Offers of Judgment and Copyright Litigation
November 02, 2005
Rule 68 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides a defendant with a means to encourage parties to settle their litigation before trial. A defendant may serve a plaintiff with an "an offer to allow judgment to be taken against [defendant] for the money or property or to the effect specified in the offer, with costs then accrued." F.R.C.P. 68. If the offer is not accepted by the plaintiff, and the "judgment finally obtained by the offeree is not more favorable than the offer, the offeree must pay the costs incurred after the making of the offer." <i>Id.</i>
Court Watch
November 01, 2005
Highlights of the latest franchising cases from around the country.
Why Some Franchisees Who Leave the Franchise System Become Competitors
November 01, 2005
A working draft of a paper by three Australian academic researchers offers some insights about why franchisees choose to leave franchising systems and, more importantly, what franchisors can do to make the exits less likely to happen and less likely to lead to litigation when they do. The researchers are Lorelle Frazer, Bill Merrilees, and Owen Wright, from the Service Industry Research Centre, Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia.
News Briefs
November 01, 2005
Highlights of the latest franchising news from around the country.
Net News
November 01, 2005
U.S. Senators Turning Up Heat on Peer-to-Peer Pirates Lawmakers pushed federal authorities last month to crack down on peer-to-peer (P2P) services that…
Leading Questions and Child Witnesses
November 01, 2005
The first part of this article discussed the case law of both state and federal courts with regard to the admissibility of child testimony and the suggestibility of child witnesses. The conclusion discusses whether the child witness understands that he or she can affect the outcome of the litigation, as well as other issues related to the reliability of the child's testimony.
Case Notes
November 01, 2005
Highlights of the latest product liability cases from around the country.
Nebraska Supreme Court Rejects Infancy Tolling Argument for Statute of Repose
November 01, 2005
In a case of first impression, the Nebraska Supreme Court has rejected arguments that the state's product liability statute of repose should be tolled for minors. <i>Budler v. General Motors Corp.</i>, 689 N.W.2d 847 (Neb. 2004). The ruling was en banc and unanimous. The court's decision was the result of thoughtful analysis and application of well-established principles of statutory interpretation. The impact of the ruling is significant, however, given the state's long-standing public policy of preserving a minor's cause of action until he/she reaches the age of majority.
The Proposed and Enacted 'Cheeseburger Bills' Limiting Obesity Lawsuits
November 01, 2005
The issue of obesity in the American population has become a hot national topic. While there has been some dispute among interested groups as to the extent of the problem, it seems clear that obesity causes health conditions that include diabetes, heart disease and sleep apnea. Indeed, authorities as established as former Surgeon General Dr. David Satcher have stated that the problem of obesity may eventually cause as much preventable disease and death as cigarette smoking. The sparkplug event on the issue in the legal community was the filing of the <i>Pelman v. McDonald's Corp.</i> action in a New York state court in August 2002, which was removed to federal court a month later. In that action, two girls, as members of a putative class action of minors, alleged that their obesity and other health problems were caused by their heavy diet of McDonald's products. The noise on the issue was amplified by the Second Circuit's decision in <i>Pelman v. McDonald's Corp.</i>, 396 F.3d 508 (2d Cir. 2004), reversing the district court's dismissal of the action.
