Emerging Litigation Podcast

Our Legal Tech Host Sara Lord speaks with data scientist and eDiscovery expert Lenora Gray of Redgrave Data.  Discovery is a staple in any litigation practice, and it has been transformed by technology assisted review tools – or TAR. eDiscovery has developed into its own specialty – with eDiscovery experts on staff who know all there is to know about the technology, standards, processes, and practices.But every litigator needs to understand how eDiscovery tools work. They should be able to answer questions around the approach being used, why that approach was chosen, reliability of the assisted review, human oversight implemented, and more.This, like many areas of law, is filled with acronyms, specialized terminology, and a changing landscape – from technology developments to evolving legal standards to ethics competency issues. But because so much of the work is done by a technology vendor that has specialized tools, it can feel like your review is based on blind faith and that finding the pieces to support your case requires you to rely on dumb luck.Can we do more than pray to the document gods? Listen as Sara Lord interviews Lenora Gray, Data Scientist at Redgrave Data.Lenora Gray is an eDiscovery expert and data scientist who is skilled in auditing and evaluating eDiscovery systems. In her role as data scientist at Redgrave Data, she designs and analyzes structured and unstructured data sets, builds predictive models for use in TAR workflows, implements automation solutions, and develops custom software. Prior to joining Redgrave, she spent 12 years as a paralegal, a role in which she managed discovery teams. Lenora is currently pursuing her M.S. in data science from John Hopkins University and earned a B.S. in computer science from Florida Atlantic University.I welcome back Sara Lord as legal tech guest host for the Emerging Litigation Podcast. A former practicing attorney with a decade of experience in data analytics, Sara applies her time at law firms and companies to explore and address the cultural and practical barriers to diversity in law, supporting value-creation through legal operations and client-first business-oriented practices. In her recent work as Managing Director of Legal Metrics, she led a team of experts focused on providing the tools to support data-driven decision making in legal operations and closer collaboration between law firms and their clients through automation and standardization of industry metrics. Sara earned her J.D. from New York University School of Law.*******This podcast is the audio companion to the Journal of Emerging Issues in Litigation. The Journal is a collaborative project between HB Litigation Conferences and the vLex Fastcase legal research family, which includes Full Court Press, Law Street Media, and Docket Alarm.If you have comments, ideas, or wish to participate, please drop me a note at Editor@LitigationConferences.com.Tom HagyLitigation Enthusiast andHost of the Emerging Litigation PodcastHome Page

Tom Hagy interviews jury and trial expert Tara Trask about picking juries in an age of misinformation, general distrust, tribalism, unleashed social media warriors, flamers, and propagandists, and unorthodox legal strategies that seem to unfold on a daily basis. All of these conditions began to accelerate in the lead-up to the 2016 presidential election in which Donald Trump prevailed over Hillary Clinton, continued to heat up in Trump's race against then-candidate Joe Biden, culminated in the Jan. 6 attack on the Capital, and continues to blot out the sun amid civil and criminal actions against the former president and some of his supporters and colleagues as the 2024 election roars at us like a freight train.  In this episode we ask: How does what some have called a Cold Civil War affect our ability to listen and decide objectively when presented with arguments and evidence in court? How much increased bias, skepticism, and hostility for institutions -- from courts to corporations to witnesses -- do people carry into the jury box?  Tara Trask is a nationally recognized author and lecturer on juror psychology and other trial science topics. As President of Trask Consulting, a boutique litigation strategy, jury research and trial consulting firm with offices in San Francisco, Houston and New York, Tara focuses on civil litigation with an emphasis on complex commercial litigation, including intellectual property, antitrust, securities, breach of contract, and fraud. She has assisted plaintiffs and defendants in products liability, insurance, and oil and gas matters, and has extensive experience assisting institutions and individuals in matters involving regulatory enforcement and white-collar defense. *******This podcast is the audio companion to the Journal of Emerging Issues in Litigation. The Journal is a collaborative project between HB Litigation Conferences and the vLex Fastcase legal research family, which includes Full Court Press, Law Street Media, and Docket Alarm.If you have comments, ideas, or wish to participate, please drop me a note at Editor@LitigationConferences.com.Tom HagyLitigation Enthusiast andHost of the Emerging Litigation PodcastHome Page

