Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Features

Television Shows and Trademark Protection Image

Television Shows and Trademark Protection

ALM Staff & Law Journal Newsletters

Recent rulings that may affect your business.

Features

Powerhouse Industry Firm Divorces Image

Powerhouse Industry Firm Divorces

Kellie Schmitt

Marshall Grossman and Stanton 'Larry' Stein may be in for some awkward elevator rides. The two heavyweights at L.A.'s Alschuler Grossman Stein & Kahan officially divorced Jan. 1, after a year-long tug-of-war over the future of the 90-lawyer firm they'd fused together seven years ago. Now they've got their own firms, but they're just one floor away in Santa Monica's Water Garden building.

Features

Cameo Clips Image

Cameo Clips

ALM Staff & Law Journal Newsletters

Recent rulings of interest.

<b>Decision of Note:</b> Record-Rent Ban Does't Apply to Literary Works Image

<b>Decision of Note:</b> Record-Rent Ban Does't Apply to Literary Works

ALM Staff & Law Journal Newsletters

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit decided, in a case of first impression, that the federal ban on renting or lending sound recordings doesn't apply to audiobooks. <i>Brilliance Audio Inc. v. Haights Cross Communications Inc.</i>, 05-1209.

Features

State Consumer Protection Law: A New Path to Medical Monitoring Class Actions? Image

State Consumer Protection Law: A New Path to Medical Monitoring Class Actions?

Scott Elder & Josh Becker

Medical monitoring is often pursued as a claim in class actions against corporate defendants based on exposures to environmental pollutants or products that allegedly have the potential to cause future health problems. Because medical monitoring is an exception to the general requirement that the plaintiff must have a present injury in order to pursue a claim, many jurisdictions have adopted strict elements that a plaintiff must satisfy in order to succeed on a medical monitoring claim. These elements often require the court to consider issues specific to individual plaintiffs, particularly aspects of each plaintiff's medical history that have an impact on the need for or the extent of the proposed medical monitoring. As a result of these individual medical issues, many courts in recent years have refused to certify medical monitoring class actions. <i>See, e.g., Ball v. Union Carbide Corp.</i>, 385 F.3d 713, 727-28 (6th Cir. 2004); <i>Zinser v. Accufix Research Inst., Inc.</i>, 253 F. 3d 1180, 1195-96, <i>amended,</i> 273 F.3d 1266 (9th Cir. 2001); <i>Barnes v. Am. Tobacco Co.</i>, 161 F.3d 127, 143 (3d Cir. 1998); <i>Boughton v. Cotter Corp.</i>, 65 F.3d 823, 827 (10th Cir. 1995).

Sarbanes-Oxley Act Offers Recording Artists Potent Tool for Challenging Label Operations Image

Sarbanes-Oxley Act Offers Recording Artists Potent Tool for Challenging Label Operations

Jay Rosenthal

Armed with a 'blue sky' law passed in 2002, new Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) regulations and a general shareholder mood of discontent that is turning into activism, artists have an unprecedented opportunity to seek meaningful corporate reform and oversight of the music industry through the corporate boardroom. What they couldn't accomplish as disgruntled artists, they may be able to accomplish as disgruntled shareholders.

Features

The Consumer Expectation Test: Fostering Unreasonable Expectations of Safety Image

The Consumer Expectation Test: Fostering Unreasonable Expectations of Safety

John D. Sear

Automakers have implemented an incredible amount of safety features into vehicles over the past century. For as long as automakers have been implementing those features into vehicles, however, they have had to defend themselves against critics and purported safety advocates wanting to know why a particular safety innovation was not implemented sooner and why it was not more effective, as consumers 'expected.' On their face, many safety-related criticisms appear valid, given that in 2005 alone, more than 2.7 million people were killed or injured in more than six million police-reported traffic accidents. <i>See</i> NHTSA's National Center for Statistics &amp; Analysis, <i>Motor Vehicle Traffic Crash Fatalities and Injuries &mdash; 2005 Projections</i>, DOT HS-810-583 (2006), available at <i>www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/ pdf/nrd30/NCSA/PPT/2006/810583.pdf.</i>

Verdicts Image

Verdicts

ALM Staff & Law Journal Newsletters

Recent rulings of importance to your practice.

Features

How to Reduce Your Exposure to Lawsuits Image

How to Reduce Your Exposure to Lawsuits

Bill Wortel

Employers go to great lengths and expense to reduce their potential exposure to employment-related claims. Most employers implement policies to address the myriad and growing federal, state, and local employment laws; regularly conduct employee EEO training; hire qualified human resources professionals and in-house attorneys with expertise in employment law; and regularly seek advice and assistance from outside counsel concerning these prophylactic measures. The purpose of this article is to apprise readers of a fast, simple, and inexpensive way to reduce their exposure to certain types of employment-related claims through the inclusion of an express waiver ('Waiver') in an employment application or other document signed by applicants or employees. The Waiver contractually reduces to six (6) months the time period within which certain types of employment-related claims must be filed and waives any statute of limitations to the contrary, thereby significantly reducing the number of timely-filed claims and, consequently, the employer's potential exposure.

Features

'But I Have Insurance to Cover that Claim!' Image

'But I Have Insurance to Cover that Claim!'

Kevin C. McCormick

As many of you know, there are various insurance policies available to protect against employment-related claims. Although some policies, such as employment practices liability (EPL) policies, cover a variety of claims, many cover only specific claims to the exclusion of all others. A recent decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit highlights some of the interesting issues that can arise in resolving employment claims covered by an insurance policy.

Need Help?

  1. Prefer an IP authenticated environment? Request a transition or call 800-756-8993.
  2. Need other assistance? email Customer Service or call 1-877-256-2472.

MOST POPULAR STORIES