Crandall Melvin Professor of Law Shubha Ghosh, Director of the Syracuse Intellectual Property Law Institute, commented that the recent summary judgment in favor of Thomson Reuters in their lawsuit claiming copyright infringement against Ross Intelligence’s use of artificial intelligence (AI) was a “strong victory.”
“The trial will proceed, [but] Thomson Reuters was awarded a summary judgment, a victory at this stage of the litigation,” Ghosh said in a Tech Crunch interview. “The judge also affirmed that Ross wasn’t entitled to summary judgment on its defenses, such as fair use and merger. As a consequence, the case continues to trial with a strong victory for Thomson Reuters.”
Nassau notes that the earned income tax credit, or EITC, a refundable tax break for low- to moderate-income workers, is a common target.
“There are people who claim it improperly for one reason or another,” said Nassau. “It can be confusing,” with eligibility based on earnings, residency, and family size.
Professor Katherine Macfarlane spoke with Bloomberg for the story “74 Lawsuits Have Been Filed to Stop Trump, Most in a Handful of Courts”. The article examines where lawsuits challenging President Trump’s executive orders are being filed.
Macfarlane, an expert in federal civil procedure, said that in politically charged cases, at least some amount of “macro” strategy around where to file has become standard.
Political protections like life tenure haven’t “been enough to give parties confidence that it doesn’t matter who you’re in front of,” she said.
Macfarlane’s recent article “Constitutional Case Assignment”, published in the North Carolina Law Review, addressed judge-shopping and case assignment in the federal district courts, and is available here: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4539837.”
Dean Terence Lau, a former international trade expert at Ford Motor, spoke with CNBC on automotive industry tariffs being proposed by President Trump.
Lau said that the automotive industry is built on free trade as is adaptable to change. “The car industry can adjust to anything. Really, it can. It’s always going to make product that customers want to buy because personal mobility and transportation is a human need all around the world,” he said. “What the car industry cannot do well is pivot on a dime.”
Lau argued that a single-digit tariff can be a “nuisance,” but once they hit 10% or more, that’s when additional costs can really begin eating into the margin on products.
Dr. Amanda Higginson L’25 and Dr. Tobias Mattei L’25 are featured in the ABA Journal article “Jurist Doctors: Physicians Return to Law School for New Challenges.” The article examines the trend of physicians returning to school to obtain a law degree. Higginson and Mattei attended the College of Law’s hybrid online JDinteractive program.
Dr. Mattei, Chief of Spine Surgery and Associate Professor, Division of Neurological Surgery at St. Louis University, decided to attend law school during COVID-19 to assist in his review of potential legal cases and other instances where he was an expert witness.
Dr. Tobias Mattei L’25
“I just wanted to be smarter than the attorneys I was dealing with, to make sure I could understand the framework” of legal cases,” says the spinal cord specialist who has a few patent applications. “Very few doctors, especially neurosurgeons, have this special knowledge.”
Dr. Higginson, Associate Dean for Student Affairs, Clinical Sciences, and Clinical Professor of Pediatrics at the Brody School of Medicine at East Carolina University, is a U.S. Navy veteran who used the GI Bill to attend the College of Law.
“Our office handles all of the policies surrounding the medical students,” she says. “I view those now in a slightly different way, in terms of the language used.”
Some people know from an early age that they want to be lawyers. For others, the path to a law degree comes later, shaped by life experiences and schooling. What is undeniable is that a J.D. degree offers incredible flexibility to chart a successful career, no matter the challenges or circumstances that come along the way.
That’s the experience of Danielle Wild L’15, an Associate Teaching Professor at Syracuse Law and a member of the Legal Communication and Research (LCR) faculty.
Wild’s path back to her alma mater—and into teaching—was not direct or fully intentional.
She originally planned to pursue a career as a forensic psychologist, earning a B.A. in Psychology with a minor in Criminal Justice at Roberts Wesleyan College (now University). During her undergraduate studies, she became more aware of and passionate about restorative justice, the Innocence Project, and wrongful convictions.
“When my interests started going in that direction, I decided to graduate early and gain experience in the legal field,” she explains. “Several professors encouraged me to consider law school. I worked as a paralegal for a year, and that confirmed I wanted go this route [to law school].”
While she applied to many law schools, she chose Syracuse Law to stay close to family and accommodate fast life changes. “I grew up in Syracuse, and my whole family is here,” she says. “I was living in Rochester when I decided I wanted to go to law school. I got married a month before starting law school while my husband was finishing graduate school. We decided we wanted to stay near family.”
That decision turned out to be a very fulfilling one for Wild. At Syracuse Law, she competed on the National Trial Team and was a member of the Moot Court Honor Society (now the Travis H.D. Lewin Advocacy Honor Society). Additionally, she served as the Secretary of the Justinian Honor Society, a Law Ambassador, and an editor on the Syracuse Law Review. As a 3L, she was a Legal Communication and Research Assistant to Professor Shannon Gardner.
Wild remembers law school fondly: “I loved law school. I made the most of a variety of opportunities while here. I thrived, and as soon as I left, I missed it. A part of me always thought I’d return to academia, but I didn’t expect to teach until later in my career.”
After graduating, Wild worked at a criminal defense firm in Rochester for two years, handling a spectrum of criminal matters at trial and on appeal. Working at the firm ended up not being a good fit for Wild for various reasons, and when starting a family came into the picture, the flexibility of her J.D. became a lynchpin for her next career step: opening a solo practice focused on criminal appeals and post-conviction advocacy.