“Of all the opportunities legal operations teams might identify to save time, money, and resources while potentially improving quality, Robotic Process Automation may currently offer the biggest and most immediate opportunities.”That is from the forthcoming book, "Legal Operations in the Age of AI and Data," specifically the “Automation in Legal Departments” chapter written by Tara Emory, Wilzette Louis and Adam Poeppelmeier of Redgrave Data, and Kassie Burns of King & Spalding.  (Available for pre-order now from Globe Law & Business.)Automating repetitive tasks and workflows required to effectively advance litigation frees litigators and support teams to focus on “strategic, analytical, and high-value work,” say the authors. Boosted by AI technology, like natural language processing, these tools can conduct data extraction and analysis from volumes of documents, create new documents, summarize documents, or initiate document drafting.How can litigators best leverage these capabilities? Listen as our first-time guest host Sara Lord interviews Redgrave Data's Tara Emory, SVP, Legal AI Strategy, and Wilzette Louis, Director of Client Solutions. Tara is a highly regarded legal industry executive and recognized expert in legal AI, ediscovery,  information governance operations, and consulting. She plays a leadership role in The Sedona Conference and was contracted to serve as eDiscovery Lead on the House of Representatives Select Committee to Investigate the Jan. 6th Attack on the U.S. Capitol. Tara holds a JD and LLM in International and Comparative Law from Duke University School of Law.Wilzette is an ediscovery expert and advisor focused on approaches for using technology and workflows to  maximize effectiveness, efficiency, and overall client satisfaction. Wilzette has a BS in computer science from the New York Institute of Technology.I welcome as guest host for the podcast Sara Lord, a former practicing attorney with a decade of experience in data analytics. Sara applies her talents in large and small law firms and businesses to explore and address the cultural and practical barriers to diversity in law, and client-first business-oriented practices. As Managing Director of Legal Metrics, she leads a team of experts focused on providing the tools to support data-driven decision making in legal operations and closer collaboration between law firms and their clients through automation and standardization of industry metrics. Sara earned her J.D. from New York University School of Law. Listen as Sara speaks with Tara and Wilzette about the game-changing potential of robotic process automation and AI, and how these are not just futuristic concepts but practical solutions to today's legal challenges. *******This podcast is the audio companion to the Journal of Emerging Issues in Litigation. The Journal is a collaborative project between HB Litigation Conferences and the vLex Fastcase legal research family, which includes Full Court Press, Law Street Media, and Docket Alarm.If you have comments, ideas, or wish to participate, please drop me a note at Editor@LitigationConferences.com.Tom HagyLitigation Enthusiast andHost of the Emerging Litigation PodcastHome Page

Surveys abound on artificial intelligence and the law – many of them by companies bringing the technology into their products for attorneys. One survey says three quarters of lawyers expect AI to be integrated into their legal practices in the near term. Half say they expect it will boost productivity, half feel it will be transformative, while  nine out of ten attorneys expressed concerns about artificial intelligence applications and attendant ethical issues.  In an article she wrote for Above the Law, you’re going to hear even more about generative artificial intelligence in the coming months, “especially” she says, “as legal technology companies ramp up their generative ai releases.” She forecasts “a rapid, exponential uptick in the number of new GAI tools for legal professionals.” And, as she reminded me, litigators have an ethical duty of technology competence.  Nicole "Niki" Black is a Rochester, New York-based attorney, author and journalist, and is senior director of subject matter expertise and external education at MyCase, a company that offers legal practice management software for small firms. She is the nationally recognized author of cloud computing for lawyers and is co-author of social media for lawyers: the next frontier, both published by the American Bar Association. She writes regular columns for abajournal.com and Above the Law; has authored hundreds of articles for other publications; and regularly speaks at conferences regarding the intersection of law and emerging technologies. Nicole earned her J.D. from Albany Law School.Listen as I interview, first, Google Gemini fka Bard, for fun, then our real-life human attorney guest, about the current state and future of generative artificial intelligence and the practice of law. Tom HagyHostEmerging Litigation Podcast***This podcast is the audio companion to the Journal of Emerging Issues in Litigation. The Journal is a collaborative project between HB Litigation Conferences and the vLex Fastcase legal research family, which includes Full Court Press, Law Street Media, and Docket Alarm.If you have comments, ideas, or wish to participate, please drop me a note at Editor@LitigationConferences.com.Tom HagyLitigation Enthusiast andHost of the Emerging Litigation PodcastHome PageLinkedIn

