Eli Lilly & Co. will pay a combined $1.42 billion, including the largest criminal fine in history ' $515 million ' to settle charges that it illegally marketed the anti-psychotic drug Zyprexa for off-label use, federal prosecutors announced on Jan. 15.
This article explores a social networking site user's right to privacy, an adversary's right to obtain information from that site, and the admissibility of the information.
In today's BlackBerry-driven, online business world, losing one's e-mail ' and access to other online forms of communication ' has to be worse than REM's fear of losing one's religion. Yet that is just the fate that may await our next President, who has already publicly confessed (on national television, no less, though you can certainly find the story on the Internet) his steadfast inability to shake his smoking addiction under the stress of a Presidential campaign.
Who's doing what; who's moving where.
An appellate court recently ruled that an automobile dealership that could not file suit to enjoin an additional dealership under the statute's specific additional "add-point" statute could nevertheless file an administrative proceeding based on a "generic" statute that prohibits conduct by a manufacturer that is "capricious, in bad faith, or unconscionable."
The 2008 Kansas Legislature passed a statute that declares void as against Kansas public policy long-standing contract risk-allocation provisions in many commercial contracts ' including franchise and dealership contracts. The story begins in 2004, when the legislature enacted a prohibition against liability indemnity provisions in construction contracts.
Commentary on the latest cases.
Everything contained in this issue, in an easy-to-read format.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld a copyright infringement verdict against the great-grandson of artist Pierre-Auguste Renoir in a fight over the right to reproduce sculptures created by the French impressionist. The appeals court noted that stare decisis required it to follow its controversial 1996 precedent regarding Walt Disney's copyright for Bambi. Although that ruling "can be, and has been, criticized, it is still binding in this circuit. We are thus bound to follow it," the court said.
