The legal playbook is being rewritten—and strategic counsel must adapt.
From bold moves in corporate reincorporation to what qualifies as fair game in digital marketing, courts are redefining how attorneys approach litigation across the country.
Recent rulings across product liability, commercial litigation, and intellectual property are delivering fresh guidance on how courts interpret critical legal questions.
Here are three pivotal rulings—and their implications for practitioners looking to stay ahead of the curve.
Tripadvisor Ruling: Business Judgment Rule Gets a Boost
Maffei v. Palkon
Corporate/Commercial Litigation
In February 2025, the Delaware Supreme Court overturned the Chancery Court’s earlier decision in the Tripadvisor case, ruling that a corporation’s decision to reincorporate in another jurisdiction is protected by the business judgment rule—provided there’s no pending or imminent litigation or conflicts of interest.
This notably shifts the legal standard away from “entire fairness”, restoring broader discretion to corporate directors and providing a firmer legal foundation for reincorporation strategies—particularly to management-friendly states like Nevada.
Key Takeaway For Case Strategy
Litigators and governance advisors should now view reincorporation as a viable, proactive defense mechanism—especially for boards anticipating shareholder activism or legal challenges. This decision underscores the importance of preemptive governance planning and paves the way for legal teams to assert greater autonomy in jurisdictional choices.
Fitbit Case: A Warning Shot on Product Hazard Disclosure
Fitbit v. US Consumer Product Safety Commission
Product Liability
Fitbit’s $12.25 million civil penalty for failing to timely report serious burn hazards associated with its Ionic smartwatches marks a watershed moment in product safety enforcement.
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) found that Fitbit delayed notifying the agency despite receiving dozens of injury reports, violating mandatory reporting obligations. As part of the settlement, Fitbit agreed to implement stronger compliance protocols and submit ongoing reports to the CPSC.
Key Takeaway For Case Strategy
This case underscores regulators’ growing intolerance for delays in product hazard reporting. Product liability teams and corporate counsel should prioritize real-time internal reporting protocols and early disclosures—not only to remain compliant but also to establish a record of good faith that can prove crucial in litigation or settlement contexts.
Google Ads & IP: Trademark “Conquesting” Gets a Pass
Lerner & Rowe PC v. Brown Engstrand & Shely LLC
Intellectual Property
In a landmark decision from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, the court clarified the scope of trademark protection under the Lanham Act in the context of digital advertising.
Arizona law firm Accident Law Group (ALG) had purchased “Lerner & Rowe” as a Google Ads keyword—prompting the much larger Lerner & Rowe firm to sue for trademark infringement. The court ruled in favor of ALG, affirming that buying a competitor’s name as a keyword does not in itself violate the Lanham Act.
Key Takeaway For Case Strategy
This strengthens the legal footing for competitive keyword advertising. Plaintiffs will now face a higher burden to show actual consumer confusion or misleading ad content, not just intent. For defense teams, this ruling offers a solid precedent to argue that keyword bidding falls within the bounds of legitimate fair competition in digital marketing.
Why Strategic Litigators Partner with AP Expert Group
When the rules shift, clarity matters.
AP Expert Group connects litigators with expert witnesses who simplify complex technical, medical, and regulatory issues—providing clear, credible analysis that can make or break your case.
As the legal terrain continues to evolve, having the right expert on your side isn’t just helpful—it’s strategic.
Join the Conversation
What recent legal ruling do you think will have the biggest impact on litigation strategy this year?
Tag us at AP Expert Group—we’d love to hear your take.