TreatiseTreatise

Product Liability Litigation: Current Law, Strategies and Best Practices

 by Stephanie A Scharf, Lise T Spacapan, Traci M Braun, Sarah R Marmor
 
 Copyright: 2009-2016
 Last Updated: December 2016

 Product Details >> 

Product Details

  • ISBN Number: 9781402412578
  • Page Count: 1284
  • Number of Volumes: 1
  •  

PLI’s Product Liability Litigation: Current Law, Strategies, and Best Practices provides comprehensive legal, technical, and strategic knowledge that maximizes your ability to prevail in consumer product liability cases, whether you’re the plaintiff’s or defendant’s attorney.

Product Liability Litigation also gives you current regulatory information, including the latest product safety standards, which enables you to help companies avoid claims and litigation altogether.

Featuring case studies, checklists, sample documents, and other practical resources, Product Liability Litigation shows you how to develop case assessment and discovery plans that can cut litigation costs and increase the likelihood of a favorable resolution for your clients; use forensic analysis and software tools to obtain key electronically-stored information for cases; deploy technologies to present complex scientific evidence in clear, compelling ways to jurors; craft e-discovery management plans that help you to comply with e-discovery rules, control costs, and avoid spoliation claims; reach product liability class action settlements; and help companies develop effective crisis management plans.

Updated annually or as needed, Product Liability Litigation: Current Law, Strategies, and Best Practices is essential reading for any attorney involved in product liability issues, including litigators and corporate attorneys seeking to minimize the legal exposure of their clients.

