#MeToo, IP Issues Among Top Litigation Trends in 2019: Crowell Report
In-house legal departments also are increasingly using technology such as data analytics and AI to help inform and guide their litigation case strategy, the report said.
January 15, 2019 at 03:04 PM
4 minute read
In-house legal departments are facing growing challenges in 2019 from the #MeToo movement and radically evolving intellectual property landscape. But the new year also will see an increased use of technology as an aid in litigation.
At least that's the outlook from Crowell & Moring's annual report on litigation trends, Litigation Forecast 2019: What Corporate Counsel Need to Know for the Coming Year.
The report identifies about a dozen areas that should be front and center in the minds of general counsel, chief among them labor and employment, IP and the use of technology in litigation case strategy, said Mark Klapow, a partner in Crowell's litigation group in Washington, D.C., who created and edited the 35-page report.
Other areas included in the report are antitrust, environment, government contracts, torts, white collar, privacy and cybersecurity, corporate, e-discovery, health care and trade.
Employment is a hot area, Klapow said, because #MeToo has spawned state and municipal legislation that targets confidentiality and settlement agreements as well as “other perceived tools for repeat offenders to hide behind.”
“You read about these instances where someone has been accused a half-dozen times and is just hiding behind these [nondisclosure agreements] and settling, and we're seeing more laws that target that practice,” said Klapow, adding that federal lawmakers also may seek to legislate this practice.
States and municipalities also have taken action to prohibit an employer from asking a prospective employee about his or her current compensation, making “gender pay equity another area where we can expect to see some action,” he added.
On the IP front, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas did not lead in the number of patent filings last year, ceding that top position for the first time in about a dozen years to the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware—an indication of weakened IP rights, Klapow said. The Crowell report also looks at jurisdictional trends such as longest time from filing to termination—the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas with 1,420 days—and the biggest damages award in 2018—the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
“The pendulum tends to swing away from patent rights, and we're seeing companies adjust their IP strategies and more trade secret filings than we've seen in the past,” Klapow said.
The report's cover story, written by Kent Goss, a Crowell partner and member of the firm's litigation group steering committee in Los Angeles, notes the changing nature of litigation.
“The overall trend today is for companies to take fewer cases to trial, but to take the cases that are more complex and significant to the business all the way because the client needs to take a stand or a case can set precedent for a docket,” according to the article. “This drives costs up, and technologies such as analytics and AI-based automation will be needed to manage those costs.”
In fact, legal departments that aren't already using data analytics to help guide their litigation strategy are behind, Klapow said.
“It's all about understanding how fast the case is going to move, the likelihood of success on a summary judgment motion, to what extent equitable relief is likely,” he said. “For complex litigation, that's mandatory at this point. Everybody should be doing it.”
Another technological trend, Klapow added, is the use of analytics and AI in jury research, which he described as traditionally “a little bit more feel than science.”
But “the analytical tools that are available where courts allow them give you an opportunity to get more insight, in real time, into jurors and their predispositions,” he said. “It's a tool that we all need to look at where it makes sense and where it's allowed.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'The Unheard of Superpower': How Women's Soft Skills Can Drive Success in Negotiations
Tales From the Trenches: What Outside Counsel Do That GCs Find Inexcusable
Venus Williams Tells WIPL Crowd: 'Living Your Dreams Should Be Easy'
The 2024 WIPL Awards: Law Firm Mentor and Mentee Collaboration
Trending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250