Laundering money generated in the drug trade. The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime estimates that between $800 billion to $2 trillion is laundered annually. Laundering money intended to support terrorism. The International Monetary Fund is concerned about terrorism financing, and proliferation financing, providing funds for nuclear, chemical, or biological weapons. Money that is embezzled or other schemes also must be laundered, that is, if you're a criminal or criminal enterprise. As of Jan. 1, 2024, domestic and foreign entities registered to do business in the United States must comply with new “beneficial ownership reporting requirements” imposed under the Corporate Transparency Act. Listen to what veteran attorney Lori Smith of Stradley Ronon has to say about the Act, something 30 million companies will have to follow during the Act's first year. Lori provides insights for business executives and attorneys on key facets of the requirements, potential penalties, and chances for litigation.***This podcast is the audio companion to the Journal of Emerging Issues in Litigation. The Journal is a collaborative project between HB Litigation Conferences and the vLex Fastcase legal research family, which includes Full Court Press, Law Street Media, and Docket Alarm.If you have comments, ideas, or wish to participate, please drop me a note at Editor@LitigationConferences.com.Tom HagyLitigation Enthusiast andHost of the Emerging Litigation PodcastHome PageLinkedIn

Litigators who do other things besides litigate -- you know them. Some perform comedy, act on stage or in film, or they are gifted musicians. Some are even drummers. (Drummer joke, if that’s not too edgy.)  One highly acclaimed San Francisco class action litigator is talented on the kit and owns her own drum company. Another Los Angeles-based litigator started his own record label. Another San Francisco litigator left the profession, moved to South Africa, and led people on safari. Others write books, or develop technology solutions to common problems. Still others launch businesses, teach, and back causes.The point is: Litigators do many things. One job closer to home is when he or she moves from private practice to a corporate legal department. But what about when the company is on the smaller size, with a modest legal department whose members are expected to handle an assortment of matters?  Hiring is an important decision for any company, but when it’s a smaller organization selecting in-house counsel is arguably even more critical. When companies like this aren’t engaged in litigation, one might think a litigator wouldn’t be the first choice.In this episode we talk about all the things one litigator has done, and the advantages she feels a litigator can bring to a small company – one that isn’t embroiled in litigation and would like to keep it that way.    She is Somya Kaushik, in-house counsel, entrepreneur, adjunct law professor, writer, leader, a children’s book author (“You, YES You! Yolki's Journey Within," illustrated by Annie Hagy* and available on Amazon and other fine platforms), and a former litigator. She is senior corporate counsel for Mineral, an HR and corporate compliance company which was recently acquired by Miratech, a tech solutions company for legal, HR, and governance, risk and compliance. Before Mineral she was an intellectual property litigator representing large and small companies, including SaaS and tech firms. In 2013 she founded EsqMe, Inc., a sharing platform where lawyers can exchange legal documents, templates, motions, and forms, where she served as general counsel. She is also an adjunct professor at Lewis & Clark Law School. Now located in Chicago, for nearly five years Somya was president of the South Asian Bar Association of Oregon. Somya is on the Fastcase 50 list honoring innovators and leaders in the legal industry.  Education: New York Law School, J.D.; George Washington University, B.A., Psychology and Political Science; London School of Economics; and Harvard Business School. *Ms. Hagy is the younger daughter of the host of this podcast, which, now that I think about it, could use some illustrations to brighten up the place. ********This podcast is the audio companion to the Journal of Emerging Issues in Litigation. The Journal is a collaborative project between HB Litigation Conferences and the vLex Fastcase legal research family, which includes Full Court Press, Law Street Media, and Docket Alarm.If you have comments, ideas, or wish to participate, please drop me a note at Editor@LitigationConferences.com.Tom HagyLitigation Enthusiast andHost of the Emerging Litigation PodcastHome PageLinkedIn

Today we talk about liability forecasting and the role it plays in the administration of massive, sometimes multi-billion-dollar mass tort settlement trusts. These mechanisms were built to fairly and judiciously compensate current and future claimants for their injuries. Mass tort litigation is a complicated beast as is the administration of these trusts. There are many overlapping, interlocking, intersecting, and dynamic layers involved with people, companies, diseases, certain financial externalities, and "black swans" that complicate the oversight of settlement funds. Listen to my conversation with Mark Eveland and Ed Silverman, both with Verus LLC, which provides litigation support services to law firms working on mass torts, such as case management and medical review services, settlement administration, business and advisory services, and analytics. They explain that liability forecasting is a practice best understood through the three areas it analyzes: (i) the risks and injuries created by a product and its use, (ii) claims filed and approved, and (iii) finances. Liability forecasting is both a science and an art, they say, with plenty of risks.Eveland, founder, CSO, and chairman of the board, is an expert in building settlement and claims management programs for mass torts, class actions, and insurance runoffs. Throughout his career, Mark has provided research, discovery, analytics, settlement administration, and expert witness support litigators around the country. Trained in molecular biology, genetics and epigenetics, and biochemistry, Silverman is an analytics executive, a life science expert, and biomedical communications specialist. Ed assists with data analytics, scientific collaboration networks, patient based medical claims, and more. I hope you enjoy the episode! Bonus: I left in a little introductory jazz in the beginning, then  encouraged Ed to discuss his background and research, which I was thrilled to find included how fruit flies (Drosophila melanogaster) form memories. I can't tell you how glad I was I asked. Yes I can. Very glad.  ********This podcast is the audio companion to the Journal of Emerging Issues in Litigation. The Journal is a collaborative project between HB Litigation Conferences and the vLex Fastcase legal research family, which includes Full Court Press, Law Street Media, and Docket Alarm.If you have comments, ideas, or wish to participate, please drop me a note at Editor@LitigationConferences.com.Tom HagyLitigation Enthusiast andHost of the Emerging Litigation PodcastHome PageLinkedIn

