<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>Texas Lawyer Podcasts and Video Blog</title>
    <link>http://www.law.com/jsp/tx/specials.jsp?p=TLpodcasts</link>
    <description>Texas lawyers discuss developments in their respective legal fields, including labor and employment, family law, insurance law, criminal law, legal malpractice, personal injury, the First Amendment, and more.</description>
    <atom:link href="http://www.texaslawyerpress.com/RSS/rss.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <language>en-us</language>
    <copyright>ALM Media Properties</copyright>
    <managingEditor>amcmillan@alm.com (Anne McMillan)</managingEditor>
    <pubDate>Fri, 12 Mar 2010 20:37:05 GMT</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Dec 2010 22:22:30 GMT</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>Absolute RSS Editor</generator>
    <docs>http://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification</docs>
    <itunes:author>Texas Lawyer</itunes:author>
    <itunes:category text="Business" />
    <itunes:category text="Government &amp; Organizations" />
    <itunes:category text="News &amp; Politics" />
    <itunes:explicit>no</itunes:explicit>
    <itunes:image href="http://www.texaslawyerpress.com/images2010/TL_logo.jpg" />
    <itunes:keywords>Texas Lawyer, law, legal, lawyers, attorney</itunes:keywords>
    <itunes:owner>
      <itunes:name>Texas Lawyer</itunes:name>
      <itunes:email>jborders@alm.com</itunes:email>
    </itunes:owner>
    <itunes:subtitle>From the editors of Texas Lawyer</itunes:subtitle>
    <itunes:summary>Podcasts and video from Texas lawyers on a variety of legal topics.</itunes:summary>
    <item>
      <title>Podcast: Objecting to the Admission of Harmful Evidence</title>
      <link>http://www.law.com/jsp/tx/specials.jsp?p=TLpodcasts#personal</link>
      <description>A trial lawyer objecting to the admission of harmful evidence must have a thorough understanding of motions in limine, objections and limiting instructions to avoid a waiver of the right to complain about the admission on appeal, says Quenting Brogdon.</description>
      <enclosure url="http://www.law.com/regionals/tx/audio/brogdon_objecting.mp3" length="4160631" type="audio/mpeg" />
      <guid isPermaLink="false">F2C5B93C-0921-4C34-B57F-73A6B8EDAD77</guid>
      <pubDate>Mon, 13 Dec 2010 22:19:36 GMT</pubDate>
      <itunes:author>Quentin Brogdon</itunes:author>
      <itunes:duration>00:05:46</itunes:duration>
      <itunes:explicit>no</itunes:explicit>
      <itunes:keywords>Quentin Brogdon, personal injury, trial, objection, motions</itunes:keywords>
      <itunes:subtitle>Objecting to the Admission of Harmful Evidence</itunes:subtitle>
      <itunes:summary>A trial lawyer objecting to the admission of harmful evidence must have a thorough understanding of motions in limine, objections and limiting instructions to avoid a waiver of the right to complain about the admission on appeal, says Quenting Brogdon.</itunes:summary>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Podcast: Citizens United, Texas Bingo and the First Amendment</title>
      <link>http://www.law.com/jsp/tx/specials.jsp?p=TLpodcasts#first</link>
      <description>Paul C. Watler says a ruling by a federal judge in Austin extends the controversial 5-4 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission that corporations have a First Amendment right to engage in free speech in support of political candidates and causes.</description>
      <enclosure url="http://www.law.com/regionals/tx/audio/watler_net_free_speech.mp3" length="4106052" type="audio/mpeg" />
      <guid isPermaLink="false">2F9229A7-F7A7-414E-BF2D-33547A04FD15</guid>
      <pubDate>Wed, 17 Nov 2010 19:02:40 GMT</pubDate>
      <itunes:author>Paul C. Watler</itunes:author>
      <itunes:duration>00:05:41</itunes:duration>
      <itunes:explicit>no</itunes:explicit>
      <itunes:keywords>Internet, free, speech, Paul, Watler, Citizens United</itunes:keywords>
