Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
What do FEMA trailers, peanut butter, Viagra, pet food, tires, implantable defibrillators, Agent Orange and iPods have in common? A really weird dream? Maybe. Mass product liability litigation? Ding!
All of the products listed above, varied as they may be, do have at least one thing in common ' they are all subject to mass product liability litigation. Specifically, they are all currently subject to a centralized federal multidistrict litigation proceeding (“MDL”). According to information available on the Web site for the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (“JPML”), there were 60 product liability MDLs pending as of July 14, 2008. See www.jpml.uscourts.gov/Docket_Info/Pending_Dockets/pending_dockets.html. And each MDL is made up of hundreds, if not thousands, of individual cases.
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
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.
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.
When we consider how the use of AI affects legal PR and communications, we have to look at it as an industrywide global phenomenon. A recent online conference provided an overview of the latest AI trends in public relations, and specifically, the impact of AI on communications. Here are some of the key points and takeaways from several of the speakers, who provided current best practices, tips, concerns and case studies.
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.