Eight years ago, I was googling something case-related and stumbled onto a page of tentative rulings posted by the Contra Costa Superior Court.If you don’t practice in California: before a hearing, many courts post the judge’s tentative written ruling on
Connecticut just changed the AI hiring playbook: employers can no longer defend a discrimination claim by saying the algorithm made the decision.What Actually HappenedGovernor Lamont signed Public Act 26-15 in May, creating a two-phase compliance framework for employers using AI
If you want to understand elder abuse law, you can read the appellate decisions.You should.But appellate decisions are not the whole game.Subscribe nowA lot of litigation is decided in the day-to-day
California is home to both the AI industry and roughly 10% of the U.S. workforce, so when California starts asking how AI will affect jobs, employers should pay attention.But the first thing to understand about Governor Newsom’s May 21 executive
New York’s fashion model laws now cover two different uses of AI in advertising.
In Bartz v. Anthropic, the court gave Anthropic a major win on AI training: using lawfully acquired books to train Claude was fair use. But Anthropic did not get the same protection for books it allegedly downloaded from pirate libraries.That’s
From vicarious liability for a shooting to data destruction by a careless AI, to (allegedly) broken promises about driverless cars to fights over governance of one of the biggest AI organizations — the number of “theories of liability” connected to