      <itunes:subtitle>Citizens United, Texas Bingo and the First Amendment</itunes:subtitle>
      <itunes:summary>Paul C. Watler says a ruling by a federal judge in Austin extends the controversial 5-4 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission that corporations have a First Amendment right to engage in free speech in support of political candidates and causes.</itunes:summary>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Podcast: Deportation and Criminal Convictions</title>
      <link>http://www.law.com/jsp/tx/specials.jsp?p=TLpodcasts#criminal</link>
      <description>Gary A. Udashen outlines the five categories of crimes that can render a noncitizen deportable.</description>
      <enclosure url="http://www.law.com/regionals/tx/audio/udashen_immigration1.mp3" length="5843001" type="audio/mpeg" />
      <guid isPermaLink="false">0E703856-EB64-49E8-A4B2-9B48B4463281</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Oct 2010 21:05:14 GMT</pubDate>
      <itunes:author>Gary A. Udashen</itunes:author>
      <itunes:duration>00:08:06</itunes:duration>
      <itunes:explicit>no</itunes:explicit>
      <itunes:keywords>Gary Udashen, immigration, criminal, defense</itunes:keywords>
      <itunes:subtitle>Deportation and Criminal Convictions</itunes:subtitle>
      <itunes:summary>Gary A. Udashen outlines the five categories of crimes that can render a noncitizen deportable.</itunes:summary>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Podcast: Proving Personal-Injury Damages to a Jury</title>
      <link>http://www.law.com/jsp/tx/specials.jsp?p=TLpodcasts#personal</link>
      <description>Maximizing damages is perhaps the most difficult task for trial lawyers who represent victims of wrongdoing, says Quentin Brogdon. The lawyer must make the jury feel the victim's injuries, pain and suffering without causing jurors to believe they are being manipulated.</description>
      <enclosure url="http://www.law.com/regionals/tx/audio/brogdon_PI.mp3" length="3981938" type="audio/mpeg" />
      <guid isPermaLink="false">C51B2593-B38F-48B5-8979-233D0A0CFE97</guid>
      <pubDate>Wed, 20 Oct 2010 18:35:09 GMT</pubDate>
      <itunes:author>Quentin Brogdon</itunes:author>
      <itunes:duration>00:05:31</itunes:duration>
      <itunes:explicit>no</itunes:explicit>
      <itunes:keywords>Quentin Brogdon, personal injury, trial, torts, damages</itunes:keywords>
      <itunes:subtitle>Proving Personal-Injury Damages to a Jury</itunes:subtitle>
      <itunes:summary>Maximizing damages is perhaps the most difficult task for trial lawyers who represent victims of wrongdoing, says Quentin Brogdon. The lawyer must make the jury feel the victim's injuries, pain and suffering without causing jurors to believe they are being manipulated.</itunes:summary>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Podcast: A Criminal-Defense Lawyer's Duties Regarding the Immigration Consequences of a Criminal Conviction</title>
      <link>http://www.law.com/jsp/tx/specials.jsp?p=TLpodcasts#criminal</link>
      <description>Gary A. Udashen says that a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling means that defense attorneys have a new duty to provide competent advice regarding any possible immigratioin penalties that follow from a criminal convinction. Failure to do so, he says, can be the basis for a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel.</description>
      <enclosure url="http://www.law.com/regionals/tx/audio/udashen_immigration1.mp3" length="4675200" type="audio/mpeg" />
      <guid isPermaLink="false">1DD84A90-7374-4146-9725-D276DF0D8D2C</guid>
      <pubDate>Thu, 07 Oct 2010 21:18:16 GMT</pubDate>
      <itunes:author>Gary A. Udashen</itunes:author>
      <itunes:duration>00:06:29</itunes:duration>
      <itunes:explicit>no</itunes:explicit>
      <itunes:keywords>Gary Udashen, immigration, criminal, defense</itunes:keywords>
      <itunes:subtitle>A Criminal-Defense Lawyer's Duties Regarding the Immigration Consequences of a Criminal Conviction</itunes:subtitle>
