Features
Fosamax and the Public Hazards Discovery Doctrine
In September 1995, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration ('FDA') approved Merck's compound alendronate for various uses, including the treatment of osteoporosis and Paget's Disease. Alendronate is marketed by Merck as Fosamax'. It is one of Merck's biggest sellers, with approximating $3.5 billion per year in sales.
Meet & Confer Checklist
Preparing for the amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP) will require careful planning and preparation. Following are steps designed to help general counsel more effectively negotiate the scope of electronic discovery at an FRCP Rule 26(f) Meet & Confer conference.
Features
Data Mining
Few technological advancements or social movements have impacted matrimonial law as profoundly as the computer/electronic age. Today, litigants have a virtual Pandora's box of incredibly vast yet retrievable information at their fingertips, which all too often remains underutilized or undiscovered. Currently, stored data can be retrieved from joint marital assets such as computers, cell phones or even facsimile devices with memory capabilities. The information stems from usage, whether explicitly 'saved' by the computer operator or not. It can later be deciphered or interpreted by a trained professional and can yield countless bits of information to assist in discovery.
NY Appellate Court Nullifies Attorney-Fee Provision
For the first time in New York appellate history, an appeals court in Brooklyn declared unenforceable provisions of a prenuptial agreement that barred a spouse from seeking attorney fees. The decision is the first in which an appeals court had nullified part of a prenuptial agreement concerning attorney fees, rather than the whole agreement.
Features
Protecting Trust Assets from a Divorcing Spouse
When spouses divorce, they may be surprised to discover that certain trust assets may not be protected from each others' reach. It is often difficult to find a bullet-proof trust, holding assets firmly and securely away from the divorcing spouse.
Background Checks: The New Burden of Proof
Negligent hiring cases typically turn on whether a background check that was forgone would have helped to reveal an employee's propensity to erupt in violence or commit fraud. But a new burden of proof may be on the horizon.
Features
Rethinking the Rule 68 'Offer of Judgment'
With the ever-increasing costs of litigation, litigants often take steps to try and control these expenditures. Settling cases early, while not always an attractive option, is nonetheless one way to control these costs. Limiting recovery of attorneys' fees is obviously an approach that may lead to a settlement. Along these lines, defendants, particularly in civil rights cases, have turned to the 'offer of judgment' provision set forth in Rule 68 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Features
Federal Tax Incentives for Small Business
The federal tax code targets small businesses with a social conscience in an effort to encourage compliance with federal disabilities rights laws. There are tax credits and deductions that promote the employment of, and accessibility for, disabled persons. It is through these tax incentives that small businesses are permitted to defray certain costs associated with: 1) the employment of persons with disabilities; and 2) the provision of accessibility to public accommodations for persons with disabilities. Irrespective of whether a small business is an independent business, a distributorship, or part of a franchise system, it cannot afford to ignore the tangible social and economic benefits these tax incentives provide.
Features
Retaliation Under Title VII
What types of employer conduct can constitute retaliation under Title VII? The answer to that question has changed significantly with a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision.
Business Crimes Hotline
National rulings that may affect your practice.
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 ›