In this episode we talk about artificial intelligence in the world of invention. My guest recently co-wrote an article for the Journal of Robotics, Artificial Intelligence & Law about a recent decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit that expounded on the principle that only human beings -- not machines -- can be named as inventors under U.S. patent law. The decision applies a straightforward interpretation of patent statutes, our guest says. Beyond invention, what about that initial spark of innovation? What about the decision might make it difficult to obtain intellectual property protection for inventions generated by advanced AI systems? Isn’t AI kind of like using computer modeling? Don’t inventors already get considerable assistance from technology? What did the court say about all that? Joining me to answer these questions is Robert A. McFarlane, an intellectual property litigator and registered patent attorney and partner with Hanson Bridgett LLP in San Francisco. Rob chairs the firm’s technology practice, co-chairs its IP practice, litigates and advises on a variety of IP matters in the U.S. and abroad, and teaches patent law at the University of California College of the Law San Francisco (formerly Hastings College of the Law). Rob earned his J.D. from the University of California College of Law San Francisco and his B.A.S. with departmental honors, in Industrial Engineering & Political Science from Stanford University. I hope you enjoy the episode. I mean, we get to talk about everything from Tom Jefferson to monkeys with cameras.  That's five-star material right there!***********This podcast is the audio companion to the Journal of Emerging Issues in Litigation. The Journal is a collaborative project between HB Litigation Conferences and the vLex Fastcase legal research family, which includes Full Court Press, Law Street Media, and Docket Alarm.If you have comments, ideas, or wish to participate, please drop me a note at Editor@LitigationConferences.com.Tom HagyLitigation Enthusiast andHost of the Emerging Litigation PodcastHome PageLinkedIn

Annual U.S. litigation cost estimates vary wildly.  Some say $250 billion, others say $430 billion. When you consider indirect costs, such as lost productivity or economic damages, some put the costs as high as  $1.5 trillion. According to Statista, more than $5 billion is spent on employment litigation alone, and another $4.5 billion on commercial litigation. Litigation surrounding intellectual property, product liability, and real estate disputes, cost more than $3 billion each.  Time is also a factor. As any litigator knows, resolution of a lawsuit can take three to five years on average. Some cases drag on for more than a decade.Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) is increasingly attractive. Its benefits were  on full display during Covid lockdowns. It’s more convenient for almost everyone involved, especially in cross-country or cross-border disputes.  An important and dangerous side effect of litigation expense is access to justice. Everyone will have disputes and conflicts in their lives, but not everyone can afford to go to court. More ADR is moving from mediation to arbitration partly because of the perceived finality of going to a panel. The American Arbitration Association says there were 25,000 ADR cases filed in 2020. Meanwhile, there are more than 400,000 federal suits and as many as 60 million state suits filed each year.Listen to my interview with Rich Lee, CEO and Co-Founder, New Era/ADR as we discuss hot topics and issues involving what is referred to here as "Advanced Dispute Resolution." Before New Era/ADR, Rich was general counsel of a financial technology company that he helped to build, grow, and sell. Rich  serves as an advisor, board member, and investor in technology startups and venture funds and in a leadership role in the Economic Club of Chicago.  He serves on the national Leader’s Council of the Legal Services Corporation (a U.S. Senate-funded 501c3) and on the board of Illinois Legal Aid Online. He has a J.D. from Loyola University Chicago School of Law and a B.S. in Bioengineering from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.I hope you enjoy the episode. If so, give us a rating!***********This podcast is the audio companion to the Journal of Emerging Issues in Litigation. The Journal is a collaborative project between HB Litigation Conferences and the vLex Fastcase legal research family, which includes Full Court Press, Law Street Media, and Docket Alarm.If you have comments, ideas, or wish to participate, please drop me a note at Editor@LitigationConferences.com.Tom HagyLitigation Enthusiast andHost of the Emerging Litigation PodcastHome PageLinkedIn

