With the meltdown of the U.S. housing market, many players in mortgage lending now face the triple threat of criminal, civil, and administrative legal action. But the scope of federal action against questionable lending practices will depend on the answer to a key question: What funding will be made available to law enforcement agencies?
Recent rulings of interest to you and your practice.
Who's doing what; who's going where.
The latest news of importance to you and your practice.
The latest news in this important area.
Providing physicians with up-to-date, accurate information about the medicines they prescribe clearly improves patient care and advances health care in general. Nonetheless, the public health need for informed and educated HCPs may, at times, create tension with the pharmaceutical industry's perceived drive for profits.
Given how large the awards are when there is a verdict against a physician, many in the medical profession and their defense teams have come to believe that juries are random and unfair. The conventional wisdom seems to be that judge-made decisions are a safer bet for med-mal defendants. Is this true?
The Fifth Circuit decision in Poliner v. Texas Health Systems has put another damper on the hopes of unhappy peer-reviewed medical professionals who want to seek monetary damages for their real or perceived injuries. On the other hand, the decision has eased the minds of those who must step up to ensure the quality of medical care, even when it means taking away some or all of a colleague's privileges.
Over the past decade, plaintiffs have stepped up their assaults on federal diversity jurisdiction in pharmaceutical and medical device litigation. Along with their efforts to chip away at the learned intermediary doctrine, plaintiffs increasingly are attempting to join local sales representatives fraudulently in order to defeat diversity.
Courts have historically been divided over several key elements with respect to what a plaintiff must prove to support a claim for medical monitoring. In this article, we review recent decisions regarding medical monitoring and assess whether there has been any consensus among the courts as to whether an actual, present physical injury is required to support a medical monitoring claim and whether class certification is appropriate for medical monitoring claims.
