Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Speculative Expert Testimony on Alternate Design Is Inadmissible
Expert testimony regarding an alternate design may not be admitted when it is speculative or unreliable; the expert did not test his proposed design; the design was not published for peer review; the design did not have a “known rate of error”; and the expert cannot show a general acceptance of his design or his methodology. Zaremba v. General Motors Corp, No. 03-7565, Second U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, Feb. 13, 2004.
On March 18, 1996, the three plaintiffs (one driver and two passengers) were in a 1994 T-Top Pontiac Trans Am. The driver had a blood alcohol level of 0.172. None of the plaintiffs was wearing a seat belt. The evidence established that the driver was operating the Trans Am at a speed approaching 100 miles per hour. While driving at that speed, the driver approached a fork in the road, struck a curb, rolled and crashed into an overpass railing. The driver was killed, the back seat passenger suffered severe brain damage and the front seat passenger sustained soft tissue injuries. Prior to the accident, a previous owner had totaled the Trans Am, and one of the plaintiffs purchased it and arranged for it to be rebuilt.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
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
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 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.
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.
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.
UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?