Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
From spinach to pet food, peanut butter to seafood, tires to toothpaste, and most recently children's toys, there has been an extraordinary number of food and product recalls in recent months. The litigation stemming from these recent product and food safety failures presents a number of important insurance questions under general liability policies. These include questions about the scope of the products-operations hazard, whether non-products coverage is implicated by new theories advanced by the plaintiffs' bar, whether 'no injury' claims for economic harm can be shoehorned into coverage, and whether the many class action claims seeking medical monitoring for potential bodily injury will be covered under general liability policies. In the context of the lead paint toy recalls, the meaning of lead paint exclusions may also be at issue. In addition, as with traditional products liability litigation, the effect of the sistership, insured's own product, and impaired property exclusions will also be important in determining the extent to which general liability coverages may respond to the new wave of food and product safety litigation.
Scope of Products Hazard/Completed Operations Coverage
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.
Active reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.