Case Notes
Highlights of the latest product liability cases from around the country.
Online
As the article infra, page 1, discusses, attorneys who practice product liability law are not beyond the reach of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. For a complete description of the SEC's proposed rules regarding the standards of professional conduct for attorneys appearing before the SEC, go to <i>www.sec.gov/rules/proposed/31-8186</i>. The site summarizes the rules proposed pursuant to Section 307 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, which requires the SEC (Commission) to prescribe minimum standards of professional conduct for attorneys appearing and practicing before the Commission in any way in the representation of issuers.
Practice Tip: 30 Days Before Trial — Testing Your Expert's Knowledge
In the March 2003 Practice Tip, I discussed two of those individuals with whom the trial lawyer should meet within the 30 days prior to trial: the client and the physician. This month's tip discusses meeting with the engineer. For ease of reference, all individuals are deemed male. For purposes of the discussion, the case concerns injury caused by a defective machine. When the lawyer prepares the engineering expert, the plaintiff should be present. There are several issues about which he must be prepared to testify:
Tackling the 'Runaway Job-eating Blob': The ABA Calls on Congress to Rein in Asbestos Claims
<b>The Crisis</b> The following phrases have been used recently to define the current state of asbestos litigation in the United States — a "pit," an "endless saga," a "runaway job-eating blob," an "elephantine mass." For those who practice in this litigation, the phrases ring true. The "crisis," by which it has accurately become known, is multi-faceted. Dockets are clogged; the vast majority of claims are brought by unimpaired individuals who prematurely sue to avoid the bar of the statute of limitations; claims are brought against new "target" defendants that never manufactured asbestos-containing products; claims are forum-shopped to plaintiff-friendly jurisdictions where the claimants never lived or worked to maximize damage verdicts; and plaintiffs are consolidated with thousands of other claimants whose lawsuits are wholly unrelated in respect to occupation, method of exposure, or disease. These tactics create an unwieldy mass that often puts defendants in the untenable position of having to pay to buy their peace, even where there has been no discovery. Enough said. The system has run amuck.
Understanding the Distinct Purpose and Meaning of First-Party Insurance
Like all contracts, insurance agreements are drafted and entered into in order to carry forward the intentions of the parties. Because parties negotiate first-party property insurance to protect interests that differ fundamentally from those covered by third-party liability insurance, third-party precedent is of limited — if any — relevance and utility in interpreting first-party insurance agreements.
Case Briefs
Highlights of the latest insurance cases from around the country.
Four Hot Areas of Medical Device Liability
Once considered the realm of Rube Goldberg contraptions, medical technology is now a key feature of patient care. Longer life expectancy corresponds with the growth in entrepreneurial device companies making everything from tongue depressors to Jarvik-7 artificial hearts. Patients often expect perfect device performance along with flawless medical outcomes. Medical devices now comprise a multi-billion dollar industry, with vigorous growth forecast well into this century.
Document Production: Tomorrow Is Here
Litigators have seen massive technological changes occur during the past two decades. Perhaps some of the greatest of these changes have taken place in the time-honored discovery tradition of document production.
New Punitives Ruling Means New Battles
The Supreme Court's April 7 ruling on punitive damages, greeted with relief and enthusiasm by corporate defendants, opens new battlegrounds in litigation seeking those awards. The ruling significantly expanded the High Court's prior attempts to guide lower courts and lawyers on when punitive damages awards may run afoul of the Constitution. <i>State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Campbell</i>, No. 01-1289.
Case Notes
Highlights of the latest intellectual property cases from around the country.
