Podcasts about litigation

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

06-09-2026 Alexander Paykin Learn more about the interview and get additional links here: https://www.usadailychronicles.com/commercial-real-estate-distress-when-workouts-turn-into-litigation/ Subscribe to the best of our content here: https://priceofbusiness.substack.com/ Subscribe to our YouTube channel here: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCywgbHv7dpiBG2Qswr_ceEQ

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.

In this episode of Jackson Walker Fast Takes, host ⁠Courtney White⁠ welcomes Litigation senior counsel Fred Sultan for a conversation about his eminent domain practice and involvement with the LGBTQ+ Bar Association.For additional JW Fast Takes podcasts and webinars, visit ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠JW.com/Fast⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Follow Jackson Walker LLP on ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠LinkedIn⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Twitter "X"⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Facebook⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, and ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.The music is by ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Eve Searls⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.The opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of the firm, its clients, or any of its or their respective affiliates. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

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

Why Do Americans Sue So Much? The United States is known for its unique litigious nature, with lawyers being financially incentivized to resist reforms to the legal system. While the country is not the most litigious, it is already the most litigious society in the world, spending about 2.2% of gross domestic product, or roughly $310 billion a year, on torts. Americans sue more frequently than citizens do elsewhere, as evidenced by its per capita litigation rates. A new book by law school faculty member David Engel debunks the commonly held belief that injured Americans have their attorney on speed-dial.... View Article

The Trump administration is rescinding the drinking water regulations for four PFAS chemicals and extending the compliance deadline for the remaining two.  Listen to learn more and subscribe to The Pulse for all the details.

#ThisMorning | Retirement #Risk Radar: Fresh #ERISA #Litigation Highlights | Chris Tobe, CFA, CAIA, The Hackett Group, LLC | #Tunein: broadcastretirementnetwork.com #Aging, #Finance, #Lifestyle, #Privacy, #Retirement, #wellness

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 episode 254, Coffey talks with David Miklas about rapidly changing employment law trends surrounding DEI programs, EEOC enforcement priorities, workplace discrimination claims, AI risks in HR investigations, and the evolving legal landscape employers face in 2026.  They discuss the EEOC's proposal to eliminate EEO-1 reporting requirements and how demographic data impacts systemic discrimination claims; the legal distinction between lawful diversity efforts and illegal DEI employment practices; reverse discrimination lawsuits and Title VII protections for all employees regardless of majority or minority status; the risks of workforce balancing, quotas, and race-conscious hiring decisions; employee resource groups and affinity programs that may unintentionally create unlawful workplace segregation; recent federal court rulings on DEI training, race-based programming, and compelled speech claims; practical recruiting strategies for expanding applicant pools without violating discrimination laws; how employers can maintain merit-based hiring while improving diversity outreach efforts; the increasing role of AI-generated deepfakes and manipulated media in workplace investigations and litigation; discovery risks involving ChatGPT prompts, AI-generated HR documentation, and employment decisions; AI-related hiring fraud, fake applicants, and remote interview concerns; legal concerns around confidentiality, metadata, and AI-generated evidence; and management failures highlighted by viral Reddit workplace stories involving poor supervision, accommodations, and employee performance management.  For HR teams who discuss this podcast in their team meetings, we've created a discussion starter PDF to help guide your conversation. Download it here https://goodmorninghr.com/EP254  Media mentioned in this podcast:  The JPMorgan Sexual Assault Lawsuit Was Already Messy. AI Is Making It Worse Reddit: Anyone Hire a Recruiter to Recruit Away a Problem  Good Morning, HR is brought to you by Imperative—Bulletproof Background Checks. For more information about our commitment to quality and excellent customer service, visit us at https://imperativeinfo.com.   If you are an HRCI or SHRM-certified professional, this episode of Good Morning, HR has been pre-approved for half a recertification credit. To obtain the recertification information for this episode, visit https://goodmorninghr.com.   About our Guest:  David Miklas owns a Labor & Employment law firm and for 27 years he has practiced all types of labor and employment law exclusively representing Florida employers. He has written hundreds of employment law articles, is the co-author for the premier legal textbook used by lawyers for Florida employment law, is a frequent employment law presenter and is a nationally recognized speaker and an invited guest lecturer addressing employment law and human resource issues with over thirty universities, including Harvard. Mr. Miklas graduated from the University of Florida College of Law.   David Miklas can be reached at  https://www.miklasemploymentlaw.com/  https://www.linkedin.com/in/david-miklas-301861121/  About Mike Coffey:  Mike Coffey is an entrepreneur, licensed private investigator, business strategist, HR consultant, and registered yoga teacher. In 1999, he founded Imperative, a background investigations and due diligence firm helping risk-averse clients make well-informed decisions about the people they involve in their business. Imperative delivers in-depth employment background investigations, know-your-customer and anti-money laundering compliance, and due diligence investigations to more than 300 risk-averse corporate clients across the US, and, through its PFC Caregiver & Household Screening brand, many more private estates, family offices, and personal service agencies. Imperative has been named a Best Places to Work, the Texas Association of Business' small business of the year, and is accredited by the Professional Background Screening Association.  Mike shares his insight from 25+ years of HR-entrepreneurship on the Good Morning, HR podcast, where each week he talks to business leaders about bringing people together to create value for customers, shareholders, and community. Mike has been recognized as an Entrepreneur of Excellence by FW, Inc. and has twice been recognized as the North Texas HR Professional of the Year.  Mike serves as a board member of a number of organizations, including the Texas State Council, where he serves Texas' 31 SHRM chapters as State Director-Elect; Workforce Solutions for Tarrant County; the Texas Association of Business; and the Fort Worth Chamber of Commerce, where he is chair of the Talent Committee. Mike is a certified Senior Professional in Human Resources (SPHR) through the HR Certification Institute and a SHRM Senior Certified Professional (SHRM-SCP). He is also a Yoga Alliance registered yoga teacher (RYT-200) and teaches multiple times each week. Mike and his very patient wife of 29 years are empty nesters in Fort Worth.  Learning Objectives:  Distinguish between lawful diversity initiatives and illegal employment discrimination practices. Identify emerging AI-related legal risks affecting workplace investigations and HR decision-making. Apply practical management and recruiting strategies that reduce discrimination and compliance risks. 

