Exercise of Medical Judgment or Deviation from the Standard of Care?
April 28, 2009
In a handful of states, a doctrine known as the "medical judgment rule" establishes a distinction between the legitimate exercise of medical judgment and a deviation from the accepted standard of care on the part of a physician. In New Jersey, the medical judgment rule is set out in Model Jury Charge 5.50G. This article provides a look at medical judgment and standard of care as outlined in the rule.
The Autism Cases, and What's Next
April 28, 2009
The fight to get recognition of a link between autism and childhood vaccines took a heavy blow in February when the U.S. Court of Federal Claims found no such connection in the three test cases before it. Results of recent studies certainly portended these outcomes, but hope remained that the so-called Vaccine Court ' the Office of Special Masters of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims ' might side with the claimants.
NY Issues New Professional Responsibility Rules
April 28, 2009
On April 1, 2009, the Rules of Professional Conduct went into effect and replaced the current New York Lawyer's Code of Professional Responsibility as the governing rules of professional responsibility for attorneys in New York State. Here is an explanation.
Recent Tax and Estate Planning Developments
April 28, 2009
A payor-ex-spouse buying life insurance for the payee-ex-spouse as part of a divorce settlement is almost ubiquitous. Although estate planners routinely recommend that clients review their planning periodically ' especially if a change occurs ' few clients tend to listen. The cost of not heeding that advice, and a few interesting legal issues, were pointed out in a recent case.
Specific-Questions Guide to Child Custody Investigations
April 28, 2009
No matter how skilled a forensic examiner may be in conducting an evaluation, the relevance of the information gathered in the evaluation is directly tied to the clarity and scope of the questions that guide the investigation. Here is a comphrehensive guide to the correct questions.
Warn Potential Patent Infringers: But Do Your Homework First
April 27, 2009
Part One of this article addressed <i>800 Adept, Inc. v. Murex Secs., Ltd. et al.</i> and the required level of care that must be taken before issuing notice letters to potential infringers and the legal standard under which that care may later be judged. This second installment discusses <i>Dominant Semiconductors Sdn. Bhd. v. OSRAM Gmbh.</i>
The Third Amendment to the Chinese Patent Law
April 27, 2009
The Third Amendment to the Chinese Patent Law is expected to bring the law into closer conformity with international standards, particularly commensurate with U.S. Patent contract and litigation practice, even though several changes such as the absolute novelty requirement still clearly reflect the influence of European Patent laws on the development of the Chinese Patent Law. The Third Amendment includes changes to patent application and enforcement processes, ownership rights, compulsory licensing rules, international exhaustion rights, penalties for patent infringement, prior art defenses, and exemptions, summarized in this article.
The Changing Tide of Declaratory Judgment Jurisdiction in Patent Cases
April 27, 2009
During the last two years, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has decided a series of cases that collectively explore what circumstances are sufficient, or insufficient, to establish declaratory judgment jurisdiction in the context of a patent dispute. Several of these decisions, which have put patentees at an increased risk for declaratory judgment lawsuits, are addressed in this article.
