The Seven Deadly Sins of e-Mail
We've all heard horror stories about e-mails that have become trial exhibits - blown up on giant placards or projected on a large screen in front of a jury. The earnest words your client typed in private suddenly take on unforeseen importance when, months or years later, a dispute develops and a trial is held. Like a major league pitcher who releases a hanging curveball to the reigning home-run champ, your client would probably like to "take back" an e-mail that bashes a client, admits incompetence or pitches pent-up emotions in a cathartic rage. <BR>We need not, however, simply succumb to the temptation of e-mail. e-Mail mistakes can be avoided. Clients just need to be educated on how to prevent e-mail mistakes. Although common sense can't be taught, several specific types of e-mailing behavior should be avoided. E-mailers commit what we'll call here the Seven Deadly Sins of e-Mail. While it's unlikely we'll all steer completely clear of these sins, all e-mailers should make every effort to avoid committing the Seven Deadly Sins.
An Unexpected Evidentiary Battleground: The 'Causation' Element in Consumer Protection Claims
Ordinarily, the focus in a product liability case is on the defendant-manufacturer's duty to design and manufacture a safe and useful product and to warn adequately of any risks associated with its use. But an interesting and unexpected battleground can arise from a tag-a-along consumer protection claim. Here is the scenario: Plaintiff, in an individual action, sues defendant-manufacturer for injuries allegedly sustained in connection with the use of defendant's product. Plaintiff sues under traditional product liability theories as well as under the state's consumer protection statute, which proscribes deceptive and misleading trade practices. In particular, plaintiff alleges a consumer fraud has occurred because she has been injured by a product that, she claims, had been sold in connection with deceptive sales practices; in this case, certain allegedly false or misleading advertisements.
Jury Service, Reform and Fair Trials
Product liability trials are difficult for juries. They are long. They involve highly technical subjects, the testimony of conflicting "experts," and what may or may not be scientific evidence. Jurors may be asked to consider and decide the feasibility of two or more alternative designs for a product with which they are unfamiliar.
Case Notes
Highlights of the latest Product Liability cases from around the country.
Online
LexisNexis has a new service it calls "CourtLink" <i>(www.Courtlink.com)</i>. In <i>"Avoiding Ambush: Tips for the Successful Preparation and Presentation of Witnesses,"</i> August 2003 Product Liability Law & Strategy,author Kimberly D. Baker, Esq. suggested using Courtlink to ambush key adverse witnesses by "finding the dirt" on them through searching for divorce proceedings, custody issues, probate proceedings, property disputes, other business disputes and criminal matters such as driving under the influence of alcohol or acts of violence.
Practice Tip: Be Proactive in Document Production
In many kinds of litigation, document production is a dirty term. Even when done carefully, responsibly, and well by both sides, the process of producing documents (and, for the other side, the process of dealing with documents that have been produced) is tedious, thankless, and consumes a remarkable amount of resources. Things become much worse when the parties clash over what should be produced and how, and worse still when the party receiving the documents is more interested in using the discovery process to inflict pain or to generate a record for sanctions motion practice than he is in getting documents to help him prepare his case.
Protecting Record Producer's Interest In Music-Royalty Audit Scenarios
An unfortunate fact in the recording industry is that successful records result in audits by royalty participants. This is partly due to the entrenched distrust that artists have for record companies and partly to simple prudent business practices. If an artist sells hundreds of thousands or millions of units around the world, it would be the rare company that could move that many pieces of product without making a mistake. Sometimes the mistakes are just mistakes, and sometimes an audit holds up a mirror that reveals what happens under the record company hood - warts and all. And the "all" category can be very interesting.
<i>Clause & Effect</i><b>Interpreting 'Preliminary' Joint Venture Agreements</b>
Celebrities and entertainment entities may enter into joint venture agreements for projects with other parties to obtain funding and/or administrative support. The joint venture may begin with an initial letter agreement between the parties, though there are specific elements that must be included to make the letter agreement binding.