  Introduction
  Table of Contents
Chapter 1: Recent Trends in Product Claims and Product Defenses
  • § 1:1 : Overview1-2
  • § 1:2 : Preemption1-2
    • § 1:2.1 : Generally1-2
    • § 1:2.2 : Generic Drugs1-3
    • § 1:2.3 : Medical Devices1-4
      • [A] : Riegel v. Medtronic1-4
      • [B] : Trends Following Riegel: Parallel Claims1-5
      • [C] : Trends Following Riegel: Legislative Action1-7
    • § 1:2.4 : Brand Name Drugs1-8
    • § 1:2.5 : Fraud on the FDA1-10
    • § 1:2.6 : Vaccines1-12
    • § 1:2.7 : Automobiles1-14
  • § 1:3 : Name-Brand Manufacturer Liability for Generic Drugs1-15
  • § 1:4 : Federal Pleading Standards1-17
  • § 1:5 : Electronic Discovery1-19
    • § 1:5.1 : Technology-Assisted Review1-20
    • § 1:5.2 : Discovery of Social Media1-20
    • § 1:5.3 : Electronic Discovery As Taxable Costs1-22
  • § 1:6 : Class Actions1-23
    • § 1:6.1 : AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion1-23
    • § 1:6.2 : Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes, Inc.1-24
    • § 1:6.3 : Pre-certification Daubert Challenges1-26
    • § 1:6.4 : Class Action Tolling1-27
  • § 1:7 : Off-Label Promotion1-28
  • § 1:8 : Medical Monitoring1-32
  • § 1:9 : Third-Party Payor Lawsuits1-33
  • § 1:10 : Conclusion1-35
Chapter 2: Recasting Product Liability Claims as Consumer Fraud Cases—Plaintiff’s Perspective
  • § 2:1 : Overview2-2
    • § 2:1.1 : Background2-2
    • § 2:1.2 : Choosing Between Product Liability and Consumer Fraud Claims2-2
    • § 2:1.3 : Case Study: Depression Medication for Children and Adolescents2-4
  • § 2:2 : State Consumer Fraud Statutes and Class Actions2-6
    • § 2:2.1 : The Advantage of the Class Action in Consumer Fraud Cases2-6
    • § 2:2.2 : Certifying the Consumer Fraud Class2-8
    • § 2:2.3 : Risks to the Plaintiff’s Lawyer2-10
    • § 2:2.4 : Case Study: “Light” Cigarettes2-11
  • § 2:3 : Pre-Filing Considerations2-12
    • § 2:3.1 : Deception or Unfairness?2-12
      • [A] : Deception Claims2-12
      • [B] : Unfairness Claims2-14
    • § 2:3.2 : Surviving the Motion to Dismiss2-16
      • [A] : Standing2-16
      • [B] : Preemption/Exemption2-17
      • [C] : Fraud Must Be Pleaded with Particularity2-17
      • [D] : Statute of Limitations2-18
  • § 2:4 : Damages2-19
    • § 2:4.1 : Actual Damages2-19
      • [A] : Recovery for Purely Economic Loss2-19
      • [B] : Measurement of Actual Damages2-19
      • [C] : Excepting Damage Claims for Personal Injury/Wrongful Death2-20
    • § 2:4.2 : Punitive Damages2-21
    • § 2:4.3 : Attorney’s Fees2-21
  • § 2:5 : Conclusion2-23
Chapter 3: Recasting Product Liability Claims as Consumer Fraud Cases—Defendant’s Perspective
  • § 3:1 : Overview3-2
    • § 3:1.1 : Generally3-2
    • § 3:1.2 : History of Consumer Fraud Statutes3-2
    • § 3:1.3 : Characteristics of State Consumer Fraud Statutes3-6
    • § 3:1.4 : Recasting Products Liability Claims As Consumer Fraud Claims3-7
  • § 3:2 : Defeating Consumer Fraud Claims at the Motion to Dismiss Stage3-9
    • § 3:2.1 : Generally3-9
    • § 3:2.2 : Standing to Sue3-9
      • [A] : Generally3-9
      • [B] : Cases3-11
    • § 3:2.3 : Safe Harbor Provisions3-14
      • [A] : Generally3-14
      • [B] : Cases3-15
    • § 3:2.4 : Preemption3-17
      • [A] : Generally3-17
      • [B] : Cases3-17
    • § 3:2.5 : Reliance/Causation3-21
      • [A] : Generally3-21
      • [B] : Cases3-22
    • § 3:2.6 : Damages3-23
      • [A] : Generally3-23
      • [B] : Cases3-24
    • § 3:2.7 : Elements of Fraud3-27
      • [A] : Generally3-27
      • [B] : Cases3-28
    • § 3:2.8 : Statutes of Limitations3-30
      • [A] : Generally3-30
      • [B] : Cases3-30
    • § 3:2.9 : Learned Intermediary Doctrine3-31
      • [A] : Generally3-31
      • [B] : Cases3-31
  • § 3:3 : Defeating Consumer Fraud Claims at the Class Certification Stage3-34
    • § 3:3.1 : Generally3-34
    • § 3:3.2 : Cases3-35
