LexisNexis’ Post

Precision in Policy Tracing – Coastal Research: Your Competitive Edge In the fast-paced legal world, having precise and reliable insights can make or break your case. That’s where Coastal Research comes in—delivering the kind of fast, actionable intelligence that elevates your strategy from good to unstoppable. We specialize in precision policy tracing to uncover every critical detail, empowering you to take control of negotiations and maximize your client’s settlement. Imagine walking into a negotiation armed with absolute confidence—knowing you have every policy, limit, and hidden coverage detail at your fingertips. That’s the Coastal Research difference. Our streamlined process and expert analysis give you the edge, turning uncertainty into clarity, and potential into victory. Why choose Coastal Research? Unmatched Speed: Time is crucial. We deliver insights when you need them, so you never miss a beat. Incredible Accuracy: No detail is too small. We uncover the full scope of policies, ensuring nothing is left on the table. Consistent Results: We don’t just get it right sometimes—we get it right every time. Our track record is built on delivering what others can’t. Take your case handling to the next level. Trust Coastal Research to give you the precision, speed, and reliability you need to win big. 📧 Email: cases@coastalresearch.net 📞 Phone: 208-581-4265 Visit coastalresearch.net and experience the power of precision. #PrecisionInPolicyTracing #LiabilityLimits #CoastalResearch #FastResults #ReliableInsights #AttorneyAdvantage #WinningCases #HiddenCoverage #ComprehensiveResearch #LitigationSupport #ClientSuccess #CAALA #SuitsofLaw #LegalExcellence #MaximizeSettlements #LawFirmPower

George Goss, owner of Goss Environmental Coatings Ltd and a member of TAB, shares the perspective The Alternative Board has brought to his business. TAB has helped him navigate both the big strategic challenges and the smaller, everyday issues that can feel overwhelming. With the support of like-minded business owners, George has found clarity, practical solutions, and a sense of relief knowing he’s not tackling these challenges alone. Watch to learn how TAB can provide the sounding board you need to gain perspective and move your business forward. 👉 https://lnkd.in/e9t4JG2c #BusinessPerspective #PeerSupport #SmallBusinessGrowth #TABExperience

Tools for Success: Season 8, hosted by Partners Krista Chaytor and Jeff Scorgie, continues next week on Thursday, December 5 with "Tips for Reducing Contract Headaches". Attendees will learn about what you should be doing when entering into a contract, including attaching the correct documents, accuracy of commercial terms, incorporation of documents by reference, and more. Follow the link to register and view the full schedule of key topics that will be covered this season: https://bit.ly/4f8n6yS #WFToolsForSuccess #Webinar #ConstructionLaw

Lexology Panoramic: Construction 2025, edited by Michael Zicherman, Jerry Brodsky and Denis Serkin of Peckar & Abramson, P.C., is available on Lexology: https://lnkd.in/gc8aET5S Lexology Panoramic: Quick reference guide enabling side-by-side comparison of local insights on foreign entry into the local market; licensing procedures; competition and bribery considerations; contract and insurance matters (including PPP and PFI; joint ventures; tort claims and indemnity); labour and closure of operations; rights to payment; force majeure and acts of God; dispute resolution mechanisms; environmental law; applicable investment treaties, tax treaties, currency controls, and revenue, profit and investment removal controls; and recent trends. #LexologyPanoramic

Lexology has published the latest edition of Lexology Panoramic: Construction - Dacheng Law Offices, Kinstellar and BCLP have recently joined the international panel of leading experts to contribute their respective coverage of the local frameworks of China, Ukraine and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. #LexologyPanoramic #constructionlaw

CoCounsel Drafting allows you to quickly draft a wider range of clause options. Discover how CoCounsel Drafting can help your team become more innovative and deliver more value. Watch the full webinar: https://ow.ly/YpiU50ToC4F"

Navigating the world of federal contracting? Let's share some insider tips and tricks in the comments below! From marketing to proposal writing, let's unlock the secrets to winning federal contracts. #FederalContracting #WinningStrategies

In this article, Planning and Environment Partner Aaron Gadiel explains how the Land and Environment Court has further clarified how the standard definition of ‘gross floor area’ should be applied. Read more here: https://lnkd.in/g5eF939J

The Supreme Court just overturned the long-standing principle of Chevron deference, in a 6-3 decision, holding that courts may not defer to an administrative agency's interpretation of the law simply because the statute is ambiguous and the agency interpretation is permissible, because the federal Administrative Procedures Act requires “the reviewing court,” to “decide all relevant questions of law” and “interpret . . . statutory provisions.” I have a robust administrative law practice relating to decisions of municipal and state agencies. Our state standard, in applying the Uniform Administrative Procedure Act, does not automatically provide deference to an agency's interpretation of an ambiguous statute. CT's Supreme Court has instructed that while a time-tested agency interpretation of a statute will be afforded deference, such deference is appropriate only when the agency has consistently followed its construction over a long period of time, the statutory language is ambiguous, and the agency's construction is reasonable. But, if a statute is not ambiguous, or if the agency's construction of the statute is not consistent, time-tested, and reasonable, the court's review of the agency's construction of the statute is de novo. I'm curious how others think SCOTUS's decision will impact our administrative appeals in CT? SCOTUS was guided by the language of the APA. But CT's UAPA, is less clear when it comes to interpretation of statute: "The court shall affirm the decision of the agency unless the court finds that substantial rights of the person appealing have been prejudiced because the administrative findings, inferences, conclusions, or decisions are: (1) In violation of constitutional or statutory provisions; (2) in excess of the statutory authority of the agency; (3) made upon unlawful procedure; (4) affected by other error of law; (5) clearly erroneous in view of the reliable, probative, and substantial evidence on the whole record; or (6) arbitrary or capricious or characterized by abuse of discretion or clearly unwarranted exercise of discretion." Hence, the court-made standard. https://lnkd.in/edg4zNZH #administrativelaw #scotus