As of Jan. 7, 2004, pursuant to Section 1112 of the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003, agreements between brand-name and generic pharmaceutical companies regarding the manufacture, marketing, and sale of generic versions of brand-name drug products are required to be filed with the Federal Trade Commission and the U.S. Department of Justice.
Recent rulings of importance to your practice.
How do the medical device industry and the FDA prevent risks to the end user once the product is marketed? There is no simple answer to this question. Post-market vigilance in terms of risk assessment involves complex issues. These issues involve a cost/benefit analysis in terms of a "best approach" to post-market co-vigilence.
Does the Food and Drug Administration have authority to force manufacturers of prescription drug products to switch those products to over-the-counter (OTC) distribution against their will? The FDA is currently grappling with this issue, a dispute that has generated substantial controversy, including statements by FDA officials and coverage in leading newspapers.
Chief Justice Ralph J. Cappy of Pennsylvania's Supreme Court issued an opinion on Dec. 31, 2003, declaring that the State of Pennsylvania would remain a "Frye state" and would not follow suit with much of the rest of the nation in using the Daubert test to qualify expert witnesses.
The latest information from the Agency.
Recent rulings of importance to you and your practice.
Bankruptcy lawyers who rarely visit a courtroom may think they do not need to worry about the rules of evidence. Yet evidentiary rules can provide critical protections. In a typical case or negotiation, lawyers create and circulate tremendous amounts of information -- much of which would be potentially damaging if obtained by other parties. To protect this information, bankruptcy lawyers need to be familiar with the rules of evidence and how courts have interpreted these rules.
Members of official creditors' committees in Chapter 11 cases owe a fiduciary duty to the entire body of unsecured creditors. See Woods v. City National Bank, 312 U.S. 262, 268-69 (1941). As fiduciaries, committee members should have undivided loyalty to those they serve, free of any conflict of interest. Id. The imposition of such a broad duty to unsecured creditors generally might be otherwise unremarkable, except that committee members themselves obviously have significant selfish interests in the outcome of the bankruptcy case.
How does a bankruptcy professional get the court's attention on fees? Chief Bankruptcy Judge Mary F. Walrath of the District of Delaware answered the question with a detailed 33-page opinion on Dec. 23, 2003. In re Fleming Companies, Inc., et al, 2003 Bankr. LEXIS 1727 (Bankr. D. Del. 2003). Disposing of an objection by the United States Trustee to interim professional fee applications, Judge Walrath said she would "reduce the fees requested by the Debtors' professionals." Id. at 5. Not exactly the kind of attention any lawyer wants.