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.

This Day in Legal History: Black Monday and the End of the NIRAOn May 27, 1935 — a day quickly dubbed “Black Monday” by the press — the United States Supreme Court delivered three unanimous decisions that gutted central pieces of Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal in a single morning. The most consequential was A.L.A. Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States, in which the Court struck down the National Industrial Recovery Act. The case grew out of the prosecution of a Brooklyn kosher poultry slaughterhouse for violating the “Live Poultry Code,” one of the hundreds of industry codes drafted by trade groups and given the force of federal law by the National Recovery Administration. The Court held that the NIRA's code-making scheme was an unconstitutional delegation of legislative power to private actors and the executive, and that the federal government's Commerce Clause authority did not reach the intrastate sale of poultry to local butchers. Justice Cardozo, concurring, famously described the statute as “delegation running riot.”The same day, in Humphrey's Executor v. United States, the Court cabined the President's power to remove members of independent regulatory commissions, a holding that would shape the constitutional status of agencies like the FTC, SEC, and FCC for the next ninety years. And in Louisville Joint Stock Land Bank v. Radford, the Court invalidated the Frazier-Lemke Farm Bankruptcy Act as an uncompensated taking from secured creditors. Roosevelt was, by all accounts, furious — and Black Monday became the proximate cause of his 1937 court-packing plan, which failed in Congress but is generally credited with prompting the “switch in time” that produced the more deferential commerce-clause and administrative-law jurisprudence of Jones & Laughlin Steel and the decades that followed. The nondelegation doctrine the Court announced in Schechter has, famously, not been used to strike down a federal statute since — though it has been the subject of growing interest from the current Court's conservative majority, which makes the ninety-first anniversary of Black Monday more than just a historical footnote.Former President Joe Biden has sued the Department of Justice to block the release of audio recordings and transcripts from his interview with Special Counsel Robert Hur, the prosecutor who investigated Biden's handling of classified documents and declined to bring charges. According to the filing, Biden argues that releasing the recordings would skirt federal law restricting disclosure of materials gathered in a special counsel probe, and would effectively turn protected investigative material into political fodder. The suit follows a 2024 Freedom of Information Act action by the conservative Heritage Foundation seeking the same recordings, and comes against the backdrop of repeated efforts by the current administration to make Hur-era material public — efforts the Biden team has argued are intended to embarrass the former president rather than to serve any legitimate investigative or oversight function. The transcripts of the Hur interviews were released back in 2024, but the audio itself has been the subject of executive privilege fights ever since. Worth watching for what the court does with the privilege claims, and for how the Special Counsel regulations are treated now that there is an ex-president on each side of these disputes.Former President Biden sues DOJ over release of interview audio | ReutersThe Trump administration is asking a California federal judge to throw out an expanded challenge to its sweeping reorganization of the federal workforce, calling the litigation a “litigation safari.” In a Friday motion to dismiss filed in AFGE v. Trump, the administration urged Judge Susan Illston to toss a supplemental complaint that broadened the case to cover, among other things, the downsizing of FEMA and a set of forward-looking workforce planning documents the administration issued last October. The original suit, filed in April 2025 by a coalition including the American Federation of Government Employees, SEIU, and the cities of Chicago, Baltimore, and San Francisco, challenged layoffs and reorganizations at more than twenty federal agencies. Judge Illston enjoined the workforce plans last May, but the Supreme Court stayed her injunction in