Your ethics questions answered by the expert!
- March 03, 2004ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |
To prevail on a hostile work environment claim, a plaintiff must prove that the workplace was permeated with discriminatory intimidation that was "sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions" of employment. Meritor Savings Bank FSB v. Vinson, 477 U.S. 57, 106 S.Ct. 2399 (1986) An objectionable environment must be "both objectively and subjectively offensive, one that a reasonable person would find hostile and abusive, and one that the victim in fact did perceive to be so." Faragher v. City of Boca Raton, 524 U.S.775, 118 S.Ct. 2275, 2283 (1998). Courts must examine the totality of the circumstances in deciding whether a hostile environment exists. Id.
March 03, 2004Steven DeibertThe 15 medical malpractice cases in the Top 100 jury verdicts of 2003 were a mixed bag of tragedies that may (or may not) have been affected by efforts to limit tort rights. The verdicts totaled $545.5 million. While that is a robust sum, it is nearly $178.6 million less than in the previous year's top verdicts, even though 2003 had two additional cases. Some attorneys and med-mal experts contend that trend-spotting is a pointless parlor game leading to faulty conclusions. Verdicts are fact-driven, they say. Others see shrinking verdicts and blame "tort reform," which, they say, includes damage caps in 27 states and indirectly affects juries everywhere.
March 03, 2004Emily HellerRecent rulings of importance to you and your practice.
March 03, 2004ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |Expert witnesses have become a necessity in virtually all litigation, from medical malpractice to products liability to family law cases. Technical understanding of disputes is required for juror determination in this increasingly technical world. Damages need to be calculated using expert data; professional standards and their application to any medical malpractice action require expert opinion. But what happens when the side hiring the expert loses, or the independent evaluation doesn't come up with the hoped-for answer? Increasingly, what happens is the disappointed party sues the expert. In some cases, the experts have immunity to lawsuit, but in an increasing number of instances, they simply do not.
March 03, 2004R. Collin MiddletonLast month, we discussed tactical considerations when challenging expert witnesses' qualifications. This month, we focus on the optimal time to conduct voir dire.
March 03, 2004Lawrie E. Demorest and Natalie S. WhitemanNational news of interest to you and your practice.
March 03, 2004ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |National cases of interest to your practice.
March 02, 2004ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |Although executive compensation has been the subject of evolving reform for several years, the bright spotlight of public attention is now focused on this issue, due in part to the bursting of the stock market bubble, the collapse of Enron, and a number of other highly publicized corporate scandals. The image of executives enjoying excessive compensation packages as revenues and earnings decline, and stock values of the companies they manage plummet, is a dangerously common stereotype.
March 02, 2004Dennis P. R. Codon and David L. LynchBullying isn't just a playground issue. In an era of declining unionization, job insecurity, and the global profit squeeze, bullying has become a serious workplace problem, even though workplace bullies usually prefer memos, informal disciplinary meetings and grinding criticism to spitballs. Left unchecked, on-the-job abuse adversely affects both employers and employees. Current legal theories, though, are inadequate to address this recent phenomenon.
March 02, 2004Eric Matusewitch

