Features
Bernard Madoff, Marital Agreements and Mutual Mistake
<i>Simkin v. Blank</i>, a jarring Supreme Court decision, poses devastating consequences for divorcing couples who, unaware of Bernard Madoff's criminal enterprise, relied upon the accuracy of fraudulently generated portfolio statements.
Features
Verdicts
Recent rulings of importance to you and your practice.
Features
Genes Linked to Breast, Ovarian Cancers Are Ruled Unpatentable
Two isolated genes closely associated with breast and ovarian cancer are unpatentable, a federal judge ruled in March. This article presents an analysis of the case.
Features
Courts Diverge on Ex-Parte Interviews Under HIPAA
There is, as yet, no consensus on whether defense counsel in medical malpractice proceedings have the right to interview plaintiffs' treating physicians through ex parte interviews to which plaintiffs and their counsel are not invited.
Features
<i>Tiffany v. eBay </i>
The recent decision of the Second Circuit in connection with the appeal in <i>Tiffany (NJ) Inc. and Tiffany & Company v. eBay, Inc.</i> represents a thorough and well-considered exploration of the basis for finding secondary liability in the electronic marketplace for those who facilitate the sale of infringing goods without ever selling the goods and, conversely, the way for the maker of the marketplace to avoid liability for infringements by those who sell on its site.
Features
Case Briefs
Highlights of the latest insurance news from around the country.
Features
Myriad: How Did Public Policy Weigh In?
In Association for Molecular Pathology v. USPTO, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York invalidated patents related to isolated BRCA1 and BRCA2 breast and ovarian cancer susceptibility genes. The surprising aspect of the decision was the reason for invalidity ' the district court held that the isolated genes did not constitute patentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. ' 101.
Features
Practice Tip: Failure-to-Warn Causation and The Learned Intermediary
In pharmaceutical and medical device litigation, the failure-to-warn claim continues to be among the most common causes of action. This article examines some of the key factors involved in proving causation in a failure-to-warn case, and discusses recent case law in this area.
Need Help?
- Prefer an IP authenticated environment? Request a transition or call 800-756-8993.
- Need other assistance? email Customer Service or call 1-877-256-2472.
MOST POPULAR STORIES
- Law Firms are Reducing Redundant Real Estate by Bringing Support Services Back to the OfficeA trend analysis of the benefits and challenges of bringing back administrative, word processing and billing services to law offices.Read More ›
- Divorce Lawyers' Obligation to ChildrenDo divorce lawyers have an obligation to disclose client confidences when it is in the best interests of the client's child to do so? The short answer of the rules of professional responsibility is 'no' because a 'yes' answer is deemed to be fundamentally inconsistent with the premises of the adversary system in which the divorce lawyer functions. The longer answer is that the rules encourage ' but do not require ' a divorce lawyer to counsel the client to authorize the disclosure because it is in the best interests of both parent and child.Read More ›
- Develop Your Personal Book of BusinessCompetition for business is intense, time is short, and there's no time like the present to hone your business development skills and develop your personal book of business.Read More ›
- Upping the Legal Training AnteWomble Carlyle's technology training and online learning programs were in need of an upgrade. Unprecedented firm growth, heightened emphasis on developing lawyers' core technology competencies, and a need to streamline and automate existing e-learning processes led the firm to initiate a fundamental shift.Read More ›