  • § 3:4 : Conclusion3-39
Chapter 4: Game-Changers: Defending Products Cases with Child Plaintiffs
  • § 4:1 : Overview4-2
  • § 4:2 : Legal Strategies for Avoiding the “Blame Game”4-2
    • § 4:2.1 : Generally4-2
    • § 4:2.2 : Contributory, Comparative, and Imputed Negligence4-3
    • § 4:2.3 : Product Misuse and Alteration4-5
    • § 4:2.4 : Parents As “Learned Intermediaries”4-8
      • [A] : Learned Intermediary Doctrine4-8
      • [B] : Last Clear Chance Doctrine4-9
    • § 4:2.5 : State-of-the-Art/Industry Standard Defense4-10
  • § 4:3 : Discovery4-11
    • § 4:3.1 : Generally4-11
    • § 4:3.2 : Get to Know the Parents and Siblings4-12
    • § 4:3.3 : Deposing Children4-12
  • § 4:4 : Sympathy at Trial: Acknowledge It4-15
    • § 4:4.1 : Generally4-15
    • § 4:4.2 : Voir Dire4-15
    • § 4:4.3 : Trial Techniques for Cross-Examining Grieving Parents and the Injured Child4-16
    • § 4:4.4 : Damages: Removing Sympathy from the Equation4-16
      • [A] : Generally4-16
      • [B] : Annuity Evidence4-17
      • [C] : Mathematical Evidence4-18
  • § 4:5 : Conclusion4-19
Chapter 5: Preemption Defenses
  • § 5:1 : Overview5-1
  • § 5:2 : Express Preemption5-3
    • § 5:2.1 : Generally5-3
    • § 5:2.2 : Litigation Strategies in Express Preemption Cases5-3
    • § 5:2.3 : Specialized Canons of Construction in Express Preemption Cases5-5
    • § 5:2.4 : Savings Clauses5-7
  • § 5:3 : Implied Preemption5-8
    • § 5:3.1 : Generally5-8
    • § 5:3.2 : Litigation Strategies in Implied Preemption Cases5-9
  • § 5:4 : Agency Preemption5-11
  • § 5:5 : The Supreme Court’s Recent Preemption Decisions5-13
    • § 5:5.1 : Buckman Co. v. Plaintiffs’ Legal Committee5-13
    • § 5:5.2 : Sprietsma v. Mercury Marine5-14
    • § 5:5.3 : Bates v. Dow Agrosciences LLC5-15
    • § 5:5.4 : Riegel v. Medtronic, Inc.5-16
    • § 5:5.5 : Altria Group, Inc. v. Good5-18
    • § 5:5.6 : Wyeth v. Levine5-19
  • § 5:6 : Conclusion5-21
Chapter 6: Defending Class Action Lawsuits
  • § 6:1 : Overview6-2
  • § 6:2 : Class Action Basics6-4
    • § 6:2.1 : Generally6-4
    • § 6:2.2 : “Threshold” Requirements for Class Certification6-5
      • [A] : Ascertainable Class6-5
      • [B] : Representative’s Membership in the Proposed Class6-7
      • [C] : Claim That Is Not Moot6-7
    • § 6:2.3 : Rule 23(a)6-8
      • [A] : Generally6-8
      • [B] : Numerosity6-9
      • [C] : Commonality6-9
      • [D] : Typicality6-9
      • [E] : Adequacy6-9
    • § 6:2.4 : Rule 23(b)6-10
    • § 6:2.5 : A Subclass Must Individually Satisfy Rule 236-12
    • § 6:2.6 : Shady Grove Orthopedic Associates v. Allstate Insurance Co. and the Relationship Between Rule 23 and State Rules Regarding Class Certification6-13
  • § 6:3 : Federal Subject Matter Jurisdiction Over Product Liability Class Actions6-15
    • § 6:3.1 : Generally6-15
    • § 6:3.2 : Class Action Fairness Act’s Jurisdictional, Removal, and Appeal Provisions6-16
      • [A] : Expanded Diversity Jurisdiction6-16
      • [B] : Exceptions6-17
      • [C] : Liberalized Removal and Appeal Provisions6-18
    • § 6:3.3 : Other Sources of Diversity Jurisdiction Over Class Actions6-19
  • § 6:4 : Moving to Dismiss the Named Plaintiff’s Individual Claims6-19
  • § 6:5 : Moving to Dismiss the Class Allegations6-20
  • § 6:6 : Precertification Discovery6-22
    • § 6:6.1 : Generally6-22
    • § 6:6.2 : Differences Between Named Plaintiff’s and Class Members’ Claims6-22
    • § 6:6.3 : Bifurcation of Discovery6-23
    • § 6:6.4 : Scheduling6-24
  • § 6:7 : Communicating with Class Members6-24
  • § 6:8 : Moving for Summary Judgment on the Named Plaintiff’s Claims6-25
  • § 6:9 : Prevailing on the Class Certification Decision6-26
    • § 6:9.1 : Generally6-26
    • § 6:9.2 : “Triability” Arguments Against Class Certification6-27
      • [A] : Generally6-27
      • [B] : Individual Issues Secondary to Predominating Class Issues6-30
