Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

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

Search


Practice Tip: Consider Filing a Renewed Motion for Summary Judgment
When your motions for summary judgment in product liability cases are denied, your usual reaction is probably to move on and to begin focusing your case on how to win at trial. While that is usually the best approach, that doesn't mean you necessarily have to give up on the hope of winning the case on summary judgment before trial. Orders denying summary judgment are interlocutory, and so a court has the inherent power to reconsider them and change them at any time before entry of final judgment. <i>See, e.g., Freeman v. Kohl &amp; Vick Mach. Works, Inc.</i> 673 F. 2d 196 (7th Cir. 1982). Nothing in the rules bars a party from filing a renewed motion for summary judgment and, as described below, there are times when such a motion is called for.
When It's OK to Demolish the Evidence: Tactics for Destructive Examination and Testing
Destructive testing or examination of evidence in product liability cases may be a high-risk proposition. Proposing a destructive test or examination often discloses the thought processes of counsel or expert witnesses. In most cases, there probably will be only one opportunity to perform a destructive test or examination, so it must be done right the first time. The party proposing the destructive test or examination will be bound by the result, good or bad.
Case Notes
Highlights of the latest product liability cases from around the country.
Avoiding Ambush: Tips for the Successful Preparation and Presentation of Witnesses
A successful defense against a consumer's claim that she was damaged from using a medication manufactured by one of your pharmaceutical clients may hinge significantly on the testimony provided by a research scientist, a pharmacologist, or perhaps a warnings or a marketing specialist. While these witnesses have key sources of knowledge about the product, its development, testing, labeling and/or distribution, they may also bring with them fears and inadequacies that could result in the ambush of your defense.
Online: Check Out ANSI Web Site for Information on Standardization
One way for a manufacturer to ensure it has a proper warning on its product is to "use credible industry groups and trade associations, such as American National Standards Institute, for advice and guidance on labeling." "Manufacturers Beware: Liability When Warning Labels Are Ignored or Disobeyed," Product Liability Law &amp; Strategy, July, 2003, Pg. 1.The Web site for the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) is <i>www.ansi.org.</i> It is a private, nonprofit organization (501(c)(3)) that administers and coordinates the U.S. voluntary standardization and conformity assessment system.
Implement a Compliance Plan Before It's Too Late!
In this era of heightened scrutiny of health care practices, every provider of health care services or products (<i>ie</i>, medical practices, clinical laboratories, billing companies, durable medical equipment suppliers, etc.) must implement compliance plans to educate their employees to avoid questionable billing practices before they become the subject of government criminal or civil investigations or lawsuits.
Muddying the Mental Health Waters
<b><i>Too Many Professionals Can Wreak Legal Havoc</i></b> Psychiatry is far from being the only mental health profession. A review of the statutes in just this author's state of Alaska reveals separate professional licensing boards for social workers, marital and family therapists, nurses, professional counselors, psychologists, psychological associates and, of course, physicians.
Spoliation of Evidence: The Lost Records Effect
There are two types of spoliation of evidence in medical negligence litigation: physical and content. Physical spoliation of evidence occurs where the tortfeasor physically destroys evidence or in some way makes the evidence unavailable. For example, there's the "shredder effect," where the record is physically destroyed. Or the record can be left on the Risk Manager's desk until the day prior to trial. In either event, there is no physical record.
Jury Awards $12.5 Million to Paralyzed Boy
In one of the largest medical malpractice verdicts in Connecticut state history, a jury ordered Hartford Hospital to pay $12.5 million to a boy who became paralyzed from the neck down while awaiting surgery for a spinal tumor 7 years ago.
Verdicts
Recent cases of importance to your practice.

MOST POPULAR STORIES

  • Coverage Issues Stemming from Dry Cleaner Contamination Suits
    In recent years, there has been a growing number of dry cleaners claiming to be "organic," "green," or "eco-friendly." While that may be true with respect to some, many dry cleaners continue to use a cleaning method involving the use of a solvent called perchloroethylene, commonly known as perc. And, there seems to be an increasing number of lawsuits stemming from environmental problems associated with historic dry cleaning operations utilizing this chemical.
    Read More ›
  • The Flight to Quality and Workplace Experience
    That the pace of change is "accelerating" is surely an understatement. What seemed almost a near certainty a year ago — that law firms would fully and permanently embrace work-from-home — is experiencing a seeming reversal. While many firms have, in fact, embraced hybrid operations, the meaning of hybrid has evolved from "office optional," to an average required 2 days a week, to now many firms coming out with four-day work week mandates — this time, with teeth.
    Read More ›
  • AI or Not To AI: Observations from Legalweek NY 2023
    This year at Legalweek, there was little doubt on what the annual takeaway topic would be. As much as I tried to avoid it for fear of beating the proverbial dead horse, it was impossible not to talk about generative AI, ChatGPT, and all that goes with it. Some fascinating discussions were had and many aspects of AI were uncovered.
    Read More ›
  • The Powerful Impact of The Non-Foreclosure Notice of Pendency
    RPAPL ' 1331 and RPAPL ' 1403 Notices of Pendency are requisite elements for foreclosing a mortgage. <i>See, Chiarelli v. Kotsifos</i>, 5 A.D.3d 345 (a notice of pendency is a prerequisite to obtaining a judgment in a mortgage foreclosure action); <i>Campbell v. Smith</i>, 309 A.D.2d 581, 582 (a notice of pendency is required in a foreclosure action under RPAPL Article 13). In contrast, an ex parte CPLR Article 65 Notice of Pendency (the "Notice") is not required but it is a significant tool in an action claiming title to, or an interest in or the use or enjoyment of, another's land. The filer does not have to make a meritorious showing or post a bond. Article 65 provides mechanisms for the defendant-owner to vacate the Notice that caused an unilaterally imposed restraint on its realty. But, recent case law establishes the near futility of such efforts if the plaintiff has satisfied the minimal statutory requisites for filing the Notice.
    Read More ›