Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Features
The Supreme Court handed down its decision last month in the case of <i>Wyeth v. Levine</i>, ruling that federal law did not bar plaintiff Diana Levine from suing pharmaceutical maker Wyeth over allegedly insufficient drug safety warnings, even though the warnings had been approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). This decision establishes the troubling precedent that a sympathetic jury can now supersede the expert opinions of the FDA on what qualifies as adequate safety labeling.
Features
Recent cases of interest to you and your practice.
The Supreme Court's decisive ruling on March 4 against Wyeth in a landmark pharmaceutical product liability case may also close off a major front in a hard-fought battle by businesses and the Bush administration to insulate national corporations from state tort litigation.
Features
The Supreme Court's decisive ruling on March 4 against Wyeth in a landmark pharmaceutical product liability case may also close off a major front in a hard-fought battle by businesses and the Bush administration to insulate national corporations from state tort litigation.
Features
This article explores the boundaries of the follow-the-fortunes doctrine. Does it have any limits? Does a cedent have carte blanche to impose its claims decisions and allocations of claims settlements upon a reinsurer without question? Do the answers to the questions depend upon whether the dispute is before a court or an arbitration panel?
Features
In a blow for insurers and contrary to the weight of authority in multiple other juridictions, the California Court of Appeals for the Fourth District recently reversed the trial court on its so-called "no stacking rule" and affirmed the trial court in its "all sums" liability allocation.
Features
False Endorsement/No Preemption<br>Song Copyright/Implied License<br>Video-Game Statutes/Unconstitutionality
Features
In January 2008, the California Supreme Court decided that the doctrine of severability of contracts could be applied to the state's Talent Agencies Act (TAA). Under the supreme court's ruling, a personal manager's activities as an unlicensed talent agent may be severed from the manager's legal activities, the latter still being commissionable from the artist by the manager.
