Podcasts about litigation

As Andrew puts it, Chief Justice John Roberts is “cherry-picking.” He's flying solo in this short edition of Main Justice (more to come with Mary in the next episode). Andrew gives a quick briefing on several of the Supreme Court's most consequential end-of-term rulings, starting with the decision not to hear an appeal in the E. Jean Carroll case. Andrew also touches on the Court's decision to uphold a Mississippi law to allow mail-in ballots that are sent by Election Day to be counted but saves his deepest analysis for two similar cases with opposing decisions: the firings of Lisa Cook and Rebecca Slaughter. While the Court ruled that the Trump administration must have cause to dismiss Cook from the Federal Reserve, it allowed the government to fire Slaughter from the Federal Trade Commission, a decision which Andrew calls deeply flawed showing the conservative majority's support for a “unitary executive.”  And finally, Andrew breaks down the Court's narrow decision to uphold birthright citizenship, and why the tight 5-4 split is the story. Sign up for MS NOW Premium on Apple Podcasts to listen to this show and other MS podcasts without ads. You'll also get exclusive bonus content from this and other shows. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

This episode is presented by Create A Video – The US Supreme Court handed down four rulings this morning. Two were about immigration policies. Another about guns. And the final one about whether the maker of Roundup can be sued.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-pete-kaliner-show--6946691/support.Subscribe to the podcast My preferred podcast platform: SpreakerAll the links to Pete's Prep are free!Get exclusive content here!Media Bias Check: GroundNews promo code!Advertising and Booking inquiries: Pete@ThePeteKalinerShow.com  

There's a lot on the docket today. To pull apart the Iran “deal” framework, Mary and Andrew are joined by Tess Bridgeman, an international law expert who served as a legal advisor in the Obama administration through the 2015 nuclear deal with Iran. Tess lays out how President Trump's 14-point memorandum of understanding differs from what was brokered in 2015, and what to watch for as negotiations continue. Before she joins, the co-hosts begin by analyzing several examples of what Mary calls the Trump Justice Department's "consistent effort” to avoid judicial review: their refusal to put into a sworn declaration that they won't move forward with the “Anti-Weaponization” fund and a motion to dismiss a Clean Air Act violation lawsuit against Elon Musk's xAI data center in Mississippi. They also tackle a few instances where, contrastingly, the government has positioned itself “on the offense” this week, including an indictment of 15 protesters on a conspiracy charge against ICE and the DHS' intent to build a border wall through a holy landmark atop Mount Cristo Rey in New Mexico. Further reading: Here is the New York Times piece, Mary referred to about the Las Cruces case: A Diocese Tries to Protect Its 29-Foot Jesus From Trump's Border Wall Here is the Just Security tracker that Mary and Andrew mentioned: Immigration Habeas Tracker: Government Obstruction, Judicial Trust, and Accountability Sign up for MS NOW Premium on Apple Podcasts to listen to this show and other MS podcasts without ads. You'll also get exclusive bonus content from this and other shows. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

This week, we spend the episode discussing a traumatic event I witnessed outside my home last week. We unpack the experience, the horrific series of events that unfolded, and the reaction to the story in the local news. Trigger Warning: This episode contains descriptions and discussions of a fatal motor vehicle accident. This episode is brought to you by Tully Rinckey PLLC, a full-service law firm serving individuals and businesses in the Capital Region for over 20 years. Their attorneys are ready to protect your rights and guide you through legal matters related to Family & Matrimonial Law, Employment Law, Criminal Law, Litigation, Education Law, Business Law and Trusts & Estates. For experienced legal support from a firm that proudly gives back to its community, learn more at tullylegal.com or follow on social media @tullylegal.

Melissa Soliz, Partner, Coppersmith Brockelman PLC, speaks with Brendan Keeler, Interoperability Practice Lead, HTD Health, and Amy Bagge-Smith, General Counsel and Head of Regulatory Affairs, Arcadia, about the cases that are currently shaping interoperability law and how the health care industry is responding. They discuss which legal theories are gaining traction and which ones are appearing more fragile, impacts on national frameworks and CMS' Aligned Networks initiative, and how tech innovators and health care providers can navigate this complex environment. Melissa, Brendan, and Amy spoke about this topic on a recent AHLA webinar. From AHLA's Health Information and Technology Practice Group.Watch this episode: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WtCQbMudXmULearn more about the AHLA webinar that Melissa, Brendan, and Amy spoke on: https://educate.americanhealthlaw.org/local/catalog/view/product.php?productid=1772 Learn more about AHLA's Health Information and Technology Practice Group: https://www.americanhealthlaw.org/practice-groups/practice-groups/health-information-and-technology Essential Legal Updates, Now in AudioAHLA's popular Health Law Daily email newsletter is now a daily podcast, exclusively for AHLA Comprehensive members. Get all your health law news from the major media outlets on this podcast! To subscribe and add this private podcast feed to your podcast app, go to americanhealthlaw.org/dailypodcast.Stay At the Forefront of Health Legal EducationLearn more about AHLA and the educational resources available to the health law community at https://www.americanhealthlaw.org/. 

We are excited to share this very special bonus episode featuring our trip to Tijuana and the border wall with the non-profit group Al Otro Lado. If you'd rather watch the full video version of this episode, tap here. Al Otro Lado is a bi-national organization that provides free legal and humanitarian aid to immigrants, deportees, and separated families. Thanks to the leadership of Jesse Thorn and his wife,  Theresa Thorn, and especially to all of our listeners, we were able to raise over $400,000 to support Al Otro Lado's humanitarian and legal efforts. Join us as we travel to their headquarters in Tijuana to see their good work in action, meet the staff who make it possible, and meet some of the people who have benefited from Al Otro Lado's work. We recorded this episode at Friendship Park, which is located on the water in Tijuana next to the border wall. We hope you listen to our powerful conversation with Nicole Ramos, Director of the Border Rights Project at Al Otro Lado, and Cassandra Lopez, Director of Litigation at Al Otro Lado, who work in San Diego and Tijuana to advance the rights of all immigrants, refugees, and deportees, on both sides of the border. We know this is a departure from our usual content, but we believe in this powerful work and wanted to share it with you, our listeners. Learn More about Al Otro Lado and donate to support their work at: AlOtroLado.org Follow Al Otro Lado on Instagram here Support Baraka's GoFundMe here Support Baraka's Music and Merch at linktr.ee/frankiejaxnomad ---Judge John Hodgman is member-supported! Become a member to unlock special bonus episodes and more. Memberships start at just $5 a month. Just tap here!

Send us your feedback In this episode, Technology Partner Tom Maasland and Litigation Senior Associate Oliver Sutton revisit the evolving intersection of artificial intelligence and legal privilege, highlighting some recent court decisions and the impact they may have in this area of law.[00:58] Tom and Oliver open the episode with a brief recap of their earlier Tech Suite episode on AI and legal privilege, noting that emerging case law is now offering clearer judicial guidance on how legal privilege applies in the context of the use of artificial intelligence tools.[03:00] Oliver discusses and compares two recent U.S. decisions; United States v. Heppner, 25 Cr. 503 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 10, 2026), and Warner v. Gilbarco, 820 F. Supp. 3d 629 (E.D. Mich. 2026), each of which considered the impact of the use of AI tools on legal privilege. The cases reached different outcomes, highlighting how fact-specific these determinations are likely to be.[08:38] They then consider a UK Upper Tribunal decision, UK and R (on the application of Munir) v SSHD [2026] UKUT 81 (IAC), in which it was suggested that the use of open-source AI tools is likely to breach client confidentiality and result in a waiver of legal privilege, while noting that closed source enterprise AI systems may present a lower risk.[10:03] Tom and Oliver discuss the implications of these decisions in a New Zealand context and in the absence of more direct guidance from New Zealand courts.[10:51] Oliver then talks through four practical takeaways from these cases for practitioners and clients navigating AI use in a legal setting.Information in this episode is accurate as at the date of recording, 5 June 2026.Please contact Tom Maasland, Oliver Sutton or our Litigation team if you need legal advice and guidance on any of the topics discussed in the episode. And don't forget to rate, review or follow MinterEllisonRuddWatts wherever you get your podcasts. You can also email us directly at techsuite@minterellison.co.nz and sign up to receive technology updates via your inbox here.  Additional resources Tech Suite | Legal privilege meets artificial intelligenceUnited States v. Heppner, 25 Cr. 503 (S.D.N.Y. Feb 10, 2026)Warner v. Gilbarco, 820 F.Supp.3d 629 (E.D. Mich. 2026)UK and R (on the application of Munir) v SSHD [2026] UKUT 81 (IAC)For show notes and additional resources visit minterellison.co.nz/podcasts

