Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
MedBytes
Medical Sense
For those attorneys who loved “Gilly's” in law school, Current Medical Diagnosis and Treatment (CMDT), by Lange, McGraw-Hill, will simplify your ability to understand medicine. One of the problems, for non-physician attorneys who engage in medically related litigation is that the purchase of a major textbook — a treatise — introduces just the beginning of the problem of understanding medicine. Many (most) textbooks are impenetrable and written for doctors, not lawyers. Lawrence Tierney, Stephen McPhee, and Maxine Papadakis have created an indispensable medical reference intended as a general overview for doctors in training, doctors in practice … and for attorneys who need the “straight up” on most medical maladies. CMDT is arranged by system and then, within each system, discusses the major maladies. For the attorney, this is the place to begin any medical sleuthing. The really good news is the cost. This book is a very reasonable $50. Compare this with any major internal medicine book, which generally begin at prices over $150. These books are rewritten periodically. To order, go to: http://www.cmdtonline.com.
Here's more good news: Lange, McGraw-Hill publishes several other similar books on Emergency Medicine, Obstetrics and Orthopedics, as well as on subjects in several other fields. Although the authors write in “medicalese,” it is at a depth that most attorneys will be able to “get” by using any common medical dictionary. I routinely use these books to prepare discovery and deposition questions. And even if the attorney does not initially understand the medicine, CMDT will allow him or her to discuss any area with a physician and learn the area.
Elliott B. Oppenheim, MD/JD/LLM Health Law [email protected]
Medical Sense
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Stranger to the Deed Rule
In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.