      <itunes:summary>Gary A. Udashen says that a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling means that defense attorneys have a new duty to provide competent advice regarding any possible immigratioin penalties that follow from a criminal convinction. Failure to do so, he says, can be the basis for a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel.</itunes:summary>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Podcast: Defensive Attribution in the Jury Room</title>
      <link>http://www.law.com/jsp/tx/specials.jsp?p=TLpodcasts#personal</link>
      <description>When jurors are confronted with evidence of suffering, there may be a clash between the jurors' belief in a just world and the idea of an innocent, blameless victim suffering harm, observes Quentin Brogdon. To remedy that clash, jurors may engage in "defensive attribution."</description>
      <enclosure url="http://www.law.com/regionals/tx/audio/watler_net_free_speech.mp3" length="4205138" type="audio/mpeg" />
      <guid isPermaLink="false">C40C22E0-9506-4FC6-9C4D-3CE33F6F6CCE</guid>
      <pubDate>Wed, 08 Sep 2010 21:06:54 GMT</pubDate>
      <itunes:author>Quentin Brodgon</itunes:author>
      <itunes:duration>00:05:50</itunes:duration>
      <itunes:explicit>no</itunes:explicit>
      <itunes:keywords>Quentin, Brogdon, jury, jurors, trial, defensive, attribution</itunes:keywords>
      <itunes:subtitle>Defensive Attribution in the Jury Room</itunes:subtitle>
      <itunes:summary>When jurors are confronted with evidence of suffering, there may be a clash between the jurors' belief in a just world and the idea of an innocent, blameless victim suffering harm, observes Quentin Brogdon. To remedy that clash, jurors may engage in "defensive attribution."</itunes:summary>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Podcast: Milo v. Martin: Case Applies 'Net Free-Speech Provision</title>
      <link>http://www.law.com/jsp/tx/specials.jsp?p=TLpodcasts#first</link>
      <description>Paul C. Watler tells about a ruling in the first Texas appellate court application of a federal Internet free-speech statutory provision.</description>
      <enclosure url="http://www.law.com/regionals/tx/audio/watler_net_free_speech.mp3" length="2787923" type="audio/mpeg" />
      <guid isPermaLink="false">08962D68-BCBF-42AD-AA5C-D9373631CAB7</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 31 Aug 2010 15:59:14 GMT</pubDate>
      <itunes:author>Paul C. Watler</itunes:author>
      <itunes:duration>00:03:51</itunes:duration>
      <itunes:explicit>no</itunes:explicit>
      <itunes:keywords>Internet, free, speech, Paul, Watler</itunes:keywords>
      <itunes:subtitle>Milo v. Martin: Case Applies 'Net Free-Speech Provision</itunes:subtitle>
      <itunes:summary>Paul C. Watler tells about a ruling in the first Texas appellate court application of a federal Internet free-speech statutory provision.</itunes:summary>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Podcast: Divorced With Children: 10 Tips for Tiger and Elin</title>
      <link>http://www.law.com/jsp/tx/specials.jsp?p=TLpodcasts#family</link>
      <description>Brad LaMorgese has some advice for Tiger Woods and Elin Nordegren on how to maintain an amicable post-divorce ralationship, particularly as it concerns their children. His advice can apply to any spouses who are divorced but remain linked through their children, he says.</description>
      <enclosure url="http://www.law.com/regionals/tx/audio/lamorgese_tiger.mp3" length="5618539" type="audio/mpeg" />
      <guid isPermaLink="false">662A4435-C9EA-4234-BFC9-EBD8997F55E4</guid>
      <pubDate>Thu, 26 Aug 2010 21:03:23 GMT</pubDate>
      <itunes:author>Brad LaMorgese</itunes:author>
      <itunes:duration>00:07:47</itunes:duration>
      <itunes:explicit>no</itunes:explicit>
      <itunes:keywords>Tiger, Elin, divorce, custody, children</itunes:keywords>
