Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

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

Search


Non-Prescription Drug Ad Restructions Eased in UK
October 17, 2003
The latest from the UK.
Counterfeit Drugs: FDA Suggests New Counter Measures
October 16, 2003
<b><i>No 'Magic Bullet,' Says Task Force</i></b> The FDA's Counterfeit Drug Task Force issued its interim report on October 2. It contains potential options for a multi-pronged approach to combat counterfeit drugs. In recent years, the FDA has seen an increase in the number and sophistication of efforts to introduce counterfeit drugs. The FDA noted at the time the report was issued that the problem of counterfeit drugs is being treated separately from the problem of unapproved and potentially unsafe drugs that are being imported via the Internet and other unregulated international channels. Under current law, those drugs are purchased outside of U.S. and foreign consumer protection systems, so they are "buyer beware" products that have traveled outside of the regulatory protections of the legal U.S. drug distribution system.
<i>Daubert </i>Tool Lets Lawyers Track History of Experts
October 16, 2003
Expert testimony can be the linchpin that makes or breaks a case. But lawyers have had a tougher time getting that testimony admitted since 1993, when the U.S. Supreme Court decided in <i>Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals</i> that scientific testimony must be not only relevant, but reliable. In 1999's <i>Kumho Tire v. Carmichael</i>, the Court extended that rule to all experts. This means that a lawyer preparing to qualify or challenge an expert at trial must answer a number of questions. What is the state of the case law under <i>Daubert</i>? How has the particular court or judge applied the rule? How have courts ruled on this type of expertise? Has this expert ever come before a judge?
Over-the-Border Drug Debate Heats to Boiling
October 16, 2003
<b><i>The State of the Re-Importation Debate</i></b> When Gov. Rod R. Blagojevich of Illinois announced in mid-September that his state was considering buying drugs from Canada for its employees and citizens, the debate over cross-border drug purchases via the Internet and by other means, got even hotter than it was before. The pharmaceutical industry is fighting a battle similar in scope to the music industry's Internet copyright infringement war, but because no suits have been brought against 80-year-old diabetics buying insulin from pharmacies in Montreal, national debate on the issue of the purchase of foreign drugs has gotten less press of late than the debate over music piracy.
Case Briefing
October 16, 2003
The latest rulings of importance to your practice.
News from the FDA
October 16, 2003
The latest information for use in your practice, including rulings, draft guidances, seminars, and more.
Quiz of the Month
October 16, 2003
Test your knowledge of the law!

MOST POPULAR STORIES

  • Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
    This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
    Read More ›
  • Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
    Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
    Read More ›
  • The Stranger to the Deed Rule
    In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.
    Read More ›