This isn’t going to be another theoretical sermon on the business of law, but how two partners  – with the help of a business expert – re-envisioned their practice, throwing out traditional models and transforming their firm into something unique.First, we’re going to talk about looking strategically at your law firm as you would any business. The goal here, being tweaking or adjusting your practice in a way that has the most impact on your bottom line. Second, we’re going to talk about one litigation firm’s journey through that process, where they basically took their practice apart, examined each piece, and put it back together again. They rebuilt it with parts based on their strengths as attorneys and on activities that were most profitable.  My guest is James M. Grant, an attorney who has embraced the idea of applying strategic business thinking to the practice of law.  In that spirit, we talk about how and why he and his partner, Mark Kirchen, tried such an exercise and what he learned from it. Then James talks about a pretty profound transformation of his firm, developing a unique offering that is demonstrably different, as you will see. James is co-founding partner of Georgia Trial Attorneys at Kirchen & Grant LLC.  He's an experienced personal injury litigator and trial attorney, whose list of defendants include insurance companies. James started off as a state prosecutor before getting into personal injury law. He has a B.S. from Georgia Institute of Technology, and received his J.D. from Faulkner University (J.D., 2011). I hope you enjoy the episode. If so, give us a rating!***********This podcast is the audio companion to the Journal of Emerging Issues in Litigation. The Journal is a collaborative project between HB Litigation Conferences and the vLex Fastcase legal research family, which includes Full Court Press, Law Street Media, and Docket Alarm.If you have comments, ideas, or wish to participate, please drop me a note at Editor@LitigationConferences.com.Tom HagyLitigation Enthusiast andHost of the Emerging Litigation PodcastHome PageLinkedIn 

The PFAS family of man-made compounds are found in countless consumer products, as well as medical devices and firefighting foam. The incredibly strong carbon-fluorine bond that make PFAS so useful also makes them incredibly persistent. They are so ubiquitous that PFAS can be found in the blood of every human on earth and rainwater throughout the world. In this episode we are going to give you some history of the compounds, discuss some important differences, review what litigation we're seeing (including the various claims and defenses), note what we can learn from recent settlement structures, forecast the impact of any new regulation, and predict what litigation might be next. My guests have been at the forefront of PFAS litigation since they began defending carpet manufacturers in suits brought by two Alabama municipalities in 2017. They are: David J. Marmins, a partner with Arnall Golden Gregory LLP in Atlanta, Georgia. He is part of the firm’s litigation and real estate practices and co-chair of the firm’s retail industry team. David has concentrated his practice on complex civil litigation since becoming a lawyer in the last century. He earned his JD from Georgia State University College of Law. Morgan E. M. Harrison, partner, in AGG’s litigation and dispute resolution and employment practices. She is also a member of the payments systems and fintech, and background-screening industry teams. Morgan has a JD from Vanderbilt University Law School. BONUS! Read David and Morgan's article on the subject, just published in the Journal of Emerging Issues in Litigation. I hope you enjoy the episode. If so, give us a rating!This podcast is the audio companion to the Journal of Emerging Issues in Litigation. The Journal is a collaborative project between HB Litigation Conferences and the vLex Fastcase legal research family, which includes Full Court Press, Law Street Media, and Docket Alarm.If you have comments, ideas, or wish to participate, please drop me a note at Editor@LitigationConferences.com.Tom HagyLitigation Enthusiast andHost of the Emerging Litigation PodcastHome PageLinkedIn 

According to the Department of Agriculture Americans consume 137 pounds of fresh produce per year. That not only fuels our bodies but also a $146 billion industry.  Produce starts to degrade immediately after harvest, so transporting fresh fruits and vegetables from farms to stores in a safe and timely manner poses numerous challenges. What legal and reputational risks do growers, brokers, and shippers face? What laws come into play? What are the essential components of contracts among participants in the supply chain? Listen to my interview with Katy Esquivel,  founder and principal attorney with Esquivel Law Chartered. Katy focuses on trust enforcement cases under the Perishable Agricultural Commodities Act (PACA) and representation of stakeholders in the transportation industry. Katy represents transportation brokers and shippers in matters including drafting contracts, handling claims, and advising clients on evolving legal issues impacting their businesses. She also counsels growers and sellers. Katy has also successfully completed the Produce Safety Alliance Grower Training Course to ensure that she is up to date on the latest food safety standards within the industry. She earned her J.D. from St. Thomas University Benjamin L. Crump School of Law. I hope you enjoy the episode. If so, give us a rating!This podcast is the audio companion to the Journal on Emerging Issues in Litigation. The Journal is a collaborative project between HB Litigation Conferences and the vLex Fastcase legal research family, which includes Full Court Press, Law Street Media, and Docket Alarm.If you have comments, ideas, or wish to participate, please drop me a note at Editor@LitigationConferences.com.Tom HagyLitigation Enthusiast andHost of the Emerging Litigation PodcastHome PageLinkedIn 