      <itunes:subtitle>Divorced With Children: 10 Tips for Tiger and Elin</itunes:subtitle>
      <itunes:summary>Brad LaMorgese has some advice for Tiger Woods and Elin Nordegren on how to maintain an amicable post-divorce ralationship, particularly as it concerns their children. His advice can apply to any spouses who are divorced but remain linked through their children, he says.</itunes:summary>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Podcast: Why Lawyers Should Be Candid With the Court</title>
      <link>http://www.law.com/jsp/tx/specials.jsp?p=TLpodcasts#personal</link>
      <description>Quentin Brogdon says the two most persuasive reasons to be candid with the court are that it's the right thing to do, and it's the smart thing to do. But litigators should keep in mind, he adds, that being candid also is the required thing to do.</description>
      <enclosure url="http://www.law.com/regionals/tx/audio/brogdon_candid.mp3" length="3823010" type="audio/mpeg" />
      <guid isPermaLink="false">8C9EF40C-C6CA-449D-A30D-8D658DDEB1C3</guid>
      <pubDate>Thu, 05 Aug 2010 21:12:46 GMT</pubDate>
      <itunes:author>Quentin Brogdon</itunes:author>
      <itunes:duration>00:05:18</itunes:duration>
      <itunes:explicit>no</itunes:explicit>
      <itunes:keywords>trial, litigation, civil, Brogdon, lawyer</itunes:keywords>
      <itunes:subtitle>Why Lawyers Should Be Candid With the Court</itunes:subtitle>
      <itunes:summary>Quentin Brogdon says the two most persuasive reasons to be candid with the court are that it's the right thing to do, and it's the smart thing to do. But litigators should keep in mind, he adds, that being candid also is the required thing to do.</itunes:summary>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Podcast: 20 Years With the Americans With Disabilities Act</title>
      <link>http://www.law.com/jsp/tx/specials.jsp?p=TLpodcasts#labor</link>
      <description>Michael P. Maslanka, managing partner of Ford &amp; Harrison in Dallas, looks back at the impact of the landmark legislation.</description>
      <author>mmaslanka@fordharrison.com</author>
      <enclosure url="http://www.law.com/regionals/tx/audio/maslanka_ADA.mp3" length="2278523" type="audio/mpeg" />
      <guid isPermaLink="false">990E1D94-9B4F-4421-AC7A-FA8B77CFFB1F</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 30 Jul 2010 21:02:02 GMT</pubDate>
      <itunes:author>Michael P. Maslanka</itunes:author>
      <itunes:duration>00:03:09</itunes:duration>
      <itunes:explicit>no</itunes:explicit>
      <itunes:keywords>ADA, disabilities, labor, employment, handicap</itunes:keywords>
      <itunes:subtitle>20 Years With the Americans With Disabilities Act</itunes:subtitle>
      <itunes:summary>Michael P. Maslanka, managing partner of Ford &amp; Harrison in Dallas, looks back at the impact of the landmark legislation.</itunes:summary>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Podcast: Cross-Examining the Sophisticated Adverse Expert</title>
      <link>http://www.law.com/jsp/tx/specials.jsp?p=TLpodcasts#personal</link>
      <description>Contrary to popular belief, lawyers should not use the deposition of an expert to attempt to argue the expert out of his or her opinions or to prove the expert wrong in those opinions, says Quentin Brogdon. He lists some specific goals that the lawyer should use when examining the expert.</description>
      <enclosure url="http://www.law.com/regionals/tx/audio/martin_contractual_liability.mp3" length="3989473" type="audio/mpeg" />
      <guid isPermaLink="false">A3904B28-7184-463B-8BD4-F38360F44CEE</guid>
      <pubDate>Mon, 26 Jul 2010 18:40:50 GMT</pubDate>
      <itunes:author>Quentin Brogdon</itunes:author>
      <itunes:duration>00:05:32</itunes:duration>
      <itunes:explicit>no</itunes:explicit>
      <itunes:keywords>expert, witness, deposition, examining, adverse</itunes:keywords>
      <itunes:subtitle>Cross-Examining the Sophisticated Adverse Expert</itunes:subtitle>