      • [C] : Rule 23(c)(4)(A) Issue Certification6-31
      • [D] : Choice-of-Law Issues6-31
      • [E] : Eisen v. Carlisle & Jacquelin6-33
    • § 6:9.3 : Due Process Arguments Against Class Certification6-35
    • § 6:9.4 : Other Arguments Against Certification6-36
      • [A] : Immaturity6-36
      • [B] : Improper Expert Testimony Supporting Certification6-37
  • § 6:10 : Pretrial Post-Certification Relief: Decertification and Appeal6-38
    • § 6:10.1 : Generally6-38
    • § 6:10.2 : Decertification6-38
    • § 6:10.3 : Appeal6-39
  • § 6:11 : Notice and Opt-Out6-40
  • § 6:12 : Trying a Product Liability Class Action6-42
Chapter 7: Class Action Developments Overseas
  • § 7:1 : Overview7-2
  • § 7:2 : Overseas Class Action Models7-3
    • § 7:2.1 : Generally7-4
      • [A] : Scope7-5
      • [B] : Standing7-6
      • [C] : Opt-In or Opt-Out Model7-6
      • [D] : With or Without Certification7-7
  • § 7:3 : Australia and Canada7-9
    • § 7:3.1 : Australia7-9
    • § 7:3.2 : Canada7-11
  • § 7:4 : England and Wales7-14
  • § 7:5 : Africa7-16
    • § 7:5.1 : Nigeria7-16
    • § 7:5.2 : South Africa7-17
  • § 7:6 : Israel7-18
  • § 7:7 : Europe7-21
    • § 7:7.1 : Overview7-21
    • § 7:7.2 : Belgium7-21
    • § 7:7.3 : Bulgaria7-22
    • § 7:7.4 : Denmark, Norway, and Sweden7-22
    • § 7:7.5 : Finland7-24
    • § 7:7.6 : France7-25
    • § 7:7.7 : Italy7-26
    • § 7:7.8 : Lithuania7-28
    • § 7:7.9 : Malta7-28
    • § 7:7.10 : The Netherlands7-28
    • § 7:7.11 : Poland7-30
  • § 7:8 : European Union7-31
  • § 7:9 : Latin America7-33
    • § 7:9.1 : Overview7-33
    • § 7:9.2 : Argentina7-34
    • § 7:9.3 : Brazil7-34
    • § 7:9.4 : Chile7-37
    • § 7:9.5 : Costa Rica7-38
    • § 7:9.6 : Ecuador7-38
    • § 7:9.7 : Mexico7-40
    • § 7:9.8 : Peru7-41
  • § 7:10 : Asia7-41
    • § 7:10.1 : Overview7-41
    • § 7:10.2 : People’s Republic of China7-42
    • § 7:10.3 : Hong Kong7-45
    • § 7:10.4 : Taiwan7-46
    • § 7:10.5 : Japan7-47
    • § 7:10.6 : Korea7-47
  • § 7:11 : Forecasting the Future for Class Actions Overseas7-48
Chapter 8: Litigation in Foreign Countries Against U.S. Companies
  • § 8:1 : Overview8-1
  • § 8:2 : Initial Considerations in Responding to Foreign Litigation8-2
    • § 8:2.1 : Retaining Foreign Counsel8-2
    • § 8:2.2 : Service and Personal Jurisdiction Challenges8-3
    • § 8:2.3 : Venue Challenges8-3
    • § 8:2.4 : Pretrial Asset Seizures8-4
    • § 8:2.5 : Obtaining Foreign Evidence8-5
  • § 8:3 : U.S. Implications of Foreign Litigation8-6
    • § 8:3.1 : Parallel U.S. Litigation8-6
    • § 8:3.2 : Settlement of U.S. Litigation8-7
    • § 8:3.3 : U.S. Governmental Inquiries/Actions8-8
    • § 8:3.4 : Enforceability of Adverse Foreign Judgments8-10
    • § 8:3.5 : Implications of Foreign Criminal Cases8-15
  • § 8:4 : Conclusion8-16
Chapter 9: Scientific Advances—Potential Impact on Medical Monitoring
  • § 9:1 : Overview9-2
  • § 9:2 : Exposure Modeling9-3
  • § 9:3 : Medical Monitoring Claims9-5
    • § 9:3.1 : Generally9-5
    • § 9:3.2 : Class Actions9-6
    • § 9:3.3 : Establishing a Cognizable Injury9-7
    • § 9:3.4 : Establishing Exposure9-7
  • § 9:4 : Key Medical Monitoring Decisions9-8
    • § 9:4.1 : Majority View—Medical Monitoring Not Recognized9-8
    • § 9:4.2 : Minority View—Medical Monitoring Recognized9-10
      • [A] : Factors to Establish a Medical Monitoring Claim9-11
        • [A][1] : New Jersey9-11
        • [A][2] : California9-12
        • [A][3] : Pennsylvania9-13
        • [A][4] : West Virginia9-15
        • [A][5] : Missouri9-17
        • [A][6] : Other States9-17
      • [B] : Lack of Evidence of Plaintiffs’ Dose—Class Certification Preclusion9-19
        • [B][1] : Overview9-19
        • [B][2] : U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana9-20
        • [B][3] : U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia9-20
