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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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