      <itunes:summary>Contrary to popular belief, lawyers should not use the deposition of an expert to attempt to argue the expert out of his or her opinions or to prove the expert wrong in those opinions, says Quentin Brogdon. He lists some specific goals that the lawyer should use when examining the expert.</itunes:summary>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Podcast: Insurance Contractual Liability Exclusion</title>
      <link>http://www.law.com/jsp/tx/specials.jsp?p=TLpodcasts#insurance</link>
      <description>Ernest Martin says that — in light of a recent Texas Supreme Court ruling — insurance policyholders should prepare to defend against insurance companies' anticipated denials of coverage for claims arising our of contracts, even those contract-based claims that insurance companies have traditionally covered.</description>
      <enclosure url="http://www.law.com/regionals/tx/audio/martin_contractual_liability.mp3" length="5372177" type="audio/mpeg" />
      <guid isPermaLink="false">DFC83423-20E8-4A46-87D9-077E75EFDDAF</guid>
      <pubDate>Mon, 21 Jun 2010 16:29:44 GMT</pubDate>
      <itunes:author>Ernest Martin</itunes:author>
      <itunes:duration>00:07:27</itunes:duration>
      <itunes:explicit>no</itunes:explicit>
      <itunes:keywords>insurance, law, contract, liability, exclusion</itunes:keywords>
      <itunes:subtitle>Insurance Contractual Liability Exclusion</itunes:subtitle>
      <itunes:summary>Ernest Martin says that — in light of a recent Texas Supreme Court ruling — insurance policyholders should prepare to defend against insurance companies' anticipated denials of coverage for claims arising our of contracts, even those contract-based claims that insurance companies have traditionally covered.</itunes:summary>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Podcast: Cross Examination: A Difficult Skill to Master</title>
      <link>http://www.law.com/jsp/tx/specials.jsp?p=TLpodcasts#personal</link>
      <description>Quentin Brogdon says cross examination requires a wide variety of innate talent. But with careful study and repeated practice, any trial lawyer can learn the necessary skills.</description>
      <enclosure url="http://www.law.com/regionals/tx/audio/brogdon_cross_exam.mp3" length="3764981" type="audio/mpeg" />
      <guid isPermaLink="false">A32E6005-BC0B-4ABB-A9E6-393FF425D149</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Jun 2010 20:51:01 GMT</pubDate>
      <itunes:author>Quentin Brogdon</itunes:author>
      <itunes:duration>00:05:13</itunes:duration>
      <itunes:explicit>no</itunes:explicit>
      <itunes:keywords>cross examination, trial, defense, civil, personal injury</itunes:keywords>
      <itunes:subtitle>Cross Examination: A Difficult Skill to Master</itunes:subtitle>
      <itunes:summary>Quentin Brogdon says cross examination requires a wide variety of innate talent. But with careful study and repeated practice, any trial lawyer can learn the necessary skills.</itunes:summary>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Podcast: Five Key Employment Issues at the USSC</title>
      <link>http://www.law.com/jsp/tx/specials.jsp?p=TLpodcasts#labor</link>
      <description>The day after the U.S. Supreme Court handed down a unanimous pro-employee decision in &lt;i&gt;Lewis, et al. v. City of Chicago, Illinois&lt;/i&gt;, Michael P. Maslanka looks at five key employment law issues at the high court.</description>
      <author>mmaslanka@fordharrison.com</author>
      <enclosure url="http://www.law.com/regionals/tx/audio/maslanka_5_USSC_cases.mp3" length="3024289" type="audio/mpeg" />
      <guid isPermaLink="false">D2BBACE8-E68C-4821-BF55-F98363BF0CA1</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 25 May 2010 21:37:45 GMT</pubDate>
      <itunes:author>Michael P. Maslanka</itunes:author>
      <itunes:duration>00:04:11</itunes:duration>
      <itunes:explicit>no</itunes:explicit>
      <itunes:keywords>labor, employment, discrimination, firing, dismissal, hiring</itunes:keywords>
