Employers Can Deny Coverage for Certain Infertility Treatments
An employer's medical plan that denies coverage for certain female-only infertility procedures does not violate either the Pregnancy Disability Act (PDA) or Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The Second Circuit, in a ruling of first impression, concluded that neither are violated.
Property Condition Disclosure Act: The First Published Court Test
The Property Condition Disclosure Act (PCDA), which became effective on March 1, 2002, requires a seller of residential real property to deliver to a buyer a Property Condition Disclosure Statement (PCDS) before the buyer signs a binding contract. In <i>Malach v. Chuang, infra</i>, a Richmond County Civil Court judge construed ' for the first time ' the remedy provisions of the statute (R.P.L. sec. 465).
ONLINE: How to Research Human Organ Damage
If your product liability case involves damage to a specific organ, <i>eg,</i> heart damage allegedly caused by the use of fen-phen, professional organizations such as the American College of Cardiology (ACC) may offer some assistance. You can go to the association's Web site (www.acc.org) for information on a number of conditions.
CASE NOTES
Highlights of the latest intellectual property cases from around the country.
Daubert: 10 Years Later
<i>This is the first of a two-part article. Part two will appear next month.</i> Product liability practitioners must be intimately familiar with the strategy and tactics of challenging expert testimony under Rule 702, Fed. R. Evid., and the so-called <i>Daubert</i> trilogy of cases. Nearly 10 years ago, the United States Supreme Court, in <i>Daubert v. Merrill Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.</i>, 509 U.S. 579 (1993), vastly changed the road map for the admission of expert testimony. A body of case law has grown since that decision, providing numerous avenues to challenge admission of expert testimony. Because product liability cases usually rely on expert testimony, <i>Daubert</i> challenges are particularly important in them.
Practice Tip: 30 Days Before Trial ' Must-Have Meetings
In the January 2003 Practice Tip, I discussed the list of 'issues, witnesses and exhibits' one should compile to highlight the evidence required to establish a <i>prima facie</i> product liability case. In this issue, I discuss two individuals with whom the trial lawyer should meet within the 30 days prior to trial: the client and the physician. In a future tip, I will discuss meeting with the engineering expert. For ease of reference, all individuals are deemed male. For purposes of the discussion, the case concerns injury caused by a defective machine.
