  The government’s recent assertion that the plaintiffs in American Association of University Professors v. Department of Homeland Security lack standing to challenge the Trump administration’s pay-to-play immigration program does not address whether an agency can deem a million-dollar gift evidence of eligibility for immigration benefits carefully defined by Congress, says Jun Li at Reid & Wise.

• 2 AI Snafus Show Why Attys Can't Outsource Judgment

  

  The recent incident involving Sullivan & Cromwell where citations in a filed motion were fabricated by artificial intelligence, as well as a punitive ruling from the Sixth Circuit in U.S. v. Farris, demonstrate that the obligation to supervise AI has belonged and always will belong to lawyers, says John Powell at the Kentucky School Boards Association.