On Iowa Politics is a weekly news and analysis podcast that aims to recreate the kinds of conversations that happen when you get political reporters from across Iowa together after the day's deadlines have been met. Tackling anything from local to state to national, On Iowa Politics is your weekly dose of analysis and insight into the issues affecting Iowa.This week, we start with what is becoming an almost recurring Iowa election tradition: Libertarian ballot access litigation. Plus, gubernatorial tickets are set, Republicans have some family squabbles and another Iowa data center project sparks a political fight in Clinton.This episode was hosted by Gazette Deputy Bureau Chief Tom Barton and features Sarah Watson of the Quad City Times and Gazette columnists Althea Cole and Todd Dorman.This episode was produced by Gazette Deputy Digital Content Manager Bailey Cichon.State panel rejects 2 Iowa Libertarians' spots on ballot https://www.thegazette.com/news/elections/state/state-panel-rejects-2-iowa-libertarians-spots-on-ballot/article_b7e1c1f1-2c14-4a4b-9703-5a108db5fcb9.htmlRepublican gubernatorial candidate Zach Lahn picks state lawmaker as running mate https://www.thegazette.com/news/elections/state/republican-gubernatorial-candidate-zach-lahn-picks-state-lawmaker-as-running-mate/article_b5e45cbc-8d6b-438b-88f6-962e4539fea8.htmlJim Carlin urges supporters not to vote for Ashley Hinson https://siouxcityjournal.com/news/state-regional/government-politics/elections/article_d22241a5-168e-47f7-85bb-199388fb2a53.htmlClinton residents organize against proposed QTS data center https://qctimes.com/news/local/government-politics/article_5827c520-3b42-407e-9610-c8a6421385e5.html

John is joined by Shawn Fagan, the Chief Legal Officer of Citadel LLC and a key legal figure at Citadel Securities. Citadel is the most profitable hedge fund globally, while Citadel Securities is a leading market maker, processing nearly one-third of U.S. equities and options trades. They discuss Shawn's insights into the unique legal challenges of these rapidly growing organizations.Shawn has essentially four clients: Citadel, Citadel Securities, founder Ken Griffin, and Griffin's family office. His responsibilities extend beyond legal oversight to include regulatory affairs and compliance, reflecting the complexities of modern finance.Shawn's journey to Citadel was unconventional. He started as a litigator at Bartlit Beck, a boutique trial firm, where he spent nearly half his time in trial. He participated in high-profile cases, including Bush v. Gore, but ultimately realized that trial work was not his passion. A chance meeting with Ken Griffin led to an in-house opportunity at Citadel, where he has now been for 20 years.During that time, Citadel has grown from 1,000 employees and $12 billion in assets under management to 4,900 employees and $65 billion in assets under management. The focus of Shawn's role at Citadel is building the right teams to meet the demands of rapidly growing markets around the world, developing technology to ensure regulatory compliance across billions of transactions every day, and maintaining consistent standards in an organization that continues to grow at an extraordinary pace.Citadel has engaged in several high-profile legal battles, including lawsuits against the SEC and IRS, reflecting the firm's willingness to challenge regulations it views as unreasonable and unduly burdensome. When retaining outside counsel, Shawn looks for lawyers with strategic vision who can articulate a clear path to winning cases.Podcast Link: Law-disrupted.fmHost: John B. Quinn Producer: Alexis HydeMusic and Editing by: Alexander Rossi

In this edition of our banking litigation podcast, we consider some recent cases that will be most relevant to in-house lawyers at banks and financial institutions. This episode is hosted by John Corrie, a partner in our banking litigation team, who is joined by Ceri Morgan and special guest Elina Kyselchuk. Speakers: John Corrie (Partner), Ceri Morgan (Knowledge Counsel), Elina Kyselchuk (Associate). This podcast can be listened to on SoundCloud, Apple and Spotify and don't forget to subscribe to the channel to receive updates on future episodes. You can find out more about the cases covered in this podcast on our blog at the following links: High Court dismisses injunction application to prevent current account closure on grounds of financial crime concerns https://www.hsfkramer.com/notes/bankinglitigation/2026-04/high-court-dismisses-injunction-application-to-prevent-current-account-closure-on-grounds-of-financial-crime-concerns High Court refuses to grant injunction against bank preventing payout under performance bond https://www.hsfkramer.com/notes/bankinglitigation/2026-04/high-court-refuses-to-grant-injunction-against-bank-preventing-payout-under-performance-bond Law Commission to consider introduction of opt-out consumer class actions regime https://www.hsfkramer.com/notes/bankinglitigation/2026-04/law-commission-to-consider-introduction-of-opt-out-consumer-class-actions-regime HM Treasury pitches base camp at the mountain of consumer credit reforms https://www.hsfkramer.com/notes/bankinglitigation/2026-04/hm-treasury-pitches-base-camp-at-the-mountain-of-consumer-credit-reform FCA to Review Claims Management Practices https://www.hsfkramer.com/notes/bankinglitigation/2026-04/high-court-dismisses-injunction-application-to-prevent-current-account-closure-on-grounds-of-financial-crime-concerns0 Creation of new Business and Property Division of the High Court announced https://www.hsfkramer.com/notes/litigation/2026-06/creation-of-new-business-and-property-division-of-the-high-court-announced Handy client guide to privilege – newly updated https://www.hsfkramer.com/notes/litigation/2026-05/handy-client-guide-to-privilege-newly-updated Biannual Banking Litigation Update (Spring 2026) https://www.hsfkramer.com/notes/bankinglitigation/2026-04/bi-annual-banking-litigation-update-spring-2026

We may be hours away from the "Save College" Sports Act" making its way out of a Senate committee and being voted on. I talk about what being change. Who is not backing the Bill and why. With some of the changes in Committee, who is very nervous about the changes to this proposed legislation.  With my discussion the "Save College" Sports Act" out of the way. I move on to discuss to the latest in Lubbock, TX. Things have changed again with the Brendon Sworsby soap opera in a big way. You can say, "in a BIG XII way. What Threat open the door for the change. The first threat by a Texas Politician caused an even bigger threat by a bigger Group. Listen to hear who folded first and who is running out of town.  Title Sponsor: minnesotapersonalinjury.com Sponsor: www.Linkzart.com www.jaybeesgloverepair.com #LUBBOCKTEXAS, #TEXASTECH, #BIGXII, #NCAA, #TEXASATTORNEYGENERAL, #BRENDONSWORSBY, #NFLSUPPLEMENTDRAFT, #COLLEGESPORTCOMMISION, #LITIGATION 

In this episode of NASCIO Voices, hosts Amy Glasscock and Alex Whitaker sit down with NASCIO policy analyst Kalea Young-Gibson to discuss her article Digital Accessibility Compliance Thoughts From a Public Sector Attorney, which is based on a conversation with Max Heinz, supervising attorney with New York State Information Technology Services. The conversation covers the recently extended DOJ Title II final rule compliance deadline, explaining that while states now have more time, the urgency has not diminished — digital accessibility lawsuits have surpassed 5,000 per year and are now considered mainstream civil rights enforcement. Kalea breaks down what "reasonable effort" really means for state agencies (hint: it's context-driven, not a checklist), how states should structure vendor contracts using WCAG-tied language as a model, and why documentation is the single hardest — and most critical — thing states must get right to defend themselves in litigation. The episode closes with a lightning round featuring emoji habits, lessons from new cat ownership, and a passionate endorsement of Cook Out, North Carolina's beloved fast food chain.

Forever chemicals are everywhere — in your carpet, your cookware, your cosmetics, and increasingly, your drinking water. PFAS — per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances — have been building up in our environment, our water, and our bodies for decades. And while federal regulatory momentum on forever chemicals is stalling, states are moving in the opposite direction. In this episode of People Places Planet, we sit down with Secretary Jim Kenney, General Counsel Zachary Ogaz, and Assistant General Counsel Greg Smithkier from the New Mexico Environment Department to break down what PFAS are, why they're so difficult to eliminate, and what state-level action actually looks like in practice.They walk us through New Mexico's multi-pronged PFAS strategy: listing aqueous film forming foam (AFFF) as a hazardous waste, phasing out PFAS-containing consumer products, and implementing the country's first-ever consumer product labeling icon for intentionally added PFAS. They also discuss the state's ongoing litigation against the Department of Defense over PFAS contamination at Cannon Air Force Base.New Mexico has emerged as a national leader on PFAS action, and this conversation reveals exactly how — and why it matters for every state. With EPA rolling back MCLs and retreating from class-based regulation, the episode raises a broader question: can a patchwork of state policies produce national standards? And, at what cost to states already stretched thin on resources and scientific capacity?Also, be sure to check out ELI's recent report Current Trends in Toxics Litigation for more information on PFAS litigation trends.What are PFAS, what risks do they pose, and where can they be found? (01:38)PFAS regulation at the State and Federal level (10:13)New Mexico's PFAS playbook: hazardous waste listing, phase-outs, and labeling (14:42)Litigation and the Cannon Air Force Base case (26:46)New Mexico's PFAS conversation in DC (35:11)What's next: federal science, state capacity, and closing thoughts (40:06) ★ Support this podcast ★

If you think this episode is just about furniture, you're wrong. It's about psychology, memory, connection, and that one atrocious chair your mom kept for 30 years. I'm joined again by Suzanne Woodard, who went from arguing cases as an attorney to curating stories as the owner of a consignment store, auction house, gallery, and estate advisory service. We talk about “stuff”- exploring our connection to belongings, the spectrum of value, pro-active estate planning considerations, and how asking simple questions about objects can unlock profound stories never heard.About the Guest:Suzanne Woodard is the founder and owner of The Refind Room, a luxury consignment furniture store and personal property management provider. The Refind Room offers a comprehensive range of services for luxury estates, including appraisals, consignments, estate sales, auctions, staging, project management and design consultations to facilitate efficient and smooth life transitions, while optimizing the full value of a client's personal estate property.Formerly, Suzanne was the Vice President of Litigation and attorney for a national retailer, with extensive experience in project management, business operations, merchandising, research, marketing and retail operations.Find out more about Suzanne:Website: https://therefindroom.com/LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/suzanne-woodard-401b123b To learn more, visit:https://www.linkedin.com/in/jason-shupp-18b4619b/ Listen to more episodes on Mission Matters:https://missionmatters.com/author/Jason-Shupp/