      <itunes:subtitle>Five Key Employment Issues at the USSC</itunes:subtitle>
      <itunes:summary>The day after the U.S. Supreme Court handed down a unanimous pro-employee decision in &lt;i&gt;Lewis, et al. v. City of Chicago, Illinois&lt;/i&gt;, Michael P. Maslanka looks at five key employment law issues at the high court.</itunes:summary>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Podcast: Can a Noncompete Be Bought for Cash?</title>
      <link>http://www.law.com/jsp/tx/specials.jsp?p=TLpodcasts#labor</link>
      <description>Michael P. Maslanka considers the question: Can money paid to an employee be consideration for an employee agreeing to a noncompete? The Dallas Court of Appeals has ruled on the matter, but now the Texas Supreme Court will take up the case.</description>
      <author>mmaslanka@fordharrison.com</author>
      <enclosure url="http://www.law.com/regionals/tx/audio/maslanka_noncompete2.mp3" length="2306715" type="audio/mpeg" />
      <guid isPermaLink="false">126C0633-EE52-46D0-A172-F0F997BD8A18</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 07 May 2010 21:16:58 GMT</pubDate>
      <itunes:author>Michael P. Maslanka</itunes:author>
      <itunes:duration>00:03:11</itunes:duration>
      <itunes:explicit>no</itunes:explicit>
      <itunes:keywords>labor, employment, noncompete, contract</itunes:keywords>
      <itunes:subtitle>Can a Noncompete Be Bought for Case?</itunes:subtitle>
      <itunes:summary>Michael P. Maslanka considers the question: Can money paid to an employee be consideration for an employee agreeing to a noncompete? The Dallas Court of Appeals has ruled on the matter, but now the Texas Supreme Court will take up the case.</itunes:summary>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Podcast: The "Pole Tax" and the First Amendment</title>
      <link>http://www.law.com/jsp/tx/specials.jsp?p=TLpodcasts#first</link>
      <description>The Texas Supreme Court recently waded into a constitutional thicket when it took up a case on the issue of whether the state may levy a tax on nude dancing clubs, says Paul Watler.</description>
      <enclosure url="http://www.law.com/regionals/tx/audio/watler_pole_tax.mp3" length="3588194" type="audio/mpeg" />
      <guid isPermaLink="false">DB2AA0BF-DD2E-4595-8D60-6011AD9D42A1</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 30 Apr 2010 20:04:38 GMT</pubDate>
      <itunes:author>Paul Watler</itunes:author>
      <itunes:duration>00:04:58</itunes:duration>
      <itunes:explicit>no</itunes:explicit>
      <itunes:keywords>First Amendment, clubs, dancing, Watler, constitution</itunes:keywords>
      <itunes:subtitle>The "Pole Tax" and the First Amendment</itunes:subtitle>
      <itunes:summary>The Texas Supreme Court recently waded into a constitutional thicket when it took up a case on the issue of whether the state may levy a tax on nude dancing clubs, says Paul Watler.</itunes:summary>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Podcast: The Cat's Paw Theory and Discriminatory Animus</title>
      <link>http://www.law.com/jsp/tx/specials.jsp?p=TLpodcasts#labor</link>
      <description>The United States Supreme Court recently granted cert on an issue that is bedeviling employment law: How should courts treat cases in which the cat's paw theory comes into play? Michael P. Maslanka explains the theory and tells why the Supreme Court needs to bring some certainty to a knotty issue.</description>
      <author>mmaslanka@fordharrison.com</author>
      <enclosure url="http://www.law.com/regionals/tx/audio/maslanka_cats_paw2.mp3" length="2207364" type="audio/mpeg" />
      <guid isPermaLink="false">50CB87D1-DD91-4688-A173-0FAC53A22EB8</guid>
      <pubDate>Mon, 26 Apr 2010 16:44:51 GMT</pubDate>
      <itunes:author>Michael P. Maslanka</itunes:author>
      <itunes:duration>00:03:55</itunes:duration>
      <itunes:explicit>no</itunes:explicit>
      <itunes:keywords>labor, hostile, employee, work, environment, cat's paw, firing</itunes:keywords>
