Volume 27 - Number 3 | September 2008
| A Review of Recent Medical Monitoring By Vivian M. Quinn and Tracey B. Ehlers Courts have historically been divided over several key elements with respect to what a plaintiff must prove to support a claim for medical monitoring. In this article, we review recent decisions regarding medical monitoring and assess whether there has been any consensus among the courts as to whether an actual, present physical injury is required to support a medical monitoring claim and whether class certification is appropriate for medical monitoring claims. |
| Practice Tip By Lori G. Cohen and John B. Merchant, III Over the past decade, plaintiffs have stepped up their assaults on federal diversity jurisdiction in pharmaceutical and medical device litigation. Along with their efforts to chip away at the learned intermediary doctrine, plaintiffs increasingly are attempting to join local sales representatives fraudulently in order to defeat diversity. |
| Uncertainties of Federal Disclosure Requirements for Employee Experts By John Sear and Ryan McCarthy Product liability litigation is waged through battles of the experts. Hotly contested disputes over expert testimony arise early and often, from discovery through trial and even appeal. Disputes intensify when parties use their own employees as experts because the law governing employee expert disclosure remains undeveloped. |
| The Impact of New Vehicle Technology By By Norma M. Gant and Nicole Dinardo Part One of this article discussed the types of vehicle-related accidents to which children fall prey and described some ways technology has developed to avoid such accidents. The conclusion addresses the role of parents and caregivers in vehicle-related accidents and the new type of litigation spawned by new technology. |
| Supreme Court Speaks Again on Punitive Damages On June 25, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Exxon Shipping Co. v. Baker, a ruling likely to fortify the view that an award of punitive damages should not exceed the amount of the compensatory award. To be sure, some will argue that there are, may be, or ought to be, exceptions; some will argue that the Court was only deciding federal common law in a maritime case and not the limits of state common law; and some may say there is still support for accepting punitive awards that exceed a 1:1 ratio. |
| Case Notes Highlights of the latest product liability cases from around the country. |
| September issue in PDF format … |