After a week of decisions coming in from all corners, Mary and Andrew begin with a court order issued to remove President Trump's name off the Kennedy Center after a failed, last-minute attempt by the administration to stop it from happening. Mary refers to this as “good news in the fight against revisionist history,” which she ties into their second beat: a preliminary injunction issued to restore changes to National Parks that were made after Trump issued an executive order calling for modifications to monuments, parks and memorials to rewrite and censor American history and science. Then, onto a federal judge in Virginia officially blocking the $1.776 Billion slush fund after mixed messaging from the administration about whether it would be set up, plus a decision by Judge Mehta in DC to overturn the Department of Energy's cancellation of $82.1 Million in clean energy grants to “Blue” states across the country. Mary and Andrew also touch on a Massachusetts District Court decision blocking Ken Paxton's lawsuit against the Democratic fundraising platform ActBlue. And last up, they read and summarize the eyebrow-raising grand jury transcripts of the “Broadview Six” case out of Chicago, so you don't have to.  Further reading: Here is Judge Mehta's order reinstating the clean energy grants: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mad.296214/gov.uscourts.mad.296214.41.0.pdf   Sign up for MS NOW Premium on Apple Podcasts to listen to this show and other MS podcasts without ads. You'll also get exclusive bonus content from this and other shows. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

In this episode of our Litigation Lens podcast series, Michael Nail (shareholder, Greenville) is joined by Sarah Zucco (shareholder, New York) and Olivia Orlando-Donovan (associate, New York/Stamford) to break down Judge Lyman's April 2026 opinion in Lively v. Wayfarer Studios—a 152-page decision arising from the production of It Ends With Us. The speakers examine the court's independent contractor ruling, the enforceability of unsigned agreements, and the FEHA retaliation claim that survived dispositive motions. Tune in for practical takeaways on worker classification, contract execution, and the fine line between defending your reputation and retaliating against a complainant.

Drawing on 20 years observing attorney behavior, Hon. Stuart M. Rice (ret.) now at JAMS, speaks freely. This episode is a rare candid debrief from the other side of the bench.Key topics:What incivility actually costs you in court: Judge Rice served on the statewide civility task force and watched uncivil conduct for two decades. His diagnosis: it's not the screamer at deposition—it's the subtler patterns that quietly erode a lawyer's credibility with the bench.The task force secured a new oath provision requiring lawyers admitted since 2014 to attest to treating others with "dignity, respect, and courtesy"—but how much does an oath really change behavior?Show up in person—especially when you can lose: Remote appearances transformed California courtrooms post-COVID, and not for the better. Judge Rice's rule from the bench: if you can win or lose at a hearing, you will do better work in the room.And that's true in mediation, too.Complex mediation is a strategy problem, not just a settlement problem: As the judge who presided over all of the 2025 Palisades Fire consolidated cases and California's Johnson & Johnson ovarian cancer litigation, Judge Rice brings a systems view to large multi-plaintiff matters. He recently wrote in the Daily Journal on what it takes to succeed in complex mediations—and his JAMS practice is built around exactly these cases.Pupillage groups and the civility dividend: As president of the Benjamin Aranda III Inn of Court, Judge Rice restructured pupillage groups to require two new members per group who were law students or lawyers within five years of practice—successfully shifting the Inn's demographics and, he argues, its culture.The Adam Z. Rice Memorial Scholarship: Judge Rice is in his fourth consecutive year as president of the California Judges Foundation, which funds needs-based scholarships for law students from disadvantaged backgrounds. The scholarship is named for his late son. This year's award included an offer of free mentoring until the recipient's first legal job. Find it by searching "Adam Rice Memorial Scholarship" or visiting caljudges.org.Your next status conference is closer than you think. Hit play before it gets here—this episode will change how you read the room.

John is joined by Jeffrey N. Boozell and Christopher Tayback, both partners in Quinn Emanuel's Los Angeles office. They discuss wildfire litigation as a specialized and rapidly growing area of law, driven by increasingly destructive fires in California and other western states. What began as a relatively limited practice in the 1990s evolved into a major practice area after large California wildfires generated thousands of property loss claims and billions of dollars in damages. Jeff and Chris explain how these cases are structured, the legal theories involved, and the challenges of compensating victims.Wildfire cases are generally mass torts rather than class actions. Because each homeowner suffers different losses and faces unique causation issues, claims are coordinated before a single judge but remain individual lawsuits.These cases are typically brought against utilities, governments, and private entities that plaintiffs allege bear some responsibility for the disaster. One of the most important legal doctrines in California is inverse condemnation, which imposes liability on public utilities when infrastructure serving the public causes property damage. Under this doctrine, utilities may be responsible for property losses even without proof of negligence, distinguishing California wildfire litigation from cases in many other states.Utilities are also frequently defendants because fires are often linked to power lines, equipment failures, vegetation management issues, or other infrastructure-related problems. Various ignition scenarios may occur, including power lines striking each other in high winds, trees coming into contact with power lines, and improperly maintained equipment. For example, in the Eaton Fire, evidence shows that an old, unused power line was not properly grounded, leading to sparks that ignited the fire. In the Palisades Fire, the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power emptied the Santa Ynez Reservoir to carry out repairs and left it empty for an extended period. As a result, firefighting helicopters were unable to collect and drop water from the reservoir, and eventually, fire hydrants in the area ran dry. Utilities understand these risks but often fail to implement adequate preventive measures.Despite involving enormous losses and thousands of claimants, major California wildfire cases rarely reach trial. Instead, courts establish coordinated proceedings, identify bellwether cases, and encourage settlement through mediation programs or compensation funds. Insurance payments often cover only part of a homeowner's losses, leaving substantial uninsured damages and emotional distress claims to be pursued through litigation.The scale of the 2025 Los Angeles-area fires is unprecedented. Estimated damages exceed $200 billion, underscoring why wildfire litigation is likely to remain a significant area of legal practice for years to come.Podcast Link: Law-disrupted.fmHost: John B. Quinn Producer: Alexis HydeMusic and Editing by: Alexander Rossi

In the June 11, 2026, 2026 episode of The Interpreter Insights Podcast, our host Terry Hutchinson continues his survey of Interpreter Journal volumes with a brief review of Volume 6 from 2013. He is then joined by guest Tom Grover, an attorney from Las Vegas who discussed his presentation at the current Mormon History Association conference titled “Las Vegas Estate Litigation over Howard Hughes's ‘Mormon Will': Litigation, image & Institutional Restraint.” The post Interpreter Insights Podcast — June 11, 2026 first appeared on The Interpreter Foundation.

Rick Meadow has tried over 25 cases to verdict and spent two decades helping build The Lanier Law Firm into one of the most recognized mass tort practices in the country. In 2023, he founded The Meadow Law Firm in Phoenix as one of the first plaintiff-side practices operating as an Arizona Alternative Business Structure. In this episode, Mirena and Rick cover how the ABS model works in practice, how to evaluate a litigation finance partner, and why the wrong capital can destroy a litigation. They also discuss how defense settlement strategies have shifted, what plaintiff firms should be looking at before getting into a new mass tort, and why social media litigation is attracting so much money right now and why Rick is careful about how much he puts into it. Plus: how a bartender who quit college ended up at the top of the mass tort bar, and why Rick is now building a firm designed to outlast him.  

Litigation & Brendan Sorsby bonus 997 Thu, 11 Jun 2026 12:55:25 +0000 pwtl10y31DoZbLarYoWBonChdafCuAOv sports Sports Daily sports Litigation & Brendan Sorsby Wichita's popular morning local sports talk radio show is Sports Daily with Jacob Albracht and Tommy Castor. Listen live M-F 7a-11a on KFH! 2024 © 2021 Audacy, Inc. Sports https://player.amperwavepodcasting.com?feed-link=https%3A%2F%2Frss.

