As discussed last month, most states adhere to the collateral source rule to preclude defendants in med mal suits from presenting the jury with evidence that public benefits, such as state-provided special education and therapy, may be available to the plaintiff. Not all states have fallen in line with this general rule, however.
In 2012, OCR has entered into four settlement agreements with Corrective Action Plans (CAPs), more than in any year since HITECH went into effect; three of these arose from breach notifications, which had not happened before.
The tug-of-war pitting patients against pharmaceutical companies against pharmacists selling competing compound drug mixtures to the public has lately gained greater urgency.
In last month's newsletter, we discussed the recently decided case <i>In Re K-Dur Antitrust Litigation</i>,in which the Third Circuit bucked the trend of rubber-stamping pay-for-delay patent lawsuit settlements. The discussion concludes herein.
The fastest way to a mistrial is to mention the word "insurance" in front of the jury. This maxim refers to the collateral source rule. But what about the words "public benefits" or "special education"?
Robotic technology may spawn both medical malpractice and product liability exposures, claims and lawsuits. Suits and claims may arise from one area or both. Here's what you need to know.
The 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.
As consumers continue to shift purchasing and consumption habits in the aftermath of the pandemic, manufacturers are increasingly reliant on third-party logistics and warehousing to ensure their products timely reach the market.
This 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.
An overview of redesigns at the ITC, a discussion of the ITC's recent determination in Certain Audio Players and Controllers, and identifies some considerations to keep in mind when litigating redesigns at the ITC.
Section 365 of the Bankruptcy Code grants debtors the ability to assume or reject any executory contract or unexpired lease. Debtors must assume or reject a lease in its entirety and are not free under Section 365 to assume only favorable provisions of a lease. Courts, however, have consistently held that they will not find a multi-property master lease to be a unitary lease merely because such properties are demised in a single document.