July, and she has since declined to dismiss the case outright.The administration's argument is essentially jurisdictional: that the October planning documents are too tentative to constitute “final agency action,” that there is no specific DHS order behind the FEMA contract lapses the plaintiffs point to, and that individual FEMA terminations must run through the administrative civil-service process rather than land in district court. The “litigation safari” framing — that the plaintiffs are simply “roving the executive branch to explore various employment issues” — is rhetorically catchy but glosses over the more interesting underlying question: how cleanly the Administrative Procedure Act's “final agency action” requirement maps onto a coordinated, rolling, and openly cross-agency reorganization. A ruling on the dismissal motion is expected later this summer.Trump Admin Looks To Ax Expanded Suit Over Staffing Cuts - Law360Billionaire insurance magnate Greg Lindberg was sentenced in the Western District of North Carolina to twelve years in federal prison across two separate criminal cases — eighty-seven months on charges that he tried to bribe the state's insurance commissioner, and 144 months on wire-fraud charges arising from a $2 billion scheme in which prosecutors said he treated the insurance companies he controlled as a personal piggy bank. The sentences will run concurrently. Judge Max Cogburn also entered a preliminary restitution order of $1.6 billion based on a court-appointed special master's recommendation, which Lindberg's defense team described as the largest restitution award in state history.Prosecutors said the scheme harmed more than two hundred thousand victims, most of them elderly annuity holders, at least twenty thousand of whom died before any promised payouts arrived. The bribery case has its own complicated history — Lindberg was first convicted in 2020, had that conviction vacated by the Fourth Circuit in 2022 over faulty jury instructions, and was reconvicted on retrial in 2024. He pleaded guilty to the separate wire-fraud and money-laundering counts in November 2024. Judge Cogburn credited Lindberg's “extraordinary cooperation” with prosecutors and the special master, but also noted, with what reads like real exasperation in the transcript, that Lindberg has continued to file pro se civil lawsuits against the insurance companies he once owned and that the case illustrates how much of our regulatory apparatus can be “bought and sold like sacks of potatoes.” The government had sought roughly fourteen and a half years; Lindberg had asked for four.‘Regretful' Billionaire Gets 12 Years For $2B Fraud, Bribery - Law360The Colorado Supreme Court ruled unanimously that a debt buyer suing a consumer must attach to its complaint a non-affidavit writing that actually shows the buyer owns that consumer's debt — not just a generic bill of sale showing that the buyer purchased some bundle of receivables from the original creditor. The case, Wright v. Portfolio Recovery Associates, involved a $671.29 Victoria's Secret credit-card balance that Comenity Bank had sold to Portfolio Recovery in 2018. Portfolio Recovery's complaint attached a bill of sale and an affidavit identifying the last four digits of Wright's account number, and the lower courts found that sufficient under Colorado's Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. The Colorado Supreme Court, in the first opinion authored by recently appointed Justice Susan Blanco, reversed and held the affidavit could not cure a complaint that didn't first satisfy the statute's non-affidavit-writing requirement.The practical consequence is significant: the four largest debt buyers alone filed close to forty thousand cases in Colorado county courts between 2013 and 2015, accounting for around eight percent of the state's county-court civil docket, and many of those complaints have historically relied on exactly the kind of generic bill-of-sale-plus-affidavit packaging the court just rejected. Consumer advocates argue the ruling will help consumers — most of whom never had any relationship with the debt buyer — understand and respond to the suits filed against them; the debt-buying industry will, in the near term, need to retool its pleading practices statewide.Colo. Justices Say Debt Buyer Must Show It Owns The Debt - Law360 This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