In Re Ocugen Inc Securities Litigation

Episode 141: Updates in Parent Versus Non-Parent Custody LitigationWhen sweeping changes to Texas family law took effect on September 1, 2025, family law practitioners across the state began encountering real-world consequences that no statute could fully anticipate. In this solo episode, Holly Draper shares what Texas family lawyers are actually seeing in courtrooms — and what those on-the-ground experiences reveal about the gaps, ambiguities, and unintended consequences embedded in the new parent versus non-parent custody framework.From sua sponte dismissals before respondents are even served, to courts treating the new affidavit requirement as a threshold jurisdictional gate, to grandparents facing near-impossible burdens in modification proceedings — Holly breaks down what practitioners are seeing and offers her own clear-eyed analysis of where the legislation got it right, where it fell short, and what advocates should do in the meantime.Whether you represent parents or non-parents, this episode is packed with urgent, practical guidance you cannot afford to miss. Holly also issues a call to action: if you're seeing these issues play out in court, she wants to hear from you — because the feedback loop between practitioners and lawmakers may be what ultimately fixes this legislation.In this episode you'll discover:•       Why courts are dismissing non-parent suits sua sponte — and why the new affidavit requirement under §102.0031 is being treated as a jurisdictional threshold that can be triggered without any motion, hearing, or respondent appearance•       What the affidavit actually has to say to survive — including the Fort Worth Court of Appeals' ruling in In re SH, which found a conclusory affidavit insufficient and applied the requirement retroactively to all pending cases•       Holly's strong stance on agreed orders — why she firmly believes parents and non-parents can still enter agreed custody arrangements without requiring an affidavit or statutory findings of significant impairment in the order, and why requiring them would harm families•       The modification trap facing long-term non-parent caregivers — how the new statutory framework flips the burden in modification cases, potentially requiring a grandparent who has raised a child for a decade to prove a now-fit parent is unfit just to maintain custody•       The unresolved res judicata problem — what happens to evidence of a parent's prior conduct when the last order was agreed, and why this gap in the legislation could produce deeply unjust outcomes for children•       Practical takeaways for both sides of the docket — from filing affidavits immediately and challenging insufficiency specifically, to pulling existing non-parent orders, preserving appellate issues, and knowing when to call Holly about a potential mandamus or appeal

On this episode of the Trade Guys, Bill and Scott discuss the impacts of Chinese retaliatory tariffs on U.S. agricultural and other trade, the Trump administration's continued efforts to implement Section 301 tariffs, and the ongoing tariff refund litigation.

RiskCellar is back with a packed episode that feels like the insurance industry itself, equal parts serious and unfiltered. Brandon Schuh and Nick Hartmann sit down to unpack a week that saw some of the biggest AI-driven headlines to hit the P&C space in recent memory. From a massive brokerage laying off 2,300 employees and blaming AI, to a CNN lawsuit targeting an AI search engine, to an InsurTech startup valued at $2.6 billion on just $40 million in revenue, nothing about this week is normal. And that's exactly the point.The episode digs into the Acrisure story, where roughly 2,300 jobs are being cut, the second round of layoffs in a single year, with AI cited as the primary driver. Brandon and Nick do the math. At $300,000 average revenue per employee, that's a $690 million bet on AI's ability to fill the gap. They zoom out to connect this to the broader PE pressure story, exits, soft markets, rising interest rates, and a potential IPO on the horizon. The conversation doesn't stop there. New York State's newly signed auto insurance tort reform law gets a thorough breakdown, including the new $100,000 cap on non-economic damages and tightened comparative negligence thresholds that could finally start moving the needle on affordability. And the CNN vs. Perplexity lawsuit opens a bigger conversation about AI as a derivative product, one that can't function without the journalism it may ultimately be destroying.Rounding out the news block is a closer look at Corgi, the AI-focused MGA that just raised at a $2.6 billion valuation despite generating only $40 million in revenue, a 65x multiple that leaves both hosts scratching their heads. Brandon draws a pointed parallel to boutique consulting firms now competing with McKinsey-sized players thanks to AI tools, a trend with direct implications for insurance brokerages of every size. The episode wraps with a "Three Truths and a Lie" segment on classic TV shows and a round of Simpsons trivia, staying true to the show's blend of sharp industry analysis and genuine conversation between two people who genuinely enjoy talking shop.Takeaways:Acrisure's 2,300-person layoff represents a (690M) bet that AI can replace human production capacity.PE-backed brokerages are under compounding pressure from soft markets, rising rates, and IPO timelines.New York's auto tort reform caps non-economic damages at (100,000) and tightens comparative negligence rules.AI is a derivative product, it depends on journalism and original content to function.CNN filed suit against Perplexity for alleged copyright infringement in New York federal court.Corgi's (2.6B) valuation at (65times) revenue raises serious questions about InsurTech market rationality.Boutique brokerages now have the firepower of Aon or Marsh thanks to accessible AI tools.Alleged class action litigation is brewing against a PE-backed brokerage over unpaid producer compensation.Chapters:00:00 Welcome to RiskCellar2:45 Big News Tease + What Are You Drinking?4:00 Memorial Day Weekend Recaps7:38 This Week's AI Theme Intro8:00 Acrisure Layoffs: The (690M) AI Bet17:30 Sponsor Break: IPFS + freeflow.ai17:4 CNN vs. Perplexity: AI and Journalism's Collision21:05 Corgi's (2.6B) Valuation and the InsurTech Bubble23:30 Boutique vs. McKinsey: AI Levels the Consulting Playing Field27:10 SpaceX IPO, Elon Musk, and Market Insanity29:00 Howden TROs and Industry Legal Wars30:38 Three Truths and a Lie: Classic TV Edition32:17 Simpsons Trivia: First 100 Episodes33:57 Upcoming Guests and Episode WrapConnect with RiskCellar:Website: https://www.riskcellar.com/Brandon Schuh:Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=61552710523314LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/brandon-stephen-schuh/Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/schuhpapa/Nick Hartmann:LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/nickjhartmann/

Lawyers often think of legal operations, legal technology, and legal practice as separate disciplines. But many of the same principles that improve a legal department, support a successful technology product, or strengthen the management of a legal matter are more connected than they might first appear.In this episode, I sit down with Justin McCallon, CEO of the legal AI company Strongsuit and a former legal transformation leader at AT&T. We explore how process-improvement frameworks and operational thinking can help legal professionals solve problems more effectively. Justin shares lessons from leading large-scale legal transformation efforts, launching AI products, and building systems that help litigators navigate complex matters with greater clarity and confidence.Get full show notes, transcript, and more information here: agileattorney.com/123Take your law practice from overwhelmed to optimized with GreenLine LegalFollow along on LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/johnegrantFollow Justin on LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/justin-mccallon

Decisions are happening fast — and the consequences are showing. Last week, Trump announced he would nominate Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche to the top post at the Justice Department, after Blanche nixed the $1.776 “Anti-Weaponization” fund while keeping the controversial release that shields Trump and his family from any liability. Mary and Andrew highlight the myriad of issues Blanche will need to answer for when a confirmation hearing comes, before moving to the Supreme Court ruling that allows Alabama to adopt a Republican-drawn congressional map eliminating one of only two majority-Black districts in the state. This nullifies a lower court's decision that the map was, in fact, intentionally discriminatory. Next up, the co-hosts review a Rhode Island judge's ruling that invalidated several of Trump's immigration policies, including one that placed a hold on asylum claims globally, causing chaos and uncertainty for many legally trying to obtain asylum claims and green card status.And lastly, a beat on a new executive order stripping job protections from thousands of federal workers, plus continuing litigation over Trump's ballroom. Sign up for MS NOW Premium on Apple Podcasts to listen to this show and other MS podcasts without ads. You'll also get exclusive bonus content from this and other shows. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Why do some high-conflict people refuse to settle, even when it hurts them financially and emotionally? In this episode, Rebecca Zung explains the dopamine loop of litigation and reveals how anticipation, conflict, and emotional reactions can keep narcissists and other high-conflict personalities trapped in endless legal battles. Learn the four stages of the cycle and the key strategy for breaking the loop, protecting your peace, and moving toward resolution. #RebeccaZung #Narcissist #HighConflictPersonality #Litigation #ConflictResolution Chapters: 00:00 Why They Keep Moving the Goalposts 00:54 The Real Reason High-Conflict People Won't Settle 02:45 Stage 1: Anticipation and the Dopamine Rush 04:23 Stage 2: The Discharge Phase 06:42 Stage 3: The Trough and Withdrawal 08:10 Stage 4: Re-Engagement and Provocation 09:34 Why Emotional Reactions Fuel the Loop 10:32 How Cases Actually Move Toward Resolution 11:50 Becoming Unavailable as the Reward 12:16 The Neuroscience Behind High-Conflict Behavior 12:37 Final Takeaways and Next Steps

Nishat Mehta, CEO of Lexitas, joins Jennifer Simpson Carr to discuss how AI and technology-enabled litigation services are reshaping the legal industry. From deposition summaries and case triage to client pressure, access to justice, and the future of the billable hour, the conversation explores why law firms can not treat technology adoption as optional. Nishat offers law firm leaders a grounded and strategically honest look at where AI is creating real value. To our listeners: Audio issues during this recording impacted its sound quality, but we're publishing the episode because Nishat's insights are too valuable not to share.

Today's episode includes some trends that are increasingly reshaping housing demand. Plus, Robbie interviews Littler's Colton Long on how employers are increasingly responding to employee departures with legal action over alleged non-solicitation, confidentiality, and trade secret violations. And we close by looking at what payrolls data did to expectations for Federal Reserve policy.Thank you to JazzX, the first true end-to-end AI platform built for mortgage. From application to underwriting, JazzX is a new operating model that helps you scale growth, boost productivity, and transform how your team performs.The Chrisman Commentary is your go-to daily mortgage news podcast, where industry insights meet expert analysis. Hosted by Robbie Chrisman, this podcast delivers the latest updates on mortgage rates, capital markets, and the forces shaping the housing finance landscape. Whether you're a seasoned professional or just looking to stay informed, you'll get clear, concise breakdowns of market trends and economic shifts that impact the mortgage world.