      <itunes:subtitle>The Cat's Paw Theory and Discriminatory Animus</itunes:subtitle>
      <itunes:summary>The United States Supreme Court recently granted cert on an issue that is bedeviling employment law: How should courts treat cases in which the cat's paw theory comes into play? Michael P. Maslanka explains the theory and tells why the Supreme Court needs to bring some certainty to a knotty issue.</itunes:summary>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Podcast: 3rd Court Weighs in on Hostile Work Environment</title>
      <link>http://www.law.com/jsp/tx/specials.jsp?p=TLpodcasts#labor</link>
      <description>The Austin Court of Appeals recently established a very pro-employer standard for looking at cases involving allegations of sexually hostile work environments, says Michael P. Maslanka.</description>
      <enclosure url="http://www.law.com/regionals/tx/audio/maslanka_hostile.mp3" length="2834016" type="audio/mpeg" />
      <guid isPermaLink="false">2B758FE1-A9D4-43B7-92E7-41712005B162</guid>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 Apr 2010 16:01:27 GMT</pubDate>
      <itunes:author>Michael P. Maslanka</itunes:author>
      <itunes:duration>00:03:55</itunes:duration>
      <itunes:explicit>no</itunes:explicit>
      <itunes:keywords>labor, hostile, employee, work, environment</itunes:keywords>
      <itunes:subtitle>3rd Court Weighs in on Hostile Work Environment</itunes:subtitle>
      <itunes:summary>The Austin Court of Appeals recently established a very pro-employer standard for looking at cases involving allegations of sexually hostile work environments, says Michael P. Maslanka.</itunes:summary>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>The Duty to Defend v. The Duty to Indemnify</title>
      <link>http://www.law.com/jsp/tx/specials.jsp?p=TLpodcasts#insurance</link>
      <description>Ernest Martin poses the question: Must insurance companies pay settlements or judgments on behalf of their insureds when there is no duty to defend? The Texas Supreme Court has the answer to that question, he says.</description>
      <enclosure url="http://www.law.com/regionals/tx/audio/martin_duty.mp3" length="5921689" type="audio/mpeg" />
      <guid isPermaLink="false">DA5ACB49-E46D-44D4-AF84-5B3D13173216</guid>
      <pubDate>Mon, 05 Apr 2010 19:03:24 GMT</pubDate>
      <itunes:author>Ernest Martin</itunes:author>
      <itunes:duration>00:08:13</itunes:duration>
      <itunes:explicit>no</itunes:explicit>
      <itunes:keywords>insurance, duty, defend, Texas Supreme Court, duty to defend</itunes:keywords>
      <itunes:subtitle>The Duty to Defend v. The Duty to Indemnify</itunes:subtitle>
      <itunes:summary>Ernest Martin poses the question: Must insurance companies pay settlements or judgments on behalf of their insureds when there is no duty to defend? The Texas Supreme Court has the answer to that question, he says.</itunes:summary>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Cert Granted in FLSA Retaliation Case</title>
      <link>http://www.law.com/jsp/tx/specials.jsp?p=TLpodcasts#labor</link>
      <description>Michael P. Maslanka discusses a court ruling that limits anti-retaliation protection in an employment case to written complaints.</description>
      <enclosure url="http://www.law.com/regionals/tx/audio/maslanka_FLSA.mp3" length="1351301" type="audio/mpeg" />
      <guid isPermaLink="false">E0A5DDEE-66D5-45AB-8FC9-B3F7CE7A76C5</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 23 Mar 2010 20:45:08 GMT</pubDate>
      <itunes:author>Michael P. Maslanka</itunes:author>
      <itunes:duration>00:01:37</itunes:duration>
      <itunes:explicit>no</itunes:explicit>
      <itunes:keywords>labor, FLSA, employee, retaliation</itunes:keywords>
      <itunes:subtitle>Cert Granted in FLSA Retaliation Case</itunes:subtitle>
      <itunes:summary>labor, FLSA, employee, retaliation</itunes:summary>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>