When Products Liability Intersects with Malpractice Strategy
When physicians and hospitals find themselves defending a medical malpractice case that has been intertwined with product liability claims against a medical device manufacturer, these may seem like uncharted waters as compared with litigation solely involving multiple physician or hospital defendants. But the same general principle governs both scenarios: Defendants are likely to fare better when they hold hands and play nicely together for as long as possible and present a united front to plaintiffs.
Features
Localized Pain
A movement is slowly building to abolish century-old medical malpractice laws that judge a doctors' performance by the medical standards existing in his or her community. Those laws, known as 'locality rules,' are still on the books in 21 states.
Document, Document, Document!
Typically, health-care providers approach documentation with the goal of effectively communicating with themselves. The reality, however, is that depending upon many different circumstances, numerous other individuals may one day review a health-care provider's records for many different purposes and from many different perspectives.
Cooperatives & Condominiums
In-depth analysis of the latest cases.
Features
Index
Everything contained in this issue, in an easy-to-use format.
Features
New York Zoning, and the Variance and Rezoning Process
Evaluating the potential for a variance or a rezoning must be done on a case-by-case basis. All of the issues pertaining to the site must be considered to determine if a rezoning or a variance is appropriate for the project. Such factors as whether there is a unique condition on the site for a variance are important. For a rezoning, facts such as if there is a strong residential character around an unused manufacturing site would make for a strong case. Other factors such as the political dynamic and the details of preparing the application must be taken into account as well.
Features
Contractual Risk Transfer: Your Policy or Mine?
Companies involved in collaborative undertakings frequently confront risk sharing and transfer issues. After they identify a project's hazards, they then decide who will bear what risk, in what way, and in what amounts. They also need to consider whether either party (or both) will maintain insurance for the other's benefit. When negotiating a contractual risk transfer agreement, the parties need to understand their bargaining position and relevant contract and insurance principles. They need to be cognizant of risk transfer limitations. They need to consider if the risk transfer will be supported by insurance, and if so, the scope of coverage required and their willingness to share it in the event of a loss. The companies also need to put in place measures to assure compliance with their contract. This article examines these matters and offers practice pointers for those confronting contractual risk transfer decisions.
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
- The Article 8 Opt InThe Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.Read More ›
- Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult CoinWith each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.Read More ›
- Online Interviewing for Use in Lanham Act LitigationInternet interviewing will undoubtedly become the norm over the next decade. Being familiar with the ways to enhance its reliability and validity will be necessary to create scientifically valid, controlled, and reliable studies that can be used in Lanham Act litigation.Read More ›
- Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright LawsThis article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.Read More ›
- Foreseeability as a Bar to Proof of Patent InfringementThe doctrine of equivalents is a rule of equity adopted more than 150 years ago by the U.S. Supreme Court. Prosecution history estoppel is a rule of equity that controls access to the doctrine. In May 2002, the Court was called upon to revisit the doctrine and the estoppel rule in <i>Festo Corp. v. Shoketsu Kinzoku Kogyo Kabushiki Co. Ltd.</i> Ultimately the Court reaffirmed the doctrine and expanded the estoppel rule, but not without inciting heated debate over the Court's rationale — especially since it included a new and controversial foreseeability test in its analysis for estoppel.Read More ›