Practice Tip: Firing Your Expert
June 29, 2007
During a recent product liability trial, the plaintiff's expert opined in his original disclosure that the subject machine was defective because it lacked a clutch safety mechanism. Trial counsel, retained just weeks before jury selection, learned from the same expert that no machine in the industry contains such a mechanism. They concluded that cross-examination of the expert on this point would probably outweigh any benefit that such testimony might add to the plaintiff's case, and that a simpler explanation for the accident was the manufacturer's failure to place conspicuous warnings to the user on how to operate the device properly. They decided that it would be wise to have the expert testify about the missing warnings instead of the design defect. The problem was that the expert's design defect theory had been presented in the plaintiff's pretrial disclosure statement, which had been served on the defendants, but nothing was disclosed about the failure to warn.
Inhalation Litigation: Mold to Engineered Nanoscale Materials?
June 29, 2007
Asbestos litigation finally may be winding down, and personal injury mold litigation seems to have been stopped in its tracks. That means something else must rise and be the next wave of inhalation litigation, and it looks like it is the emergence of engineered nanoscale materials. Venture capitalists and the government itself predict that engineered nanoscale materials will transform the field of engineering. Such engineering proclamations have been made in prior generations; Henry Adams once warned that 'every day nature violently revolted, causing so-called accidents with enormous destruction of property and life, while plainly laughing at man, who groaned and shrieked and shuddered.'
Microsoft v. AT&T: The Supreme Court Grapples with How to Treat Software under '271(f) of the Patent Act
June 28, 2007
On April 30, 2007, the Supreme Court handed down its decision in <i>Microsoft Corp. v. AT&T Corp.</i>, No. 05-1056, 127 S. Ct. 1746 (2007). The <i>Microsoft</i> decision addressed the scope of §271(f) of the Patent Act, 35 U.S.C. §271(f), which provides that it is an act of infringement to 'supply' the 'components' of a patented invention from the United States for combination outside the United States.
Test Case Linking Vaccines and Autism Reaches Federal Court
June 28, 2007
'Words alone cannot explain the trauma of watching your only child's health deteriorate to such a degree before your eyes,' Theresa Cedillo of Arizona wrotes in an e-mail to Legal Times, a sister publication of this newsletter. On June 11, the case of Michelle Cedillo, Theresa's daughter, will go before an extraordinary tribunal assembled by the U.S. Court of Federal Claims. Its goal is to determine, for the first time in a judicial proceeding, whether the combination of certain vaccines and thimerosal, a mercury-based vaccine preservative, can cause autism ' a set of disorders that is gaining attention as more and more children are diagnosed; as many as one in 150 children born in the United States. The government has long denied such a link exists.
Supreme Court Establishes New Standards for Buying Practices
June 28, 2007
Since the 2003-2004 term, the Supreme Court has heard a surprising number of antitrust cases ' nine in all ' reflecting its increasing interest in, and willingness to address, questions that significantly impact the business community. Equally remarkable is the array of issues the Court has addressed in these cases. In the past three years, the Court has heard cases concerning issues ranging from a unilateral refusal to deal with rivals, to pricing decisions by joint ventures to claims of tying involving a patented product. one opinion has been issued so far ' the unanimous decision in <i>Weyerhaeuser Co. v. Ross-Simmons Hardwood Lumber Co.</i>, 127 S. Ct. 1069 (2007). This article discusses that opinion.
Restaurant Leasing Within a Shopping Center
June 28, 2007
While all retail leases pose an array of issues to the landlords and tenants involved, retail leases relating to restaurants pose certain other issues that must be addressed in order to avoid surprise costs, liabilities, and delays. This article addresses several of those issues that relate to restaurant leases in a shopping center setting (either in a food court or as an outparcel location), including trash removal, pest and rodent control, parking, and exclusive uses.
Navigating the Fair Credit Reporting Act
June 28, 2007
Employers of all sizes use third-party consumer reporting agencies to conduct background investigations such as credit, criminal, education and employment background checks. Such investigations are labor-intensive, costly and require specialized knowledge (especially if the employer has a multi-state presence). Therefore, a third-party vendor is the natural choice for outsourcing such a task. However, employers should beware that outsourcing the background check process does not automatically insulate the employer from liability when it relies on the information in a report. Using such third party reports places the employer squarely within the myriad of requirements under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ('FCRA'). 15 U.S.C. ' 1681.