Comment on the Show by Sending Mark a Text Message.Have you ever wondered how a single jury award can shatter a company's financial stability? In this eye-opening episode of Employee Survival Guide®, Mark Carey dives deep into the alarming rise of 'nuclear verdicts' in employment litigation, where jury awards can soar beyond $10 million. As the landscape of employment law evolves, understanding these staggering jury awards becomes crucial for both employers and employees alike.Mark sheds light on the factors fueling these nuclear verdicts, from jury anger over perceived injustice to the pressing call for corporate accountability. With the growing trend of social inflation, jurors are increasingly moved by personal stories of mistreatment, making employment claims not just legal battles but deeply emotional ones. With real-world examples of significant recent verdicts, he illustrates how the threat of exorbitant jury awards reshapes employer strategies, influencing everything from early settlement negotiations to rising insurance premiums.But it's not just about fear; it's about empowerment. Mark emphasizes the importance of proactive compliance and treating employment disputes as critical risk events. He provides actionable steps for employers to mitigate risks, such as auditing workplace policies, training managers effectively, and genuinely addressing employee complaints. By fostering a culture of transparency and accountability, businesses can not only protect themselves but also enhance their workplace environment.This episode is a must-listen for anyone navigating the complex world of employment law, whether you're an employee seeking to understand your rights or an employer aiming to safeguard your organization against costly litigation. Tune in for insider tips on severance negotiation, workplace rights, and the nuances of employment contracts. Join us as we explore how to survive and thrive in the challenging landscape of employment disputes, ensuring that both employee empowerment and corporate responsibility go hand in hand.Don't miss out on this essential discussion that could redefine your understanding of workplace dynamics and legal strategies. Discover how to navigate the intricate web of employment law issues and emerge victorious in the face of adversity. Your survival in the workplace starts here! If you enjoyed this episode of the Employee Survival Guide please like us on Facebook, X and LinkedIn.  We would really appreciate if you could leave a review of this podcast on your favorite podcast player such as Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Leaving a review will help other employees find the Employee Survival Guide.  For more information, please contact our employment attorneys at Carey & Associates, P.C. at 203-255-4150, www.capclaw.com.Disclaimer:  For educational use only, not intended to be legal advice. 

