Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

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

Search

We found 2,807 results for "Product Liability Law & Strategy"...

Looks Can Be Deceiving (and Costly): The Legal Implications of Counterfeit Products to a Pharmaceutical Manufacturer
The World Health Organization has estimated that drug counterfeiting affects 5-8% of all drugs, representing approximately $10-$15 billion to the U.S. pharmaceutical market alone. The Food and Drug Administration has estimated that approximately 10% of the drugs in worldwide distribution are counterfeit, with most being sold in developing countries. Not surprisingly, the most commonly counterfeited drugs are those with the largest sales, as well as drugs with high profit margins and drugs that are easier to counterfeit.
Leading Questions and Child Witnesses
Lawyers involved in product liability cases are occasionally involved with child witnesses, either as plaintiffs or as percipient witnesses to the critical events in the lawsuit. As in other types of litigation, child witnesses present a number of difficult challenges in product liability cases.
Online: Explore the Depth of the CPSC on the Web
According to the overview on its Web site, <i>www.cpsc.gov</i>, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission ("CPSC") is charged with protecting the public from unreasonable risks of serious injury or death from more than 15,000 types of consumer products under the agency's jurisdiction. Deaths, injuries and property damage from consumer product incidents cost the nation more than $700 billion annually. The CPSC is committed to protecting consumers and families from products that pose a fire, electrical, chemical, or mechanical hazard or can injure children.
Case Notes
Highlights of the latest product liability cases from around the country.
Merck Faces New Jersey Jury After Big Texas Loss
After Merck &amp; Co.'s devastating loss in Texas in August in the first Vioxx case to go to a jury, the nation's eyes now turn to Atlantic City, where New Jersey's first case was set for trial on Sept. 12. There are about 5000 personal injury suits filed nationwide, about half in New Jersey, over the Merck painkiller that has been linked to increased risk of heart attack or stroke. Last month, New Jersey Superior Court Judge Carol Higbee, who is overseeing nearly 2500 Vioxx product-liability cases, rejected a Merck request to postpone the trial. The plaintiff's attorney, Christopher Seeger of Seeger-Weiss in Manhattan and Newark, told <i>The Wall Street Journal</i> that he was "absolutely thrilled" by the judge's action. "I just can't wait to get in a courtroom with this company," he said.
Judge Won't Stop Suit Against Clinical Lab
In a ruling that breaks new ground in the area of drug products liability, a federal judge has refused to dismiss negligence and fraud claims against a clinical laboratory for allegedly conspiring with a drug manufacturer to mislead the FDA.
Using Daubert to Defeat Causation in the Delayed Diagnosis Claim
<b>Part Two of a Two-Part Article.</b> The <i>McDowell</i> case discussed in the first part of this article presented the question of "whether it is so if an expert says it is so." <i>See Viterbo v. Dow Chem. Co.</i>, 826 F.2d 420, 421 (5th Cir. 1987). <i>Daubert</i> and its progeny answered in the negative and established that an expert may not present a bare causation conclusion to the jury when that expert has no scientific basis for that conclusion or for any of the predicate inferences leading up to it. The <i>McDowell</i> claim failed because a physician's personal clinical experience, sometimes called anecdotal experience, is simply not a proper scientific basis for causation opinion testimony.
NTP v. RIM: Developments in Infringement Liability Where a Significant Component Is Located Outside the U.S.
Companies involved with technologies that use components located both within and outside the United States will be interested in a recent decision in the patent infringement action brought by NTP, Inc. ("NTP") against Research In Motion, Ltd. ("RIM"). In August 2005, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit distinguished between infringement of "system" and "method" patent claims in "out of country" situations. The Federal Circuit held that if a component is located outside the United States, a <i>system claim</i> would be infringed if there is beneficial use of the patented system in the United States, while a <i>method claim</i> would not be infringed.
Flying on a Wing and a Prayer
In its zeal to eradicate perceived abuses and further clip the wings of executives who, based on press reports, took great pleasure in using the company's airplane for personal purposes, Congress amended section 274(e)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code (the Code). Effective on the date of enactment (Oct. 22, 2004), these amendments effectively reversed the decisions of the Tax Court and Eighth Circuit in <i>Sutherland Lumber-Southwest, Inc. v. Commissioner</i>, and prompted the IRS to issue guidance containing a myriad of rule changes and hinting at others, leaving tax practitioners scratching their heads and companies running for cover.
Australian Court Finds For Music Company
Justice Murray Rutledge Wilcox of the Federal Court held that certain defendants associated with Sharman Networks were liable for "authorization" of copyright infringement as a result of having distributed the Kazaa file-sharing software. <br>Notwithstanding substantial differences between the legal systems and copyright jurisprudence in Australia and the United States, <i>Grokster</i> and <i>Sharman</i> demonstrate remarkable similarities in analysis.

MOST POPULAR STORIES