Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Home Topics

Litigation

Features

Anti-Assignment Clause?

Steven B. Smith & Dana Gale Hefter

The Third Circuit recently reaffirmed the policy underlying anti-assignment provisions in connection with bankruptcy cases, and the extent of bankruptcy courts' jurisdiction after closure of a case.

Features

<i>In re Bellingham Ins. Agency</i>

By Yitzhak Greenberg

The Supreme Court <I>may</I> finally clarify some of the confusion regarding a bankruptcy court's authority acknowledged by Justice Scalia in <I>Stern</I>.

Columns & Departments

Decisions of Interest

ALM Staff & Law Journal Newsletters

Analysis of recent important rulings.

Features

Windsor Leads to Multiple Benefits for Same-Sex Married Couples Nationwide

Janice G. Inman

It makes very little difference what a couple's home state says: The federal government apparently intends to recognize their marriages, even if their state will not.

Features

Communications @ Risk

Kevin M. Quinley

A text message or e-mail may be misinterpreted or be seen by unintended eyes, thus expanding a physician's potential legal liability.

Features

Relearning the Learned Intermediary Doctrine

Brian Raphel

Courts in nearly every state have embraced some form of the "learned intermediary doctrine," which provides that a prescription drug manufacturer satisfies its duty to warn so long as it provides an adequate warning of the drug's potential risks to the plaintiff's prescribing doctor.

Columns & Departments

In the Courts

ALM Staff & Law Journal Newsletters

Analysis of a key ruling.

Features

Transformative Use Musings

Stan Soocher

The California Supreme Court has accepted "transformative use" as a First Amendment defense to a right-of-publicity claim for more than a decade. The issue recently came up before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, in the class action suit by former college athletes who claim Electronic Arts (EA) violated their rights of publicity with the NCAA Football video game.

Features

Maddeningly Mismated Matches

Jonathan Moskin

In paired opinions rendered the same day by the same judge, the Ninth Circuit reached seemingly directly contrary conclusions in virtually identical cases concerning the balancing of intellectual property rights and First Amendment interests.

Features

Forensic and e-Discovery Tools to Help Win Your Case

Richard D. Lutkus

Winning or losing your client's case often rests on your ability to prove facts that support your client's position. Subject-matter expert witnesses play a prominent role in interpreting the facts available to them and helping the trier of fact reach a conclusion on the meaning of such information. Forensic and e-discovery experts are no different than any other experts in that their opinions can only be as solid as the information they can find and analyze.

Need Help?

  1. Prefer an IP authenticated environment? Request a transition or call 800-756-8993.
  2. Need other assistance? email Customer Service or call 1-877-256-2472.

MOST POPULAR STORIES

  • Surveys in Patent Infringement Litigation: The Next Frontier
    Most experienced intellectual property attorneys understand the significant role surveys play in trademark infringement and other Lanham Act cases, but relatively few are likely to have considered the use of such research in patent infringement matters. That could soon change in light of the recent admission of a survey into evidence in <i>Applera Corporation, et al. v. MJ Research, Inc., et al.</i>, No. 3:98cv1201 (D. Conn. Aug. 26, 2005). The survey evidence, which showed that 96% of the defendant's customers used its products to perform a patented process, was admitted as evidence in support of a claim of inducement to infringe. The court admitted the survey into evidence over various objections by the defendant, who had argued that the inducement claim could not be proven without the survey.
    Read More ›
  • In the Spotlight
    On May 9, 2003, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Massachusetts announced that Bayer Corporation, the pharmaceutical manufacturer, had been sentenced and ordered to pay a criminal fine of $5,590,800 stemming from its earlier plea of guilty to violating the Federal Prescription Drug Marketing Act by failing to list with the FDA its drug product, Cipro, that was privately labeled for an HMO. Such listing is required under the federal Food, Drug &amp; Cosmetic Act. The Federal Prescription Drug Marketing Act, Pub. L. 100-293, enacted on April 22, 1988, as modified on August 26, 1992 by the Prescription Drug Amendments (PDA) Pub. L. 102-353, 106 Stat. 941, amended sections 301, 303, 503, and 801 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, codified at 21 U.S.C. '' 331, 333, 353, 381, to establish requirements for distributing prescription drug samples.
    Read More ›