In a timely episode, host Jim Reeder is joined by attorney, experienced poll worker, and current president of the ABA Michelle Behnke to discuss the American election system and the role of lawyers in that system. It might seem we're a long way from the notorious practice of voting from the cemetery, but are we? (Spoiler: we are).  It seems like many Americans are becoming more skeptical about our current election system. And, as Behnke says, whenever there are humans in a process, there's always a chance for error. But today's technology and redundancies have made voting more secure than ever, even if allegations of cheating creep into the news cycle. Not only is she a business attorney, but Behnke has served as a poll worker and watched the system work as designed.  Hear about Behnke's personal experience and how it built her confidence in the registration and voting process.  So where do lawyers fit in? And how can you get involved and inspire confidence? Get out there as a poll watcher or even an election official. The system needs you. As Behnke bites, “As lawyers, we are made for serving in that role.”  Also in this episode, quick tips from Lauren Williams as she discusses centering yourself. Have a question, comment, or suggestion for an upcoming episode? Get in touch at MRogson@SkywardInsurance.com or JAReederJr@gmail.com.  Resources Mentioned:  “Become a Poll Worker,” United States Election Assistance Commission American Bar Association American Bar Association Litigation Section Subscribe to Litigation Radio: https://play.megaphone.fm/rhyxdryztyy2v3itq6sdlq Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

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.

Jim Pattillo is a litigation partner and litigation practice group chair at Christian & Small, a law firm based in Alabama and Mississippi. With more than 20 years of trial experience and over 70 trials to verdict, Jim represents insurers and corporate clients in high-stakes litigation and is frequently called in for complex, high-exposure matters. In addition to his practice, Jim plays a key role in the firm's growth and talent development efforts, with a strong focus on training younger lawyers, building high-performance teams, and creating a culture of accountability and excellence. He also holds a master's degree in mass communication from the University of Florida, giving him a unique perspective on how legal strategy, client communication, and business development intersect. Jim is a frequent speaker and writer on litigation strategy, trial readiness, and law firm leadership. WHAT'S COVERED IN THIS EPISODE ABOUT SCALING A LITIGATION PRACTICE Law firms say associates are their most important resource, but many are still treating them primarily as billing units. Work gets pushed down with no relationship behind it, and younger lawyers are left figuring things out by asking another associate or a paralegal how a partner likes things done. That might keep files moving, but it doesn't build the kind of lawyers clients ask to have on their next case. Jim Pattillo's litigation group at Christian & Small went from three associates to roughly 15 in about four years, across three offices. That growth required more than hiring. It meant making partners accessible, helping associates understand not just the work but the business behind it, and being intentional about training rather than expecting people to pick it up by osmosis. From Monday morning team meetings to monthly associate lunches to a review process where associates tell the firm what they think they need, the investment is planned, tracked, and measured. In this episode of The Lawyer's Edge, Elise Holtzman talks with Jim Pattillo of Christian & Small about what real investment in younger lawyers looks like, why work product quality is the best business development tool, how to maintain consistency across a growing litigation team, and what law firm leaders miss about the connection between culture and profitability. 2:09 - The false dichotomy between culture and profitability 4:16 - Why younger lawyers need to be in the office to learn 5:42 - What drove the firm's growth from 3 associates to 15 6:51 - Being intentional about training, not just hiring 11:37 - Why work product quality is your best business development tool 13:30 - How AI changes the associate role without replacing it 15:22 - The constant pull between producing and leading 19:16 - What equity partners need to understand about profitability 20:19 - The rule of thirds and helping associates see themselves as assets 25:28 - Hiring for soft skills and letting lawyers be themselves 27:56 - What associates actually need from their firms MENTIONED IN SCALING A LITIGATION PRACTICE WITHOUT LOSING WHAT MAKES IT WORK Christian & Small, LLP | LinkedIn Jim Pattillo on LinkedIn Marcie Borgal Shunk and Sona Spencer | The Death of Apprenticeship: What it Means for Lawyers and Law Firms Get connected with the coaching team: hello@thelawyersedge.com The Lawyer's Edge SPONSOR FOR THIS EPISODE This episode is brought to you by the coaching team at The Lawyer's Edge, a training and coaching firm that has been focused exclusively on lawyers and law firms since 2008. Each member of the team is a trained, certified, and experienced professional coach—and either a former practicing attorney or a former law firm marketing and business development professional. Whatever your professional objectives, our coaches can help you achieve your goals more quickly, more easily, and with significantly less stress. To get connected with your coach, fill out our contact form.

