The Cleveland Municipal Court , including the Cleveland Housing Court, was closed on Monday, February 24, following an unspecified cyber incident that occurred on Sunday evening. Deputy Court Administrator Mike Negray confirmed that all affected systems were shut down as a precaution. The cause of the incident remains unclear, and an investigation is ongoing.

  According to a press release from Court News Ohio , the Ohio Supreme Court plans to join 33 other states in administering the NextGen Bar Exam starting in July 2028. Developed by the National Conference of Bar Examiners , the new exam format is designed to align closely with the real-world responsibilities of newly licensed attorneys. It focuses on nine areas of legal doctrine and seven foundational lawyering skills, including civil procedure, evidence, and criminal law, as well as legal research, client counseling, negotiation, and issue analysis. Ethical considerations are integrated throughout the exam to emphasize professional integrity. The NextGen Bar Exam will also reduce overall testing time from 12 to 9 hours. Click here to read more details in the Supreme Court’s press release.

Former Ohio Supreme Court Justice Melody Stewart is joining the Cuyahoga County Board of Elections. The Cuyahoga County Democratic Party’s executive committee selected Stewart over Christopher Nance to fill a vacancy. She will replace outgoing board member Inajo Davis Chappell, who did not seek reappointment. Stewart’s term is set to begin on March 5, pending final approval from Secretary of State Frank LaRose. Read more about Justice Stewart's appointment at cleveland.com .

In a Memorandum Opinion filed on February 11, 2025, Visiting Circuit Judge Stephanos Bibas (sitting by assignment) granted summary judgment on most of Thomson Reuters’s claims for direct copyright infringement, related defenses, and fair use against Ross Intelligence , a former competitor. The Judge also denied summary judgment to Ross Intelligence on fair use and Thomson Reuters’s copyright claims. As Judge Bibas explained: “Ross built its competing [AI] product using Bulk Memos, which in turn were built from Westlaw headnotes. When Thomson Reuters found out, it sued Ross for copyright infringement.” Click here to read the Judge’s reasoning in detail.

  The Library Innovation Lab at Harvard Law School has launched a new archive of data.gov. This 16TB repository contains over 311,000 datasets from 2024 and 2025 and is updated daily. The initiative aims to preserve public datasets for research, policymaking, and public use. In addition, the project has released open-source software to help others replicate the archive and build similar repositories.

The Cleveland Public Library sent a memo to staff advising them not to intervene if Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents enter library branches to arrest patrons. Executive Director and CEO Felton Thomas emphasized that interfering with arrests could result in legal consequences, such as obstruction of justice. He reassured staff that ICE is unlikely to target CPL employees but reminded them that agents are legally permitted to enter public library spaces. Additionally, staff must protect patron privacy under Ohio law and should refer any ICE inquiries about personal information to the library’s legal counsel.

  The U.S. Copyright Office has published a new report titled Copyright and Artificial Intelligence Part 2: Copyrightability . The report states: “In the Office’s view, the case has not been made for additional protection for AI-generated material beyond that provided by existing law. As an initial matter, because copyright requires human authorship, copyright law cannot be the basis of protection for works that do not satisfy that requirement.” Key conclusions from the report include: Questions of copyrightability and AI can be resolved under existing law, without legislative change AI tools that assist human creativity do not affect copyright eligibility Copyright protects original human expression, even if AI-generated material is included Purely AI-generated content, or content lacking sufficient human control, is not copyrightable Human contributions must be evaluated case-by-case to determine authorship Prompts a...