        • [B][4] : U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey9-22
    • § 9:4.3 : Future of Medical Monitoring Claims9-24
  • § 9:5 : Biomonitoring9-25
    • § 9:5.1 : Generally9-25
    • § 9:5.2 : Limitation9-26
      • [A] : Misinterpretation9-26
      • [B] : Other Limitations9-27
    • § 9:5.3 : Implications for Tort Litigation9-28
    • § 9:5.4 : Implications for Medical Monitoring Causes of Action9-29
  • § 9:6 : Biomarkers9-32
    • § 9:6.1 : Generally9-32
    • § 9:6.2 : Use of Biomarkers in Medical Monitoring Claims9-32
  • § 9:7 : Conclusion9-35
Chapter 10: Emerging Issues in Pharmaceutical and Biotech Litigation Arising from Clinical Trials
  • § 10:1 : Overview10-2
  • § 10:2 : Promotion Inconsistent with or Beyond Product Labels10-3
    • § 10:2.1 : Consumer Fraud Claims10-3
      • [A] : Generally10-3
      • [B] : Safe Harbor Provisions of State Consumer Fraud Statutes10-4
      • [C] : Class Certification in Consumer Fraud Class Actions10-6
      • [D] : Price Inflation Damages Theory10-12
      • [E] : Unjust Enrichment10-14
    • § 10:2.2 : Government Investigations10-15
      • [A] : Generally10-15
      • [B] : Under-Reporting or Selective Reporting of Clinical Trial Results10-15
      • [C] : The Anti-Kickback Statute and False Claims Act10-18
  • § 10:3 : Failure to Disclose Material Clinical Trial Results: Securities Claims10-21
    • § 10:3.1 : Generally10-21
    • § 10:3.2 : Government Regulation of Pharmaceutical and Biotechnology Companies10-21
    • § 10:3.3 : Securities Litigation Involving the Pharmaceutical and Biotechnology Industry10-23
  • § 10:4 : Injury Claims by Clinical Trial Subjects10-28
    • § 10:4.1 : Generally10-28
    • § 10:4.2 : Medical Malpractice Claims10-28
    • § 10:4.3 : Lack of Informed Consent Claims: Failure to Disclose Financial Relationships and Other Conflicts of Interest10-29
    • § 10:4.4 : Novel Liability Theories10-29
    • § 10:4.5 : Suits Attempting to Force Manufacturers to Continue to Provide Study Medications10-30
    • § 10:4.6 : Novel Defendants—Institutional Review Boards10-33
    • § 10:4.7 : Increased International Scrutiny of Clinical Trials10-34
  • § 10:5 : Conclusion10-36
Chapter 11: Emerging Issues in Medical Device Litigation
  • § 11:1 : Possible Exceptions to the Preemption of Claims Involving FDA Pre-Market-Approved Medical Devices11-2
    • § 11:1.1 : Generally11-2
    • § 11:1.2 : Arguments for Exception to Preemption11-4
      • [A] : Claims for Off-Label Use or Promotion11-4
      • [B] : Claims for Failure to Make Changes in Warnings11-13
      • [C] : Manufacturing Defect Claims11-15
      • [D] : Express Warranty Claims11-20
  • § 11:2 : Claims Arising from the Presence in the Operating Room of a Medical Device Manufacturer’s Sales Representative11-23
    • § 11:2.1 : Generally11-23
    • § 11:2.2 : Invasion of Privacy11-24
    • § 11:2.3 : Battery11-26
    • § 11:2.4 : Negligently Advising or Failing to Advise the Physician11-28
    • § 11:2.5 : Unauthorized Practice of Medicine11-32
    • § 11:2.6 : Recommended Practices for Manufacturer’s Representatives11-34
  • § 11:3 : Admissibility of Testimony by “FDA Experts” and Human Factors Experts11-35
    • § 11:3.1 : “FDA Experts” and Human Factors Experts Generally11-35
    • § 11:3.2 : Rule 702 Challenges to Experts11-36
      • [A] : Lack of Helpfulness to the Fact-Finder11-36
      • [B] : Improper Invasion of Judge’s Role11-41
      • [C] : Lack of Competence to Testify11-43
      • [D] : Lack of Reliability of Testimony11-45
    • § 11:3.3 : Rule 704 Challenges to Experts—Opinions on an Ultimate Issue11-47
    • § 11:3.4 : The FDA’s Amicus Brief in Strong v. American Cyanamid—Rules 702 and 704, and Deference to the FDA11-48
    • § 11:3.5 : Admissibility of Testimony by Human Factors Experts11-50
Chapter 12: Emerging Issues in Automotive Product Liability Litigation
  • § 12:1 : Overview12-2