What’s gotten into some corporations these days?  Some are reducing their carbon footprint and reducing waste. Some are demanding ethical behavior. Some are even paying attention to wages of frontline workers. In this episode we discuss the role of attorneys and in-house counsel in the courageous new world of Environment, Social, and Governance, or ESG. And, not to disappoint, I mention a beloved cartoon duck who, when you think about it, raises questions about inclusivity and workplace safety. Throw in the fact that he doesn’t always wear pants to work and you have an ESG trifecta. A few questions addressed in this episode: How can law firms themselves adopt ESG practices and what role do they play with clients? What are some common pitfalls attorneys should avoid when navigating ESG regulations and standards? How can in-house counsel drive ESG initiatives within their organizations?What role to they play in  communicating ESG risks and opportunities to their C-suite and board or directors? What about mitigating risks associated with ESG disclosures? And what about external partnerships and supplier contracts?And another thing. Ever wonder why corporations set ESG goals, why ratings matter, or how ratings are calculated? Listen to my interview with Kai Gray, CEO and co-founder of Motive, an ESG advisory and support service firm, as we explore what ESG is, what it is not, what good it can bring to an organization, and where attorneys fit in.  Kai generously offers his perspective based on more than two decades of work at some of the most innovative companies in the U.S.  Kai also reveals the secret to the secret sauce behind compelling corporations to the right thing! I hope you enjoy the episode. If so, give us a rating!This podcast is the audio companion to the Journal on Emerging Issues in Litigation. The Journal is a collaborative project between HB Litigation Conferences and the vLex Fastcase legal research family, which includes Full Court Press, Law Street Media, and Docket Alarm.If you have comments, ideas, or wish to participate, please drop me a note at Editor@LitigationConferences.com.Tom HagyLitigation Enthusiast andHost of the Emerging Litigation PodcastHome PageLinkedIn 

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals recently struck down Berkeley, California's ban on natural gas infrastructure in new buildings. The court ruled unanimously that the ban violates federal law. This subject is important as we will likely see more natural gas bans in the future and the Berkeley case has set a precedent for how similar cases may be treated.  The case was brought by the California Restaurant Association, the National Restaurant Association, and the American Gas Association. The plaintiffs argued that Berkeley's ban was preempted by the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA), which gives the federal government exclusive authority to regulate energy efficiency standards for appliances. The Ninth Circuit agreed with the plaintiffs, finding that Berkeley's ban was "a direct regulation of energy efficiency standards for appliances." Now, New York has implemented a natural gas ban starting in 2026. Listen to my interview with Gary Toman, Partner at Weinberg, Wheeler, Hudgins, Gunn & Dial LLC, as we discuss this seminal case and the impact of the court’s ruling on consumers and businesses across the country. Gary  has extensive experience representing corporations, banks and professionals in complex litigation and arbitration matters and business disputes. Gary has substantial experience defending corporations in a wide variety of class actions.  Gary received his J.D. from Harvard Law School.  I hope you enjoy the episode. If so, give us a rating!This podcast is the audio companion to the Journal on Emerging Issues in Litigation. The Journal is a collaborative project between HB Litigation Conferences and the vLex Fastcase legal research family, which includes Full Court Press, Law Street Media, and Docket Alarm.If you have comments, ideas, or wish to participate, please drop me a note at Editor@LitigationConferences.com.Tom HagyLitigation Enthusiast andHost of the Emerging Litigation PodcastHome PageLinkedIn 