David French — New York Times columnist, veteran constitutional attorney, and one of the sharpest legal thinkers writing today — joins the Chuck Toddcast for a riveting conversation about how the legal system is straining to handle a world being remade by AI, an out-of-control executive branch, and the slow erosion of America's basic constitutional architecture. French opens with the chilling case the Florida Attorney General has now brought against OpenAI in connection with the Florida State University shooter, who asked ChatGPT how to disengage his weapon's safety just three minutes before opening fire. French argues that if ChatGPT had been a human person, it would unquestionably have been charged as a co-conspirator — humans get prosecuted for encouraging suicide all the time — and that when ChatGPT is speaking, OpenAI is legally speaking, full stop. He walks through the murky liability questions the law is now scrambling to answer: Google Search has never been held to the same standard as ChatGPT, but ChatGPT actively generates new speech rather than just pointing users to existing content, and French argues that litigation needs to function as a meaningful deterrent rather than mere compensation — though ultimately Congress is going to have to actually legislate AI regulation rather than leave the entire field to civil lawsuits. The conversation turns to what French sees as a more immediate constitutional crisis: Trump's blanket immunity for tax violations and the "anti-weaponization" slush fund scheme, both of which French argues are flatly indefensible on legal grounds. He explains the deeper problem — Trump suing his own government creates a fiction of an adversarial proceeding when there isn't actually one, and Trump cares far more about the liability shield than the slush fund itself, because he's trying to remove himself from the operation of the law in essentially the same way a king would. The pardon power only covers federal crimes, not civil offenses, and Congress has clear authority to stop this if it had the will. French offers several concrete reforms: require congressional approval for legal settlements above a certain dollar threshold, force members of Congress to obtain a certification in the Constitution itself, and that political parties should perform comprehensive background checks for their candidates, On the question of whether the Founders intended a Christian nation, French is unequivocal: they didn't, and Madison rebuked Christian nationalism explicitly. The deeper structural problem behind the DOJ's loss of credibility is the unitary executive theory itself — Article II of the Constitution is dangerously vague, the executive was never meant to be a co-equal branch (Congress was supposed to be most powerful), and the only durable fix may require constitutional reform to formally remove the DOJ from executive control. French closes on a hopeful note: after every dark period in American history, the country has entered a major era of reform — and he believes one is coming again. Link in bio or go to https://getsoul.com & enter code TODDCAST for 30% off your first order. Protect your family with life insurance from Ethos. Get up to $3 million in coverage in as little as 10 minutes at https://ethos.com/chuck. Application times may vary. Rates may vary. Timeline: (Timestamps may vary based on advertisements) 00:00 David French joins the Chuck ToddCast 01:30 Insurance companies & gambling companies have opposite incentives 04:00 States liberalized sports gambling and the public hasn’t liked it 05:45 Trying to regulate after the fact can be difficult 07:00 Common law concepts are starting to come into regulating AI 07:30 Florida AG has brought criminal case against OpenAI over FSU shooter 09:00 There has to always be human liability in AI cases 11:00 If ChatGPT was a human in FSU case, it would have be charged as co-conspirator 12:00 Shooter asked ChatGPT how to disengage the safety 3 mins before shooting 14:00 In Canadian school shooting, ChatGPT’s participation was overt 16:30 Determining liability is murky. Google search isn’t held to same standard as ChatGPT 18:00 Humans can be prosecuted for encouraging someone to commit suicide 19:15 There are circumstances where criminal liability could apply to AI 19:45 When ChatGPT is speaking, OpenAI is speaking 21:00 Litigation needs to be a deterrent, not just compensation for victims 23:30 We need to pass laws regulating AI, not just pressure via civil lawsuits 24:45 How is blanket immunity for Trump tax violations remotely legal? 25:45 Congress’s job to stop weaponization fund & Trump IRS immunity 26:45 Legal system rests on an adversarial relationship in court cases 27:45 There’s no adversarial proceeding when Trump sues his own government 28:30 Trump cares more about liability shield than the slush fund 29:30 Pardon power only applies to federal crimes, not civil offenses. Can be sued 30:15 Trump is trying to remove himself from the operation of the law like a king 31:00 How can congress stop Trump’s DOJ from issuing these settlements? 32:45 Congress should have to approve settlements above a certain amount of $ 34:30 Member of congress should have to get a certification in the constitution 35:45 Parties should force candidates to pass a comprehensive background check 37:00 Why aren’t state funded partisan primaries a violation of equal protection? 40:15 Partisan primaries are killing the political system 41:00 States can say that they’ll only fund open primaries 42:15 Campaign finance reforms and PACs have weakened party control 44:00 Did the founders intend for America to be a christian nation? 45:00 Founders were biblically literate, but not particularly devout 45:30 Founders intentionally did not create a christian nation 46:30 Madison argued against paying clergy with tax dollars 47:15 Madison rebuked christian nationalism and immigration restriction 49:45 DOJ has lost credibility, how can we separate the DOJ from the executive? 50:30 Problems with DOJ are downstream from the unitary executive theory 51:30 Article II of the constitution is vague and inexplicit 52:45 After dark period, America enters periods of reform, which we badly need 54:45 Never supposed to be co-equal branches. Congress should have most power 55:30 Have to remove executive’s ability to claw power to the top 56:30 Would likely need constitutional reform to pull DOJ out of executive branch 59:00 Past congressional leaders wouldn’t voluntarily cede power 1:00:45 In late 80’s - early 90’s, congress was incentivized to compromise 1:01:30 Changes to college basketball in one-and-done and NIL era 1:03:00 Transfer portal has created a new form of one-and-done 1:04:45 NBA can only improve regular season by reducing the 82 games 1:06:15 Regular season NBA games are more intense than 30 years agoSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Chuck Todd opens with an uncomfortable truth Republicans are doing everything possible to avoid acknowledging: Trump turns 80 next week, his physical and mental decline is increasingly visible to anyone paying attention, and the GOP is now repeating exactly the same mistake Democrats made by ignoring Joe Biden's obvious deterioration. The cruelest irony: Trump literally built his entire 2024 campaign on the premise that his opponent was too old and too sleepy to do the job, but Biden's catastrophic debate finally broke the Democratic silence in a way the GOP shows no signs of replicating. Chuck argues Trump's behavior isn't unusual for an 80-year-old — it's deeply unusual for an American president. He warns that Senate Republicans made an enormous mistake by not killing the weaponization fund, that every GOP incumbent up for reelection is now vulnerable to extremely effective attack ads, and that acting DNI Bill Pulte is almost certainly holding that position illegally — the courts will probably step in to declare him ineligible. He previews Tuesday's primaries in Maine and South Carolina, where Lindsey Graham looks genuinely vulnerable, and notes that if Graham gets forced into a runoff, history says he's in real trouble. He's watching how much protest vote Janet Mills picks up in Maine, and on Graham Platner — who has been saying that the war "messed him up" — Chuck offers a pointed observation: just because behavior is explainable doesn't always make it excusable.He closes with a sharp analysis of the Scott Pelley firing at 60 Minutes, arguing the real story isn't Pelley at all — it's the Ellisons, who are using 60 Minutes as a bargaining chip with Trump to get their Paramount merger approved. He believes 60 Minutes is a symbol with massive brand equity, and Trump wants to bring it to heel or topple it altogether. Then, David French — New York Times columnist, veteran constitutional attorney, and one of the sharpest legal thinkers writing today — joins the Chuck Toddcast for a riveting conversation about how the legal system is straining to handle a world being remade by AI, an out-of-control executive branch, and the slow erosion of America's basic constitutional architecture. French opens with the chilling case the Florida Attorney General has now brought against OpenAI in connection with the Florida State University shooter, who asked ChatGPT how to disengage his weapon's safety just three minutes before opening fire. French argues that if ChatGPT had been a human person, it would unquestionably have been charged as a co-conspirator — humans get prosecuted for encouraging suicide all the time — and that when ChatGPT is speaking, OpenAI is legally speaking, full stop. He walks through the murky liability questions the law is now scrambling to answer: Google Search has never been held to the same standard as ChatGPT, but ChatGPT actively generates new speech rather than just pointing users to existing content, and French argues that litigation needs to function as a meaningful deterrent rather than mere compensation — though ultimately Congress is going to have to actually legislate AI regulation rather than leave the entire field to civil lawsuits. The conversation turns to what French sees as a more immediate constitutional crisis: Trump's blanket immunity for tax violations and the "anti-weaponization" slush fund scheme, both of which French argues are flatly indefensible on legal grounds. He explains the deeper problem — Trump suing his own government creates a fiction of an adversarial proceeding when there isn't actually one, and Trump cares far more about the liability shield than the slush fund itself, because he's trying to remove himself from the operation of the law in essentially the same way a king would. The pardon power only covers federal crimes, not civil offenses, and Congress has clear authority to stop this if it had the will. French offers several concrete reforms: require congressional approval for legal settlements above a certain dollar threshold, force members of Congress to obtain a certification in the Constitution itself, and that political parties should perform comprehensive background checks for their candidates, On the question of whether the Founders intended a Christian nation, French is unequivocal: they didn't, and Madison rebuked Christian nationalism explicitly. The deeper structural problem behind the DOJ's loss of credibility is the unitary executive theory itself — Article II of the Constitution is dangerously vague, the executive was never meant to be a co-equal branch (Congress was supposed to be most powerful), and the only durable fix may require constitutional reform to formally remove the DOJ from executive control. French closes on a hopeful note: after every dark period in American history, the country has entered a major era of reform — and he believes one is coming again. Finally, Chuck hops into the ToddCast Time Machine to revisit the infamous quote “Have you no sense of decency” from the Army/McCarthy hearings, why McCarthy was one of the first American politicians to master the attention economy, and why that famous quote precipitated the decline of McCarthy’s influence. He also answers listeners’ questions in the “Ask Chuck” segment. Predict the action all the way through the finals. Sign up now for your twenty-five dollar bonus on https://fanduel.com/predicts Link in bio or go to https://getsoul.com & enter code TODDCAST for 30% off your first order. Protect your family with life insurance from Ethos. Get up to $3 million in coverage in as little as 10 minutes at https://ethos.com/chuck. Application times may vary. Rates may vary. Timeline: (Timestamps may vary based on advertisements) 00:00 Chuck Todd’s introduction 05:30 Trump turns 80 in a week. Plans on celebrating himself with UFC fight 06:30 You can tell that Trump is not doing well physically/mentally 07:30 Republicans ignoring Trump’s decline like Dems did with Biden 10:00 Trump won’t do events where he has to stand, he sits now 11:30 Trump’s staff has been padding his schedule with private meetings 12:30 Trump built his campaign on premise his opponent was too old & sleepy 13:15 Biden’s debate broke the Dems silence, GOP hasn’t done same with Trump 14:30 Trump has influence and pull over his party that Biden didn’t 15:15 Trump’s behavior isn’t unusual for an 80 year, is unusual for a POTUS 16:00 Reinforces public perception that parties will say/defend anything for power 19:00 This will add to the credibility problems for the Republican party 19:30 Senate Republicans made huge mistake not killing the weaponization fund 20:15 Every Republican up for reelection is now vulnerable to easy attack ads 21:15 It’s probably illegal for Bill Pulte to hold the acting DNI position 23:00 Courts will likely step in to declare Pulte ineligible for position 25:30 Major primaries coming up on Tuesday including ME & SC 26:45 Lindsey Graham is vulnerable in South Carolina 27:45 Christian conservative right has always been skeptical of Graham 28:45 Outsiders have been ousting incumbents across the country 30:15 Since the Tea Party, GOP base has gone against the establishment 32:30 The anti-war vote will have qualms with Trump & Graham 33:15 Graham’s career is defined by being a political weathervane 35:00 If Graham is forced into a runoff, history says he’s in trouble 35:30 Will be interesting to see how much protest vote Janet Mills gets in ME 36:15 Platner says war messed him up… does he have the temperament for the job? 37:45 Just because behavior is explainable, doesn’t always make it excusable 38:15 Platner is in “save his campaign” mode 39:30 Bad actors will exploit California’s slow ballot counting process 40:30 Counting process requires people have faith in it, slowness hurts credibility 42:00 California has a duty to make citizens confident in the election 44:00 Thoughts on changes at 60 Minutes and Scott Pelley’s firing 44:30 Too much focus on Pelley and not enough on the Ellisons 45:00 Publicly traded media companies have all folded to & appeased Trump 47:30 Companies have a responsibility to shareholders, bad for news integrity 48:30 60 Minutes is a symbol, and Trump wants to bring it to heel/topple it 49:30 We don’t know the politics of the Ellisons, but they want their merger approved 50:30 Ellison’s know one 60 Minutes piece Trump dislikes could blow up merger 51:45 Bari Weiss is being used… is she comfortable being used? 53:00 Scott Pelley has the money to speak out and fight back 54:00 Journalists that stayed hoping to weather the storm & wait for new management 55:15 60 Minutes has incredible brand equity and is being gutted for the merger 56:45 The story is the Ellisons using 60 Minutes as a bargaining chip 1:04:00 David French joins the Chuck ToddCast 1:05:30 Insurance companies & gambling companies have opposite incentives 1:08:00 States liberalized sports gambling and the public hasn’t liked it 1:09:45 Trying to regulate after the fact can be difficult 1:11:00 Common law concepts are starting to come into regulating AI 1:11:30 Florida AG has brought criminal case against OpenAI over FSU shooter 1:13:00 There has to always be human liability in AI cases 1:15:00 If ChatGPT was a human in FSU case, it would have be charged as co-conspirator 1:16:00 Shooter asked ChatGPT how to disengage the safety 3 mins before shooting 1:18:00 In Canadian school shooting, ChatGPT’s participation was overt 1:20:30 Determining liability is murky. Google search isn’t held to same standard as ChatGPT 1:22:00 Humans can be prosecuted for encouraging someone to commit suicide 1:23:15 There are circumstances where criminal liability could apply to AI 1:23:45 When ChatGPT is speaking, OpenAI is speaking 1:25:00 Litigation needs to be a deterrent, not just compensation for victims 1:27:30 We need to pass laws regulating AI, not just pressure via civil lawsuits 1:28:45 How is blanket immunity for Trump tax violations remotely legal? 1:29:45 Congress’s job to stop weaponization fund & Trump IRS immunity 1:30:45 Legal system rests on an adversarial relationship in court cases 1:31:45 There’s no adversarial proceeding when Trump sues his own government 1:32:30 Trump cares more about liability shield than the slush fund 1:33:30 Pardon power only applies to federal crimes, not civil offenses. Can be sued 1:34:15 Trump is trying to remove himself from the operation of the law like a king 1:35:00 How can congress stop Trump’s DOJ from issuing these settlements? 1:36:45 Congress should have to approve settlements above a certain amount of $ 1:38:30 Member of congress should have to get a certification in the constitution 1:39:45 Parties should force candidates to pass a comprehensive background check 1:41:00 Why aren’t state funded partisan primaries a violation of equal protection? 1:44:15 Partisan primaries are killing the political system 1:45:00 States can say that they’ll only fund open primaries 1:46:15 Campaign finance reforms and PACs have weakened party control 1:48:00 Did the founders intend for America to be a christian nation? 1:49:00 Founders were biblically literate, but not particularly devout 1:49:30 Founders intentionally did not create a christian nation 1:50:30 Madison argued against paying clergy with tax dollars 1:51:15 Madison rebuked christian nationalism and immigration restriction 1:53:45 DOJ has lost credibility, how can we separate the DOJ from the executive? 1:54:30 Problems with DOJ are downstream from the unitary executive theory 1:55:30 Article II of the constitution is vague and inexplicit 1:56:45 After dark period, America enters periods of reform, which we badly need 1:58:45 Never supposed to be co-equal branches. Congress should have most power 1:59:30 Have to remove executive’s ability to claw power to the top 2:00:30 Would likely need constitutional reform to pull DOJ out of executive branch 2:03:00 Past congressional leaders wouldn’t voluntarily cede power 2:04:45 In late 80’s - early 90’s, congress was incentivized to compromise 2:05:30 Changes to college basketball in one-and-done and NIL era 2:07:00 Transfer portal has created a new form of one-and-done 2:08:45 NBA can only improve regular season by reducing the 82 games 2:10:15 Regular season NBA games are more intense than 30 years ago 2:13:45 ToddCast Time Machine - June 9th, 1954 2:14:15 “Have you no sense of decency?” quote becomes famous 2:15:00 Quote came during the Army/McCarthy hearings 2:15:30 The famous line didn’t end McCarthyism 2:16:15 The myth is that McCarthy created the Red Scare… he did not 2:17:00 The Cold War was not a distant abstraction, people were worried 2:17:30 McCarthy didn’t create the wave… he was surfing it 2:18:45 Mass media was growing in America and sped up the information wars 2:19:30 McCarthy understood media and how to create anticipation 2:21:00 McCarthy mastered the politics of attention, his and Trump’s mentor was Roy Cohn 2:23:00 The fear of communism still existed, but public confidence in McCarthy eroded 2:24:00 Television exposed McCarthy in a way quotes and newspapers couldn’t 2:25:30 Army/McCarthy hearings started as a personnel dispute for Roy Cohn ally 2:27:00 There were multiple institutions moving against McCarthy 2:28:00 Army chief counsel Joseph Welch spoke the infamous line 2:28:30 Welch gave words to a conclusion Americans were reaching on their own 2:31:15 Ask Chuck 2:31:30 When will congress actually hold cabinet members accountable? 2:38:15 Thoughts on DHS pulling CBP from sanctuary city airports? 2:42:15 Navigating the tension between voting for and against a candidate? 2:48:15 Thoughts on Democrats proposing a national gerrymandering ban?See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

