LJN Newsletters

In a pair of recent decisions, the California Supreme Court has significantly widened protections for workers claiming harassment and discrimination under the state's Fair Employment and Housing Act. Taken together, these decisions give California employees protections from job discrimination far beyond those in any other state.

Recent rulngs of interest to you and your practice.

Almost any employer providing exit pay beyond that to which an employee is otherwise entitled expects a release of rights in return. Most waiver agreements cover claims that could be raised under Title VII, the ADA, the ADEA, the FMLA, as well as state anti-discrimination laws. But it just got harder to get a valid release of FMLA claims in the Fourth Circuit.

National rulings of interest.

Highlights of the latest product liability cases from around the country.

According to the overview on its Web site, www.cpsc.gov, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission ("CPSC") is charged with protecting the public from unreasonable risks of serious injury or death from more than 15,000 types of consumer products under the agency's jurisdiction. Deaths, injuries and property damage from consumer product incidents cost the nation more than $700 billion annually. The CPSC is committed to protecting consumers and families from products that pose a fire, electrical, chemical, or mechanical hazard or can injure children.

The World Health Organization has estimated that drug counterfeiting affects 5-8% of all drugs, representing approximately $10-$15 billion to the U.S. pharmaceutical market alone. The Food and Drug Administration has estimated that approximately 10% of the drugs in worldwide distribution are counterfeit, with most being sold in developing countries. Not surprisingly, the most commonly counterfeited drugs are those with the largest sales, as well as drugs with high profit margins and drugs that are easier to counterfeit.

Consumers often ignore product manufacturers' recalls of defective products despite manufacturers' best efforts. The unfortunate but inevitable result is that some consumers are injured. A reasonable defense for manufacturers is that the consumer's fault in ignoring the recall negates their liability. The limited authority available, however, indicates that a manufacturer probably will not be completely exonerated from liability. A consumer's failure to respond to a recall, nevertheless, can be raised as a comparative fault defense. This article reviews existing authority and suggests strategies for manufacturers and consumers when this situation occurs.