Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Search


Med Mal News
March 28, 2008
The latest news items you need to know.
Drug & Device News
March 28, 2008
Recent happenings of interest to you and your practice.
Supreme Court Handles Device Makers a Victory
March 28, 2008
The U.S. Supreme Court in February tackled an issue that has come up frequently in lawsuits brought by plaintiffs claiming they've been injured by medical devices: Do the Medical Device Amendments of 1976 preempt state law-based claims against device manufacturers? The Court had partially answered the question in <i>Lohr v. Medtronic</i>, but the fact situation in that case did not necessarily make its decision applicable to other cases against medical devices manufacturers.
Lack of Informed Consent vs. Battery
March 28, 2008
Last month, we discussed the fact that a recent decision by the California Court of Appeal explores the relationship between the doctrine of informed consent and the intentional tort of battery. The case was <i>Saxena v Goffney</i>. This is the conclusion of that discussion.
The FTCA and the Payment of Tort Damages
March 28, 2008
Federal government attorneys recently unsuccessfully attempted to convince a Federal District Court and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit to rewrite the terms of the Federal Tort Claims Act ('FTCA') to allow the creation of a reversionary trust rather than give a lump-sum award to pay for a medical malpractice plaintiff's future medical expenses.
Movers & Shakers
March 28, 2008
Who's going where; who's doing what.
Litigation
March 28, 2008
Recent rulings of interest to you and your practice.
NJ Panel Finds Civil Union Partners Often Treated As Second-Class
March 28, 2008
New Jersey's year-old Civil Union Act has failed so far to convey to registered same-sex couples the rights and privileges of marriage, a state commission reported on Feb. 18.
Case Briefs
March 27, 2008
Highlights of the latest insurance cases from around the country.
New Approach to Policy Interpretation
March 27, 2008
Three decisions ' <i>Fortis Benefits v. Cantu,</i>; <i>Mid-Continent Insurance Co. v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co.,</i>; and <i>Excess Underwriters at Lloyd's v. Frank's Crew &amp; Rental Tools, Inc.</i> ' appear to reflect the Texas Supreme Court's view that courts applying Texas law should not read more into policies than what is expressly included. And, if there is an agreement apart from the insurance contract, the Texas Supreme Court will look for it to be in writing.

MOST POPULAR STORIES