Frequently, written policies and procedures are used to instruct nurses or other non-physician employees on the protocols for a variety of activities. This practice can make training and employment performance issues easier for the provider. However, it can also expose the organization to criticism when these seemingly arbitrary policies are not precisely followed.

Features

A recent new statute in New York provided for automatic temporary restraining orders against assets commencing with the filing and service of divorce papers. A number of other states have enacted, or tried to enact, such legislative provisions. However, there are serious constitutional issues that should be addressed.

Congress left the estate tax law in a state of complete confusion at the end of 2009. Even if the bigger question of whether we will have an estate tax is resolved by the time you read this article, many issues that affect matrimonial practitioners, not just estate planners, will still remain unresolved.

Features

On Feb. 2 of this year, the Supreme Court of New Jersey held that a foreign manufacturer of an industrial recycling machine is subject to New Jersey's long-arm jurisdiction under the stream-of-commerce theory. This has broad implications.

Features

On April 1, the Third Circuit upheld a June 2009 decision by U.S. District Judge Thomas N. O'Neill Jr. that rejected claims by a mother and her daughter who suffers from Fragile X syndrome, a mutation known to cause a group of serious maladies.

The purpose of this article is to provide an update of the themes and factors that were important to courts in 2009 in reaching their decisions on the admissibility of expert witness opinions.

The defense of a pharmaceutical or medical device product liability case often turns on the testimony of the core treating physicians. As defense counsel, we often are left holding our breath waiting to see how the physicians testify at their depositions or at trial. So do the plaintiffs.

Features

Last month, we discussed the fact that a defendant should be permitted to offer evidence that the plaintiff's injuries could have occurred in the absence of negligence. Conversely, the defendant should not be permitted to offer evidence that might lead a jury to improperly infer that the mere fact that a complication is a known risk of the procedure is evidence that the defendant was not negligent in causing that complication. The discussion concludes herein.