 Holly Fretwell explains how NEPA, the Endangered Species Act, and the Clean Air Act create "red tape" and litigation that stall restoration projects. She highlights that the Clean Air Act paradoxically limits prescribed burns, which would prevent far more damaging, high-emission wildfires. Some litigious groups cling to unrealistic, romanticized visions of unmanaged forests. (2)180E  HARLEM HEIGHT00

Nicholas focuses his practice on resolving disputes over trusts, estates, conservatorships, and other fiduciary matters. A respected member of the Los Angeles legal community, Nicholas is known as a pragmatic and effective trusts and estates litigator who seeks to achieve favorable results for his clients through skillful negotiation, strategic counsel and deft trial work.Visit his website here: https://www.sheppardmullin.com/nvanbrunt

In this episode, I speak with Rachel McCarthy, Executive Director of the Milestone Foundation, about a challenge that often sits quietly in the background of personal injury litigation: how injured plaintiffs manage financially while waiting for their cases to resolve.Litigation can take months or years to reach a settlement or verdict. During that time, plaintiffs may face mounting medical bills, housing expenses, transportation costs, and lost income. Financial pressure can create significant hardship and, in some cases, influence settlement decisions. Rachel explains how the Milestone Foundation was created to address this issue through a nonprofit model that provides low-interest, non-recourse advances designed to help plaintiffs cover essential living expenses while their cases proceed.We discuss how plaintiff funding differs from litigation finance, why many attorneys remain skeptical of the industry, and what makes nonprofit funding models different from traditional providers. Rachel also explains the mechanics of simple versus compounding interest, the importance of understanding funding agreements, and the questions attorneys should ask before recommending funding options to clients.In addition, we explore emerging regulatory efforts, including new state-level consumer protection measures, and discuss the broader access-to-justice implications of helping plaintiffs withstand the financial pressures that can arise during lengthy litigation.Whether you are a plaintiff attorney, litigation professional, consumer advocate, or simply interested in how economic realities intersect with the civil justice system, this conversation offers valuable insight into a topic that affects thousands of litigants every year.Jump in to hear Rachel's perspective on ethical plaintiff funding, consumer protection, and how financial support can help plaintiffs and their attorneys see cases through to a more appropriate resolution.Tom HagyHost of The Emerging Litigation Podcast______________________________________Thanks for listening! If you like what you hear please give us a rating. You'd be amazed at how much that helps. If you have questions for Tom or would like to participate, you can reach him at Editor@LitigationConferences.com. Ask him about creating this kind of content for your firm -- podcasts, webinars, blogs, articles, papers, and more. Tom on LinkedInEmerging Litigation Podcast on LinkedInEmerging Litigation Podcast on the HB Litigation site 

Today we are joined by Liliana Lizarazo Rodríguez and Martha Robles Ustariz, our partners from the Brussels School of Governance. In the Defend-Bio project, they focus on the area “Litigation in Latin American and the Caribbean countries”, trying to identify, analyze and conceptualize the role played by regional and national courts regarding the actions of biosphere defenders seeking to prevent or mitigate the degradation of these ecosystems.

Daily Business Review and law.com reporter Annie Mayne had a chance to catch up with Scott Seaman and discuss his new book, which he co-authorized with two other Hinshaw partners: "America 250: The History of Insurance and Insurance Coverage Law and Litigation in the United States". Seaman also discussed how AI will alter the insurance litigation landscape and what, if anything, ESG means to the Trump administration.   Hosts: Patrick Smith & Cedra Mayfield Reporter: Annie Mayne Guest: Scott Seaman Producer: Charles Garnar

In this week's episode of The Learning Curve, co-hosts Prof. Albert Cheng of the University of Arkansas and Alisha Searcy of the Center for Strong Public Schools speak with Leslie Hiner, Senior Advisor for Legal Policy at EdChoice, about the constitutional foundations and future of educational freedom in America. Hiner reflects on her distinguished career […]

In this week's episode of The Learning Curve, co-hosts Prof. Albert Cheng of the University of Arkansas and Alisha Searcy of the Center for Strong Public Schools speak with Leslie Hiner, Senior Advisor for Legal Policy at EdChoice, about the constitutional foundations and future of educational freedom in America. Hiner reflects on her distinguished career in law and public policy before examining the landmark U.S. Supreme Court decisions that have shaped the modern school choice movement. She discusses how Brown v. Board of Education's promise of equal educational opportunity influenced later efforts to expand parental choice and educational access. Hiner then explores the significance of Zelman v. Simmons-Harris, Trinity Lutheran Church v. Comer, Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue, and Carson v. Makin, explaining how each expanded protections for families seeking religious and private educational options. She assesses the legal landscape following Carson, highlights key recent victories such as Loffman v. California Department of Education, and offers insights into the future of school choice litigation, educational tax credits, and parental rights nationwide. Finally, Hiner also examines current legal cases, including Hellman v. Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, and they could mean for the future of school choice in Massachusetts.

We are pleased to introduce the fifth ILTA Content Teams and NextGen Innovators Group podcast series—an initiative designed to repackage high‑value, evergreen content in a format tailored for today's Next Gen legal professionals.   Sessions included: Tabletop Exercise on CoPilot Work-First Or People-First? Introduction of Legal Data Intelligence

With the Voting Rights Act in tatters, will corporate America reaffirm their commitment to our right to vote? The Congressional Black Caucus thinks they might… Our second guest, Congressman Jonathan Jackson of Illinois’ 1st district, is calling on Costco, Microsoft, John Deere, Apple, Ford, McDonalds, and others to do more. Our first guest is Maryam Jazini Dorcheh, Senior Director of Litigation for Common Cause, and one of the lead attorneys challenging Trump’s $1.7 billion slush fund. Trump is setting up a $1.7 billion fund to compensate “victims” of President Biden’s so-called “lawfare,” including folks convicted of crimes related to January 6th. Some Republicans have spoken out against the fund, which faces legal challenges. LINKS: The CBC’s Open Letter to Business: https://cbc.house.gov/uploadedfiles/congressional_black_caucus__corporate_america_voting_rights_accountability_letter.pdf Learn more about Common Cause: https://www.commoncause.org/about-us/ More on Trump’s Slush Fund: https://www.npr.org/2026/06/01/g-s1-125268/justice-department-trump-anti-weaponization-fund-pause Read the 2021 “Business for Voting Rights” Letter to Congress: https://www.businessforvotingrights.com/letter-to-congress Want to ask Angela a question? Subscribe to our YouTube channel to participate in the chat. Welcome home y’all! —--------- We want to hear from you! Send us a video @nativelandpod and we may feature you on the podcast. Instagram X/Twitter Facebook NativeLandPod.com Watch full episodes of Native Land Pod here on YouTube. Native Land Pod is brought to you by Reasoned Choice Media. Thank you to the Native Land Pod team: Angela Rye as host, executive producer, and cofounder of Reasoned Choice Media; Andrew Gillum as host and producer, Bakari Sellers as host and producer, and Lauren Hansen as executive producer; LoLo Smith is our research producer, and Nikolas Harter is our editor and producer. Special thanks to Chris Morrow and Lenard McKelvey, co-founders of Reasoned Choice Media. Theme music created by Daniel Laurent.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Wrongful death actions have unique procedural and evidentiary requirements and strategic considerations that distinguish them from bodily injury cases. The history of the IICLE handbook, Wrongful-Death and Survival Actions, stretches back over 30 years to a time when Scott Seamn, General Editor of the handbook and this month's guest, was searching for an authoritative guide on the topic. Wrongful-Death and Survival Actions 2026 Edition is available now at IICLE.com.IICLE® is a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit based in Springfield, Illinois. We produce a wide range of practice guidance for Illinois attorneys and other legal professionals in all areas of law with the generous contributions of time and expertise from volunteer attorneys, judges, and other legal professionals.

