Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The first article in this series (<i>Insurance Coverage Law Bulletin</i> Volume 2, Number 1, February 2003) provided an overview of upcoming articles, and addressed the issue of fraud at the inception of an insurance claim. This second installment focuses on insurance carriers' analysis of fraudulent claims and the use of forensic experts to defend against claims. It also addresses the issue of fraudulent enhancement of otherwise valid claims.
Features
Professional liability policies typically exclude coverage for claims arising out of an insured's knowing, wrongful acts, but, in recognition of the fact that a single policy may extend coverage to multiple insureds working together in association, insurance companies sell the policies with language reinstating coverage for innocent insureds, those of the insureds who had no knowledge of the allegedly wrongful acts of their colleagues. Recently, this innocent-insured coverage has received scrutiny.
Highlights of the latest insurance cases from around the country.
In the weeks before trial of a product liability case, you will presumably begin to focus more significantly on jury selection, perhaps the most important stage of any jury trial. One way to maximize the <i>voir dire</i> process is to use juror questionnaires — a series of written questions that are given to the prospective jury panel and answered in writing by each prospective juror prior to voir dire.
Features
Attorneys litigating suits involving everything from vaccines to the safety of the air on jetliners, or those who simply need scientific information about research and policies, can visit <i>www.national-academies.org</i>, the Web site for the National Academies of Science and Engineering, the Institute of Medicine and the National Research Council. Areas covered on the site include: biology, chemistry, engineering, environmental issues, behavioral and social science, education, health and medicine, and business and economics.
Features
Mass tort litigation provides ample opportunity for filing spurious claims. Last November, a Philadelphia federal judge sharply criticized two small New York plaintiffs' firms for allegedly having submitted dubious claims to a fen-phen diet pill settlement trust. U.S. District Judge Harvey Bartle III of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania found that 78 claimants did not, in fact, show evidence of heart valve damage, notwithstanding diagnoses to that effect by two physicians retained by the firms. One of those physicians had been paid $725,000 to interpret 725 echocardiograms, while the other was getting a contingent $1500 bonus for each diagnosed claim that was paid by the trust, the judge found.
<i>This is the second of a two-part article. Part one appeared in last month's issue.</i> The first part of this two-part article explored the development of the standards for admission of expert testimony under <i>Daubert</i>, and discussed strategies and tactics for dealing with them. The conclusion addresses tactics for use while deposing an expert, briefing a <i>Daubert</i> motion, and conducting a hearing on the motion.
Highlights of the latest intellectual property cases from around the country.
Tort reform continues to be a controversial topic. California has placed a cap on damages. At press time, New York was considering similar legislation. Doctors in several states have conducted "strikes" to protest the amount of their malpractice premiums and to urge tort reform in their states. This article describes recent legislation in Mississippi — in order to alert readers to the trend and illustrate one state's efforts to deal with the problem of astronomic verdicts by sympathetic juries.
Features
Recent rulings of importance to your practice.