Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Did Plaintiff's Expert Change Horses Midstream?
C.R. Bard Inc., a manufacturer of transvaginal mesh facing close to 10,000 cases in federal court, has moved to disqualify one of the plaintiffs' experts. According to the defense, Dr. Neeraj Kohli cannot testify as a general and a case-specific expert for the plaintiffs because he testified for defendant Bard in another case: That case was the first vaginal mesh trial held in California, Scott v. Kannappan. At issue in that case were Bard's Avaullta Plus Anterior and Posterior Biosynthetic Support Systems as well as allegations of medical malpractice by those plaintiffs' physicians, according to Bard. The case resulted in a $5.5 million plaintiffs' verdict with Bard found 60% at fault and a treating physician found 40% at fault. The California case also involved the same defendant, the same type of products and the same scientific issues regarding the use of polypropylene mesh, the defendant said. Kohli also consulted on other transvaginal mesh cases, including two bellwether cases, Bard said. “Dr. Kohli's 'side-switching' creates clear and substantial conflict of interest,” the manufacturer said.
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
On Aug. 9, 2023, Gov. Kathy Hochul introduced New York's inaugural comprehensive cybersecurity strategy. In sum, the plan aims to update government networks, bolster county-level digital defenses, and regulate critical infrastructure.
A trend analysis of the benefits and challenges of bringing back administrative, word processing and billing services to law offices.
Summary Judgment Denied Defendant in Declaratory Action by Producer of To Kill a Mockingbird Broadway Play Seeking Amateur Theatrical Rights
“Baseball arbitration” refers to the process used in Major League Baseball in which if an eligible player's representative and the club ownership cannot reach a compensation agreement through negotiation, each party enters a final submission and during a formal hearing each side — player and management — presents its case and then the designated panel of arbitrators chooses one of the salary bids with no other result being allowed. This method has become increasingly popular even beyond the sport of baseball.