Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

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

Search


Med Mal News
National news of interest to the medical malpractice community.
A Primer on PAMII
Congress has enacted several federal statutes to protect and advance the interests of those with mental illness or developmental disabilities, and of other mentally handicapped persons who do not meet the statutory criteria for being either mentally ill or developmentally disabled. These statutes were enacted partly in response to concerns about the mistreatment of the mentally handicapped in institutions, including both public and private hospitals, nursing homes, and correctional facilities. Not surprisingly, therefore, the agencies constituted to enforce these laws have been granted broad powers to monitor and investigate conditions in facilities that provide treatment and care for the mentally handicapped. In recent years, there has been significant litigation concerning the degree to which that investigatory authority includes a right of access to institutions' peer review and quality assurance records, which otherwise would be protected by state privilege statutes.
Contribution, Indemnification or Contract
Faced with hefty legal bills, damage awards, or settlements as a result of discrimination or harassment claims, employers have attempted to recover costs from third parties whom they perceive as causing or sharing responsibility for the problem. To this end, employers have sued unions and even their own employees in an effort to spread the financial responsibility. The theories behind such suits, and their results, have been mixed.
National Litigation Hotline
Recent rulings of interest to your practice.
Recent Developments from Around the States
National rulings of interest to you and your practice.
Supreme Court Clarifies Standard of Proof for Mixed-Motive Discrimination Cases
At the conclusion of its most recent 2002-2003 term, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision clarifying plaintiffs' standard of proof in "mixed-motive" employment discrimination cases under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended by the Civil Rights Act of 1991. In <i>Desert Palace, Inc. v. Costa</i>, the Court held that a plaintiff is required to prove by direct evidence that an unlawful factor was a "motivating factor" in the challenged adverse employment action. Instead, a plaintiff can prove his or her discrimination claim in a mixed-motive case by circumstantial evidence. As a result of this decision, defendants will find it more difficult to obtain summary judgment dismissing mixed-motive discrimination cases prior to trial, the result of which will be that more such cases will be subjected to the uncertainties of jury trials.
November issue in PDF format
Hostile Environment As Form of Retaliation
Can the creation of a hostile environment suffice as an adverse employment action in a retaliation claim under Title VII and in similar state and city actions?
October issue in PDF format
Letter from the Editor
A "hello" from our new Editor-in-Chief, Elizabeth Anne "Betiayn" Tursi.

MOST POPULAR STORIES

  • Artist Challenges Copyright Office Refusal to Register Award-Winning AI-Assisted Work
    Copyright law has long struggled to keep pace with advances in technology, and the debate around the copyrightability of AI-assisted works is no exception. At issue is the human authorship requirement: the principle that a work must have a human author to be eligible for copyright protection. While the Copyright Office has previously cited this "bedrock requirement of copyright" to reject registrations, recent decisions have focused on the role of human authorship in the context of AI.
    Read More ›
  • Recently Introduced Bill Would Limit ITC 'Domestic Industry by Subpoena'
    Patent infringement disputes in the United States are not only heard in district courts. The U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) also decides high-stakes intellectual property disputes — with the remedy for the IP rights holder not being damages, but rather an exclusion order that can block a competitor's importation of infringing articles into the U.S. That remedy can be incredibly powerful for companies engaged in stiff competition in the U.S. market.
    Read More ›
  • 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 ›