Challenged by the pandemic, war, trade conflicts, natural disasters, consumer demand, and inflationary pressures, the global supply chain has drawn heightened scrutiny for its impact on the economy, the labor market, the delivery of goods and services, and national security. What have the U.S. Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission had to say? Have they sufficiently addressed the issue? Any further measures in the works?  Are we seeing disputes in the courts? How can supply chain and manufacturing companies limit their risk of being subject to government investigation?  Listen to my interview with Jennifer M. Driscoll, Counsel at Robinson + Cole, LLP, as we explore recent developments related to the manufacturing industry and supply chains and their impact on marketplace competition. Jennifer  focuses her practice on investigations, litigation, arbitration, mergers, and counseling. She has extensive experience in the medical devices, pharmaceutical, electronic components and automotive industries, with a particular knowledge of industries in Japan. An experienced commercial litigator, Jen defends corporations and individuals against alleged antitrust and anti-corruption claims, both civil and criminal. She is active in the American Bar Association’s Section of Antitrust Law, where she serves as Vice Chair of the Section’s Corporate Counseling Committee and Vice Chair to the Section’s U.S. Comments and Policy Committee during the 2022-2023 Section year. Jennifer received her J.D. from University of Pennsylvania School of Law.This episode is based on Jennifer's article -- "Supplier Beware: DOJ and FTC Investigating Manufacturing and Supply Chains" for the Journal on Emerging Issues in Litigation.  Give it a read!  I hope you enjoy the episode. If so, give us a rating!This podcast is the audio companion to the Journal on Emerging Issues in Litigation. The Journal is a collaborative project between HB Litigation Conferences and the vLex Fastcase legal research family, which includes Full Court Press, Law Street Media, and Docket Alarm.If you have comments, ideas, or wish to participate, please drop me a note at Editor@LitigationConferences.com.Tom HagyLitigation Enthusiast andHost of the Emerging Litigation PodcastHome PageLinkedIn 

The Federal  Trade Commission’s proposed rule banning non-compete agreements between employers and workers has met with considerable support and just as much opposition. Proposed on Jan. 5, 2023, a vote on a final rule not anticipated until Spring 2024.Will all of the challenges to the rule result in a substantially different final version? Why has the FTC chosen now? Who is contesting the rule and what are some of the challenges it raises? What does it mean for employers and other entities today? What impact might the rule have on litigation? Listen to my interview with Andreya DiMarco, attorney with the Hatfield Schwartz Law Group LLC, as we explore the nuances of the proposed rule as well as the legal and practical impact it will have if it is adopted.Andreya  focuses her practice on employment law and transactional matters. She is well versed in the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination, the New Jersey Civil Rights Act, and the Conscientious Employee Protection Act, and has represented clients in federal court, state court, and before administrative agencies including the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the New Jersey Division of Civil Rights.  She also advises clients on a variety of aspects of employment law and compliance, and provides training and policy drafting.  Andreya received her J.D. from NYU School of Law.I hope you enjoy the episode. If so, give us a rating!This podcast is the audio companion to the Journal on Emerging Issues in Litigation. The Journal is a collaborative project between HB Litigation Conferences and the vLex Fastcase legal research family, which includes Full Court Press, Law Street Media, and Docket Alarm. If you have comments, ideas, or wish to participate, please drop me a note at Editor@LitigationConferences.com.Tom HagyLitigation Enthusiast andHost of the Emerging Litigation PodcastHome PageLinkedIn     

The IRS closed more than 72,000 appeals last year and its Chief Counsel's Office received more than 65,000 cases. That's a lot of disputes. Safe to say they are about rules. Following rules. Not following rules. Questioning rules. Then, there are rules about rules that the IRS must follow.  The Administrative Procedure Act (APA) is such a beast. The APA places requirements on federal agencies when engaged in a “rule making” that has the force and effect of law. The APA has become a focal point in tax litigation, due in large part to the IRS’s record of refusing to comply with the law's notice-and-comment mandate. In his article for the Journal on Emerging Issues in Litigation, our guest – Jeffrey S. Luechtefeld, shareholder at Chamberlain Hrdlicka – wrote about challenging the IRS, recent trends in tax litigation, and the future of APA challenges. And now, he's here on our humble podcast.  Jeff is a tax controversy and litigation attorney with a strong technical tax background and a deep understanding of the inner workings of the agency. Jeff advocates on behalf of clients in IRS examinations, appeals and litigation. Previously, he led the regional tax controversy practice for a Big Four accounting firm. He began his career with the IRS Office of Chief Counsel as a litigator, eventually becoming a Special Trial Attorney in the Large Business and International Division. Jeff received his JD from the University of Missouri, Columbia School of Law. I hope you enjoy the episode. If so, give us a rating!This podcast is the audio companion to the Journal on Emerging Issues in Litigation. The Journal is a collaborative project between HB Litigation Conferences, and the Fastcase legal research family, which includes Full Court Press, Law Street Media, and Docket Alarm -- all now part of vLex. If you have comments or wish to participate in one our projects please drop me a note at Editor@LitigationConferences.com. I'm often polite. Tom HagyLitigation Enthusiast andHost of the Emerging Litigation PodcastHome PageLinkedIn 

