Older and Better: Partner Retirement Policies
You have heard the clich': '60 is the new 40.' In today's law firm, however, the 60-year-old may very well be at the prime of his or her career, and many firms are taking notice. Firms committed to building critical mass, particularly in key practice areas and offices (notably New York) are scrambling to recruit the 'big splash' partner. The seasoned attorney from a top-tier firm, approaching the firm's retirement age but not yet ready to quit, is a prime target. This partner has a loyal client base, the wisdom gained from years of experience, and prot'g's who are frequently eager and willing to follow the master.
A Blurry Distinction with a Huge Difference: Commercial vs. Non-Commercial Speech
Imagine the following two scenarios, and try to figure out what the real difference is. First, your competitor blatantly lies in its advertising about the effectiveness of its products; second, your competitor blatantly lies to a reporter about the effectiveness of its products, and the reporter publishes the lies in an article or in a magazine. It seems like the same situation, but it is not. With the first, you could sue for false advertising because the advertisement is 'commercial' speech, whereas with the second, you cannot because the magazine article is 'non-commercial' speech. A similar difference is presented if a newspaper uses a picture of a celebrity without the celebrity's consent to highlight a news article, as opposed to a company using the same celebrity picture in a print advertisement, in the same newspaper, to promote the company. A breach of the celebrity's right of publicity claim is not available against the newspaper because the news article is 'non-commercial,' but is available against the company because the print advertisement is 'commercial.' The rationale for both is that while the First Amendment fully protects 'non-commercial' speech, it protects 'commercial' speech in a significantly limited way.
Hospital Allowed to Keep Report from Disclosure
In a decision that could influence discovery in federal medical-device products liability litigation, a Magistrate Judge in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York has held that a state-law provision designed to encourage hospitals to maintain quality assurance and infection control programs without fear of litigation can be invoked to block disclosure of hospital records even where there is, at most, an indirect threat of a malpractice suit and where the…
Failure to Warn
The author, Tim O'Brien, was appointed Lead Counsel by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York in MDL No. 1789, <i>In re Fosomax Products Liability Litigation</i>. The opinions expressed herein are Mr. O'Brien's and represent some of the arguments the plaintiffs are or will be making in the litigation.
Do You Know What Companies Really Want?
In the 20 years I have worked with and for in-house counsel and CEOs, this recent statement to me by a Fortune 100 senior in-house counsel is the strongest yet. Over the years I've compiled a number of such statements, which, if more moderate in tone, are equally serious in intent. Many of them zero in with a great deal of specificity on buyers' discontent and, as such, are particularly helpful, if disconcerting.
Case Notes
Highlights of the latest product liability cases from around the country.