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

On today's episode of BakerHosts, we give businesses a clear, practical roadmap for navigating tariff refunds and the litigation risks that follow.Questions and comments: JSingerBrady@bakerlaw.com; kcutts@bakerlaw.com

Law school teaches you how to brief a case, but it rarely teaches you how to talk to a jury. In this episode of the ABA Law Student Podcast, host Eve Albert sits down with Alicia Hawthorne, known online as The Luncheon Lawyer. Alicia, an immigration and criminal defense attorney, shares how her side hustle as a legal content creator serves as a "global crash course" in understanding the public's perspective on legal issues.Alicia also dives deep into the "theater-to-law" pipeline, explaining how improv and community theater skills are the ultimate tools for thinking on your feet in front of a judge. From battling imposter syndrome and ageism to the ethical tightrope of saying "allegedly," this episode is a masterclass in building an authentic legal brand in the digital age.(00:00) - Intro (02:14) - – Introducing Alicia Hawthorne: The Luncheon Lawyer (03:35) - – Career Pivot: The Reality of Prosecution vs. Defense (05:25) - – Shopping Around: Why You Don't Need All the Answers at Graduation (06:30) - – Overcoming Ageism and Stereotypes in the Legal Field (08:44) - – Building a Reputation: Letting Your Work Speak for Itself (10:04) - – Navigating Imposter Syndrome and Public Scrutiny (13:07) - – Using Social Media Comments as a "Free Juror Pool" (14:50) - – Learning the Art of Talking to People (Not Just Statutes) (17:13) - – Who Follows Legal Influencers? Bridging the Gap for Laymen (19:08) - – The Theater-to-Law Pipeline: Improv Skills in Court (21:02) - – Embracing Embarrassment to Become a Better Trial Lawyer (22:18) - – The Future of The Luncheon Lawyer: Media and Ethics (24:17) - – The Ethics of "Allegedly" and Dealing with Backlash (26:54) - – Setting Boundaries: Content Creation vs. Real Practice (28:39) - – Best Advice for Students: Staying Calm Under Pressure (31:50) - – Host Debrief: Applying Theater Skills to the Law (35:15) - – Strategic Anger vs. Professional Decorum in Litigation (39:02) - – Modern Legal Marketing: From Yellow Pages to TikTok (42:15) - – The Risks and Rewards of a Digital Brand (45:45) - – Closing and ABA Law Student Division Resources Click here to view the episode transcript.

What is the CLARITY Act? Maybe the most important piece of financial legislation in a generation. This podcast explains the history of U.S. digital asset regulation, why regulation-by-enforcement failed and what the CLARITY Act addresses, plus remaining steps for this to become law.Guests:Lewis Cohen, Partner & Co-Chair of CahillNXT's Digital Assets & Emerging Technology practiceMiles Jennings, Head of Policy & General Counsel for a16z cryptoSarah Brennan, general counsel at Delphi VenturesKyle Bligen, Head of Policy and Public Affairs at the Decentralization Research CenterMiller Whitehouse-Levine, CEO at Solana Policy InstituteDugan Bliss, Head of Litigation at BinanceBy the end of this episode, I promise you'll be in the 99th percentile for understanding CLARITY, regardless of whether you're a lawyer, builder or operator. Timestamps:0:00 Intro4:46 Explaining market structure6:05 Regulatory distortion10:43 Predecessor bills13:35 Senate Banking markup takeaways 15:46 SEC & CFTC20:37 The Securities Act of 193323:07 The Howey Test25:26 The Ineluctable Modality of Securities Law 28:51 SEC enforcement32:32 Why SEC rulemaking isn't enough37:36 Titles of CLARITY40:00 Digital commodities47:29 Investment contract principles 54:10 Promoters: originators58:18 Promoters: related persons 1:04:13 Token taxonomy 1:11:02 Ancillary asset requirements1:19:34 The certification process 1:28:32 Remaining hurdles for CLARITY1:34:50 Stablecoin yield1:38:45 Ethics 1:45:50 Tax consequences 1:48:54 Thanking people working on the bill, such as @SenLummis, @gillibrandny, @SenatorTimScott, @SenatorHagerty, @SenThomTillis, @MarkWarner, @SenRubenGallego, @Sen_Alsobrooks, their staffs & many, many others.Newsletter: I'm re-launching the Law of Code newsletter soon: you can ⁠⁠⁠stay updated on emerging tech law for free here⁠⁠⁠. https://www.lawofcode.fm/Any feedback on this episode? Or how to improve the podcast? ⁠⁠Click here⁠⁠. https://forms.gle/W4d2a5aHuLJjuNdn7Disclaimer: This podcast is for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal or investment advice. Views expressed by guests are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of their employers. Listening to this podcast does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Featuring: Maria Aiello, NextGen Committee Co-Chair and Associate Attorney, The Upper Deck CompanyHost: Landis Barber, Safran Law OfficesIn this episode of Highlight Reel Headlines, host Landis Barber is joined by Maria Aiello for a conversation recorded on site in Chicago at the SLA Annual Conference. The episode opens with the College Sports Commission's arbitration win, including discussion of the arbitrator's findings on “Associated Entities,” valid business purpose requirements, and the warehousing of NIL rights. From there, the conversation turns to former Ohio University football coach Brian Smith's wrongful termination lawsuit. Landis and Maria then examine a significant decision in the Chicago Cubs' ongoing rooftop litigation. In addition, the episode covers the NFL referees' newly approved collective bargaining agreement. Finally, the conversation closes with reflections on the Sports Lawyers Association Annual Conference in Chicago. Join us as we roll through the headlines!