There are no borders when it comes to commerce, which means there are no borders when it comes to business disputes and litigation, either.  In addition to evidence and witnesses being spread across continents -- from Chicago to Shanghai to Sumatra -- nations'  various rules and traditions governing discovery is another substantial complicating factor.  Navigating these complexities requires specialized tools, a thorough understanding of how they do things from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, and how to get your case over hurdles not seen in the U.S. Listen to my interview with Benjamin Daniels of Robinson+Cole, an experienced litigator and advisor to financial institutions and global corporations. As a member of the firm's Business Litigation Group, Ben provides creative and ardent advocacy during litigation, enforcement actions, investigations, crisis management, and white-collar defense matters.  He received his J.D.  from Washington University School of Law in St. Louis. Also, and this is important, Ben had very nice things to say about Switzerland.  I hope you enjoy the episode. If so, give us a rating!This podcast is the audio companion to the Journal on Emerging Issues in Litigation. The Journal is a collaborative project between HB Litigation Conferences and the Fastcase legal research family, which includes Full Court Press, Law Street Media, and Docket Alarm. The podcast itself is a joint effort between HB and our friends at Law Street Media. If you have comments or wish to participate in one our projects please drop me a note at Editor@LitigationConferences.com.Tom HagyLitigation Enthusiast andHost of the Emerging Litigation PodcastHome PageLinkedIn 

Auto-GPT is a new generative artificial intelligence application which autonomously “self-prompts” to engage beyond a human-chatbot discussion. This takes us into a realm of AI self-prompted actions that do not need additional human inputs. It also potentially puts the “traditional” GPT models on a fast track to further reduce human interaction. The number of use cases as well as the number of legal and ethical questions is inevitable. For that reason, it's becoming increasingly important for businesses to understand how Auto-GPT technologies use data, the potential for biased results, and how to responsibly leverage these powerful technologies.Listen to my interview with Jason I. Epstein, Partner at Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough as we explore this emerging field. Jason is the co-head of the firm's technology and procurement industry group which provides legal services to global buyers and sellers of technology in industries that include FinTech, HealthIT,  and manufacturing. An experienced business and technology negotiator, Jason has dealt with a variety of matters, e.g., the metaverse, technology transfer, privacy, cryptocurrency, IoT, open-source code, and more. Jason received his JD from the University of Tennessee College of Law. He also teaches "Law of Cyberspace" as an adjunct professor at Vanderbilt University Law School.  I hope you enjoy the episode. If so, give us a rating!This podcast is the audio companion to the Journal on Emerging Issues in Litigation. The Journal is a collaborative project between HB Litigation Conferences and the Fastcase legal research family, which includes Full Court Press, Law Street Media, and Docket Alarm. The podcast itself is a joint effort between HB and our friends at Law Street Media. If you have comments or wish to participate in one our projects please drop me a note at Editor@LitigationConferences.com.Tom HagyLitigation Enthusiast andHost of the Emerging Litigation PodcastHome PageLinkedIn 

You might think that if you purchase a product for a price inflated by bad actors in the supply chain that you would be able to collect damages. Unfortunately, depending on who you are, you would be wrong. Consumers and businesses, indirect purchasers of products whose prices are fixed by those who supply the maker of your purchase may not collect damages in states that, surprisingly, do not have antitrust laws that give them standing. But what about federal law? Why do some states provide for damages and others do not? Are there alternatives?  Are there any pro-purchaser changes on the horizon that could impact antitrust litigation brought by indirect buyers?   For answers to these questions and more, listen to my interview with attorney Austin Cohen of Levin Sedran & Berman LLP of Philadelphia. His practice focuses on  antitrust and business law, class actions, torts and products liability, and environmental damage litigation. Austin received a BA in Economics and History from the University of Pennsylvania and his JD, cum laude, from the University of Pittsburgh School of Law. I hope you enjoy the episode. If so, give us a rating!This podcast is the audio companion to the Journal on Emerging Issues in Litigation. The Journal is a collaborative project between HB Litigation Conferences and the Fastcase legal research family, which includes Full Court Press, Law Street Media, and Docket Alarm. The podcast itself is a joint effort between HB and our friends at Law Street Media. If you have comments or wish to participate in one our projects please drop me a note at Editor@LitigationConferences.com.Tom HagyLitigation Enthusiast andHost of the Emerging Litigation PodcastHome PageLinkedIn