“I opened a solo practice because of the flexibility and autonomy it gave me. My first son was only a few months old when I left the firm. I quickly wrapped up my trial cases and focused on appellate work, which gave me more control over my schedule. What started as a necessity based on life circumstances turned into a successful practice. I carved out a niche in the Rochester area and earned a strong reputation. I received some offers to join other firms over the years, but I declined them because I couldn’t see myself practicing law any other way.”
While her practice continued to grow, along with her involvement in the Monroe County Bar Association, the call to return to law school beckoned in Fall 2022, when she was presented with an opportunity to join the Syracuse Law faculty as an adjunct professor. “The doors started opening to teach classes here and there. I loved it, and that led me to pursue a full-time position,” she says.
“I prioritize the mastery of skills alongside legal doctrine. I try to show students how what they’re learning translates into practice and informs the everyday work that lawyers do.”
—Danielle Wild L’15
That full-time position came to fruition in Spring 2024, when Wild joined the LCR faculty, also teaching courses in criminal law and advocacy. Wild draws on her experiences both as a firm lawyer and solo practitioner to shape her teaching.
“I prioritize the mastery of skills alongside legal doctrine,” Wild explains. “I try to show students how what they’re learning translates into practice and informs the everyday work that lawyers do. In my legal writing classes, for example, we work through a mock case over the semester. We begin with preliminary research to understand a discrete area of law, then engage in fact-gathering—such as a client consultation or other simulated exercise—before conducting additional research and refining our analysis. We translate that work into legal writing. I believe this approach helps students see legal analysis as an essential skill and understand how it fits into real-world practice.”
Wild and Setzer meet to discuss coursework in Dineen Hall.
Julian Setzer L’25 had Professor Wild for LCR II and was so impressed with her teaching style he is now taking her Appellate Advocacy class. “Professor Wild communicates her goals for the class very clearly since in law school, there’s not a lot of black and white, there’s a ton of gray areas. The assignment she has given us in the appellate class is very practical.”
“I identify with the level of professionalism and work ethic that it takes to be a professor, a practitioner, and a parent and at the same time be a decent human being. To do all that and smile through it is an admirable trait.”
—Julian Setzer L’25
Wild’s career path is a testament to the versatility of a J.D. degree—one that helped her find her way back to her alma mater and a place she loves.
“I identify with the level of professionalism and work ethic that it takes to be a professor, a practitioner, and a parent and at the same time be a decent human being. To do all that and smile through it is an admirable trait. And I think every law student should take Professor Wild to learn how to achieve that,” says Setzer.
Being able to make your point clearly and concisely. Your reader should only need to read your work once to understand—and agree with—your analysis or argument.
I often tell my students to think of legal analysis like a lab report. Legal analysis is a thought experiment, and like a lab report, it must be meticulously structured and detailed so the reader can follow each step, replicate the experiment, and reach the same result.
University Professor David Driesen discussed the “unitary executive” theory with ABC News.
In the article “Trump and the ‘unitary executive’: The presidential power theory driving his 2nd term”, Driesen says “I think they are setting up test cases, and this Supreme Court is very likely to expand the theory and overrule other cases that are in tension with it.”
The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit will hold oral arguments at Syracuse University College of Law on March 28 from 10 A.M. to 11:30 A.M. The oral arguments are free and open to the public. Seating is limited.
The court session will be held in the Melanie Gray Ceremonial Courtroom in Dineen Hall, 950 Irving Avenue, Syracuse, NY 13244.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit is one of the thirteen United States Courts of Appeals. Its territory covers the states of Connecticut, New York, and Vermont, and it has appellate jurisdiction over the U.S. district courts in the following federal judicial districts: District of Connecticut. Eastern District of New York. Northern District of New York. Southern District of New York, Western District of New York, and District of Vermont.
The U.S. Court of Appeals sits just below the Supreme Court of the United States in the judicial branch of the federal government.
“The Court of Appeals from the Second Circuit is one of the most influential courts in the country. It is of great honor for the College of Law to host the Court and provide our students, faculty, and the community at large an opportunity to see jurisprudence in action at the highest level,” says College of Law Dean Terence Lau.
The case and panel of judges will be updated by the Court on their calendar closer to the court session date.
Cameras and video recording devices are not permitted in the courtroom during arguments.
Professor Gregory Germain spoke with Newsweek for the story “Can Pam Bondi Reverse Donald Trump’s Conviction? Experts Weigh In”.
“She [Attorney General Pam Bondi] has no power over the state courts. She can try to investigate and harass the D.A. and the judge maybe, although I don’t think the courts will put up with political interference,” said Germain.
Professor Katherine Macfarlane’s article “Higher Education’s Accommodations Mistake” was recently accepted for publication in the Georgetown Law Journal, where it will be published this Fall. A draft of Professor Macfarlane’s article is available here.
The article examines the “fundamental alteration” defense, which applies to claims brought pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and how the defense impacts reasonable accommodation requests made by undergraduate and graduate students with disabilities. Professor Macfarlane is a leading expert in disability law and higher education accommodations.
She directs the College’s Disability Law & Policy Program and teaches Constitutional Law, Disability Law, and Civil Rights Litigation.