On today's Legally Speaking Podcast, I'm joined by three fantastic guests from the world of disputes. First, Loukas Mistelis, International Arbitration Partner at Clyde & Co, Professor of Transnational Commercial Law and Arbitration at Queen Mary University of London and Co-Chair of London International Disputes Week. Next, returning guest Henrietta (Hetti) Jackson-Stops, mediator, Partner of IPOS Mediation, founder of Simply Resolved, former Allen & Overy litigator, former Government lawyer, and currently leading the LegalTech Showcase at LIDW. And also returning to the show, Emilie Jones, Legal Director and Barrister at Pinsent Masons, Co-Chair of London International Disputes Week, specialising in commercial litigation and leading Pinsent Masons' Litigation and Regulatory practice development function.This episode is all about the modern litigator and arbitrator, and how legal tech and AI are changing dispute resolution in practice, not just in principle. Because the real question is no longer whether change is coming. It is what has actually changed, what is genuinely adding value, and what still depends on human judgment. So today, we are getting into the realities of modern disputes practice, the opportunities, the risks and what great litigators and arbitrators need to look like in 2026.So why should you be listening in? You can hear Rob, Loukas, Hetti and Emilie discussing:- Artificial Intelligence Enhancing Efficiency In Litigation, Arbitration and Mediation- Online Dispute Resolution Expanding Cross-Border Collaboration and Accessibility- Document Review Technology Transforming Complex Case Management- Human Judgment Remaining Essential Despite Rapid Legal Tech Adoption- Legal Professionals Focusing On Practical Value Beyond AI HypeConnect with Emilie Jones here - https://www.linkedin.com/in/emilie-j-a32415162Connect with Loukas Mistelis here - https://uk.linkedin.com/in/prof-loukas-mistelis-fciarb-0a736b1bConnect with Henrietta Jackson-Stops here - https://uk.linkedin.com/in/henrietta-hetti-jackson-stops-2331482

Discover how the future of TV advertising is shifting toward outcome-based measurement and AI-driven optimization coming out of the 2026 upfronts . iSpot CEO Sean Muller joins the show to break down their fundamental "Creative + Audience = Outcome" equation, the integration of their new AI platform Sage, and why the industry must prioritize trusted, neutral data over ongoing currency debates. Key Highlights

In this episode of the Massive Passive Cash Flow Podcast, Gary Wilson sits down with alternative investment expert Patrick Grimes to discuss how real estate agents and investors can build more resilient portfolios through diversification, alternative investments, and non-correlated assets. Patrick shares his journey from mechanical engineering and real estate investing to becoming a leader in alternative investments after experiencing major losses during the 2009 subprime mortgage collapse. He explains how setbacks shaped his philosophy around diversification, recession resilience, and long-term wealth protection. The conversation dives deep into: Litigation finance investing Medical receivables investing Diversified investment portfolios Syndications and passive investing Tax-efficient investment strategies Asset protection and wealth preservation Recession-resistant industries Non-correlated investments Risk management for real estate investors Patrick also explains why many investors become overexposed to a single asset class and how alternative investments can help stabilize wealth during uncertain economic conditions. He shares practical insights on building true financial resilience while avoiding common mistakes investors make when scaling too quickly. Whether you're a real estate agent, investor, entrepreneur, or business owner looking to diversify beyond traditional real estate and stocks, this episode provides valuable strategies for creating a stronger and more recession-resistant financial future.

Justice Thomas stated that the Comstock Act bans using the mail to ship any “drug…for producing abortion.” Constitutional expert, lawyer, author, pastor, and founder of Liberty Counsel Mat Staver discusses the important topics of the day with co-hosts and guests that impact life, liberty, and family. To stay informed and get involved, visit LC.org.

In this episode of the Always Be Booked Cruise Podcast, host Tommy Casabona covers Costa is taking a stand against food smuggling Royal Caribbean cancels a sailing for a charter Cuban's win a victory in court Man sues Carnival under the most ridiculous circumstances in history much much more Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

My talk with Skye begins at 26 mins Subscribe and Watch Interviews LIVE : On YOUTUBE.com/StandUpWithPete ON SubstackStandUpWithPete Stand Up is a daily podcast. I book,host,edit, post and promote new episodes with brilliant guests every day. This show is Ad free and fully supported by listeners like you! Please subscribe now for as little as 5$ and gain access to a community of over 750 awesome, curious, kind, funny, brilliant, generous souls Skye L. Perryman is the President and CEO of Democracy Forward, a nonpartisan, national legal organization that promotes democracy and progress through litigation, regulatory engagement, communications, policy education, and research. Named as one of the 2025 100 Most Influential People In The World by TIME Magazine, Ms. Perryman took the helm at Democracy Forward a few months after January 6, 2021, in the midst of rising extremism in communities and courts across the country. She has built a visionary team of legal, policy, and communications experts to confront anti-democratic extremism head-on while also using the law to advance progress and a bold vision for the future. Under Ms. Perryman's leadership, Democracy Forward has expanded the scope and reach of its work, emerging as a nationally recognized institution that is taking on the most significant issues affecting people, families, and communities– from defending civil rights and fair wages to seeking to expand access to reproductive health care post-Dobbs to confronting attacks on education to addressing the climate crisis and much more. Since January 2025, Democracy Forward has played a leading role in inspiring courage and in protecting the American people from harmful and unlawful federal executive action. The organization has filed hundreds of legal actions, launched hundreds of investigations, and, through its Democracy 2025 initiative, has organized the largest, most successful affirmative litigation effort against executive branch excesses in United States history. Learn more about our work here. Known for her strategic insight and impact-oriented leadership, Ms. Perryman has a track record of winning tough legal and policy battles, uniting diverse coalitions, inspiring the American public, and elevating voices that represent the fabric of our country to deliver results that improve the lives of millions. Over the course of her nearly two decade legal career, Ms. Perryman has served in executive positions and has provided legal and strategic counsel for a broad range of clients and institutions. She previously served as Chief Legal Officer and General Counsel of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. There, she oversaw legal and policy strategies that resulted in historic advancements in access to health care for women, including developing strategies to support the extension of postpartum Medicaid coverage for more than 500,000 people, overseeing litigation that enabled the distribution of mifepristone by mail for the first time in US history, launching an industry-wide effort to address racism and promote racial equity in medicine, and leading comprehensive legal and policy responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. Ms. Perryman was previously a member of Democracy Forward's founding legal team and began her legal career in litigation roles at WilmerHale and Covington & Burling, where she gained the trust of clients in the health care, financial services, education, and consumer products industries while simultaneously maintaining an active pro bono practice, receiving numerous commendations and awards for her work. Ms. Perryman's work has been recognized widely for its positive impact on people and communities. She has received numerous awards and recognitions for her commitment to public service and her professional work, including receiving a Lifetime Award Award for the Pursuit of Justice from the Georgetown University Law Center's O'Neill Institute, being named one of the 500 Most Influential People Shaping Policy by Washingtonian Magazine for consecutive years, one of The NonProfit Times's Power & Influence Top 50 and their 2025 Influencer of the Year, the 2025 Resister in Law by the Feminist Majority Foundation, a Woman to Watch by the New Republic, a Chuck F C Ruff Pro Bono Lawyer of the Year recipient, a Sissy Farenthold Social Justice Award recipient, a Harry S. Truman Scholar (2002), a Baylor Line Foundation Outstanding Young Alumni (2018), and a four-time Rising Star in Litigation in Washington, DC, among other awards. Ms. Perryman is a frequent guest lecturer and keynote speaker on matters at the intersection of law and policy. She has testified before the U.S. Congress and other expert bodies and her legal work has been cited by the U.S. Supreme Court as well as state supreme courts. Ms. Perryman appears on both network and cable television and her work and commentary is routinely covered in outlets such as The New York Times, NPR, NBC News, The Washington Post, Texas Monthly, The Houston Chronicle, Teen Vogue, MSNBC and CNN. Ms. Perryman grew up in Waco, Texas and is a proud product of K-12 public education. She holds a Bachelor of Arts in Economics and Philosophy magna cum laude from Baylor University where she was elected to Phi Beta Kappa and a Juris Doctor with honors from the Georgetown University Law Center where she served as an Editor for the American Criminal Law Review and was an Editor in Chief for the ACLR's Annual Survey on White Collar Crime. Ms. Perryman serves on the boards of the Interfaith Alliance, the Atlas Performing Arts Center, the Texas Observer, the Baylor Line Foundation, and the Rise Up: Federal Workers Legal Defense Network. Alongside both progressive and conservative legal scholars, she co-chairs We Hold These Truths, Democracy Forward's initiative to provide accessible civic education to the American public. Listen rate and review on Apple Podcasts Listen rate and review on Spotify Pete On Instagram Pete on Blue Sky Pete on Threads Pete on Tik Tok Pete on Twitter Pete Personal FB page Stand Up with Pete FB page Gift a Subscription https://www.patreon.com/PeteDominick/gift Send Pete $ Directly on Venmo All things Jon Carroll  Buy Ava's Art  Subscribe to Piano Tuner Paul Paul Wesley on Substack Listen to Barry and Abigail Hummel Podcast Listen to Matty C Podcast and Substack Follow and Support Pete Coe Hire DJ Monzyk to build your website or help you with Marketing

Michael Toth highlights how foreign investors utilize litigation finance to gain tax advantages. He advocates for defining legal investments as ordinary income to close loopholes that favor oligarchs and burden shareholders. (4/16)1920 MANNING SC