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

PREVIEW for Later Today: Michael Toth explains the trend of investing in litigation trials for profit. He highlights how Russian oligarchs utilize this legal investment strategy to evade international sanctions and gain specific benefits from the American tax code.1936 NYC

You can buy attention—but you can't buy trust. Megan Kiefer built a firm where clients don't just leave reviews—they bring gifts, stay in touch, and trust her with moments that have nothing to do with a case. That level of connection isn't accidental. It comes from a deliberate decision to stay close to the client, push cases aggressively, and never treat people like volume. If you're ready to dominate search and turn your stellar reputation into a predictable pipeline of high-value cases, head over to Rankings.io. On this episode, you'll learn: The “all gas, no brakes” litigation approach, and why waiting kills value. How filing suit early changes leverage and accelerates outcomes. Why deep client relationships drive better reviews, referrals, and results. How purpose—not scale—can become your firm's biggest competitive advantage. If you like what you hear, hit Subscribe. We do this every week. Buy tickets for PIMCON 2026: https://hubs.li/Q04bf9vT0 Subscribe to our newsletter:  newsletter.rankings.io Get Social! Personal Injury Mastermind (PIM) powered by Rankings.io is on Instagram | YouTube | TikTok

Today on the show: rising standup comedian and Albany native Anthony Robustiano joins us ahead of his biggest hometown show yet this Friday at The Egg.  We talk about how his standup career started, how it almost ended, his approach to building millions of followers on social media, his main concern about his upcoming hometown show, and why he has a bone to pick with Team 2BD.  Use code BUTTONS for 25% off a pair of tickets to Anthony's show: https://www.tixr.com/groups/theegg/events/anthony-robustiano-175658 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.

State attorneys general have been playing an increasingly important role in American law and politics in recent years, as I discussed in my recent podcast interview of former New Jersey attorney general Matthew Platkin. Continuing the conversation on this interesting evolution, last week I interviewed Rob Bonta, the 34th attorney general of our nation's largest state, California.We began by discussing Rob's early life, including how he immigrated to California with his family as an infant, and his legal career, including his service in the San Francisco City Attorney's Office and the California State Assembly. We then turned to current events, including the Supreme Court's recent ruling in Louisiana v. Callais; the 67 lawsuits his office has filed against the Trump administration since January 2025, including election-related cases; and Rob's own future plans, including whether he might run someday for the U.S. Senate or governor of California.I've known Rob for decades, ever since we were members of an informal (and very small) group of Filipino-American students at Yale Law School. Rob is now the first person of Filipino descent to serve as California's AG—making him an especially fitting guest for May, which is Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander (AANHPI) Heritage Month.Thanks to Rob for reconnecting with me and for sharing his thoughts on a wide range of timely topics.Show Notes:* Rob Bonta bio, Office of the Attorney General of the State of California* Rob Bonta bio, WikipediaSponsored by:NexFirm helps Biglaw attorneys become founding partners. To learn more about how NexFirm can help you launch your firm, call 212-292-1000 or email careerdevelopment@nexfirm.com. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit davidlat.substack.com/subscribe