Call 855-808-4530 or email GroupSales@alm.com to receive your discount on a new subscription.
In the past year, New York’s highest court, the Court of Appeals, issued two decisions addressing both the scope of a defendant’s duty to warn in negligence and products liability actions, and the scope of tort liability in actions predicated upon third-party conduct. In In re N.Y.C. Asbestos Litigation (N.Y.C. Asbestos), No. 83, 2016 WL 3495191 (N.Y. June 28, 2016), the court considered the circumstances under which a manufacturer of a non-hazardous product has a duty to warn against dangers arising from the product’s use in combination with a hazardous product manufactured by a third party. In Pasternack v. Laboratory Corp. of America Holdings, No. 112, 2016 WL 3543713 (N.Y. June 30, 2016), the court considered: 1) whether laboratories and related entities have a common law duty to comply with federal regulations and guidelines governing drug-testing procedures that are unrelated to preserving the scientific integrity of the testing process; and 2) whether a plaintiff who suffers damages as a result of a third party’s reliance on a false representation can state a claim for fraud.
*May exclude premium content
By Steven P. Benenson
In the past several years, plaintiffs’ firms have threatened or brought class actions against different companies under New Jersey’s Truth-in-Consumer Contract Warranty and Notice Act (TCCWNA). Here's what you need to know.
By Mitch Warnock
When you take a catastrophic injury case involving paralysis, it is important to have a thorough understanding of the problems and pitfalls. In this article, the author explores, from personal experience, the different types of future expenses the client can expect to incur.
By Shannon E. McClure and Whitney Mayer
The FDA’s recent approval of 23andMe’s direct-to-consumer genetic test to identify genes associated with 10 common diseases and disorders could result in a widespread expansion of patients armed with individualized health information. This expansion of genetic information in the hands of consumers potentially impacts regulatory and litigation issues for pharmaceutical companies.
Discussion of major rulings out of Texas and California.