Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
It is, of course, black letter law that to prove a claim, a plaintiff in a product liability suit must establish that the product at issue caused the injury suffered by the plaintiff. Causation includes both general and specific: General causation “bears on whether the type of injury at issue can be caused or exacerbated by the defendant's product,” while specific causation “bears on whether, in the particular instance, the injury actually was caused or exacerbated by the defendant's product.” Ruggiero v. Warner-Lambert Co., 424 F.2d 249, 251 n. 1 (2nd Cir. 2005). See also Pick v. Amer. Med. Sys., Inc., 958 F. Supp. 1151, 1164 (E.D. La. 1997), aff'd 198 F.3d 241 (5th Cir. 1999). Absent a showing of both types of causation, a plaintiff's claims necessarily fail. In re Viagra Prod. Liab. Litig., 658 F. Supp. 2d 950 (D. Minn. 2009).
Plaintiffs have often assumed that if they could overcome the general causation barrier, they could easily create an issue of fact on the issue of specific causation. Recently, however, courts are giving more critical attention to the issue of specific causation, and, with increasing frequency, are excluding unreliable specific causation opinions.
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.
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.
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.