  • § 12:2 : NHTSA’s Revision of the Roof Crush Resistance Standard12-2
    • § 12:2.1 : Roof Strength Standard Background12-2
    • § 12:2.2 : Does Roof Strength Matter?12-3
    • § 12:2.3 : Finalizing the Standard12-6
    • § 12:2.4 : Debate Over Preemption of State Court Claims Involving Roof Strength12-8
      • [A] : Generally12-8
      • [B] : Law of Preemption12-9
      • [C] : FMVSS 216’s Preemption Language Constitutional12-10
        • [C][1] : Preemption Analysis of Geier12-10
        • [C][2] : Deference for NHTSA Interpretations12-11
    • § 12:2.5 : Future of Roof Crush Litigation12-13
  • § 12:3 : Effect of NHTSA’s Standardization of Electronic Stability Control on Automotive Product Liability Litigation12-14
    • § 12:3.1 : Electronic Stability Control Background12-14
      • [A] : Generally12-14
      • [B] : Technology of ESC12-14
      • [C] : Rationale for Mandating ESC12-17
    • § 12:3.2 : Change in the Current Focus of ESC Litigation12-17
      • [A] : Potential Increase in Defective ESC Design Claims12-17
      • [B] : Effect of Aftermarket Component Parts12-19
    • § 12:3.3 : Impact of FMVSS 12612-21
  • § 12:4 : Conclusion12-21
Chapter 12A: Emerging Issues in Food Law and Litigation
  • § 12A:1 : Overview12A-2
  • § 12A:2 : Regulatory Framework12A-3
    • § 12A:2.1 : Generally12A-3
    • § 12A:2.2 : FDA12A-5
    • § 12A:2.3 : USDA12A-8
    • § 12A:2.4 : FTC12A-9
  • § 12A:3 : Food-Borne Illness Litigation12A-9
    • § 12A:3.1 : Generally12A-9
    • § 12A:3.2 : Strict Liability12A-10
    • § 12A:3.3 : Defect12A-11
      • [A] : Generally12A-11
      • [B] : Definition of Defective Food12A-12
      • [C] : Proof of Defect12A-14
    • § 12A:3.4 : Causation12A-15
    • § 12A:3.5 : Causation in Food-Borne Illness Outbreaks12A-17
    • § 12A:3.6 : Liability Across the Supply Chain12A-18
      • [A] : Generally12A-18
      • [B] : Sellers and Distributors12A-19
      • [C] : “Manufacturer” of Food Products12A-19
      • [D] : Third-Party Auditors/Consultants12A-20
  • § 12A:4 : Class Actions12A-21
    • § 12A:4.1 : Food-Borne Illness Outbreaks12A-21
    • § 12A:4.2 : Consumer Fraud Litigation12A-22
      • [A] : Generally12A-22
      • [B] : Reliance12A-25
      • [C] : Causation12A-26
      • [D] : Injury12A-27
      • [E] : Failure to Sufficiently Plead12A-27
      • [F] : Preemption and Primary Jurisdiction12A-28
  • § 12A:5 : Conclusion12A-31
Chapter 13: Emerging Issues in Cosmetics and Other Beauty Product Litigation
  • § 13:1 : Overview13-2
  • § 13:2 : Regulatory Framework of Cosmetics and Beauty Products13-3
    • § 13:2.1 : Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act13-3
      • [A] : Generally13-3
      • [B] : FDA Oversight13-3
    • § 13:2.2 : Fair Packaging and Labeling Act13-5
  • § 13:3 : Increased State Oversight of Cosmetics and Beauty Products13-5
    • § 13:3.1 : Generally13-5
    • § 13:3.2 : California Safe Cosmetics Act13-6
    • § 13:3.3 : Safety Concerns13-7
  • § 13:4 : Issues Related to Ingredients of Cosmetic and Beauty Products13-7
    • § 13:4.1 : Industry Safety Assessments13-7
      • [A] : Generally13-7
      • [B] : Lead in Lipstick13-8
      • [C] : Phthalates13-9
      • [D] : Dioxane and Other Chemicals13-10
      • [E] : Nanomaterials13-11
    • § 13:4.2 : Product Liability and Other Litigation Related to Cosmetic Ingredients13-13
      • [A] : Traditional Product Liability Claims13-13
      • [B] : “No Injury” Product Liability Claims13-14
      • [C] : Private Actions to Enforce State Health and Safety Requirements13-15
  • § 13:5 : Organic, All Natural, and Other Content Claims13-16
    • § 13:5.1 : Generally13-16
    • § 13:5.2 : Definition of “Organic”13-16
    • § 13:5.3 : “All Natural” Products13-17
    • § 13:5.4 : Effectiveness of Cosmetic and Beauty Products13-20
  • § 13:6 : Products Claiming Attributes of Cosmetics and Drugs13-21
    • § 13:6.1 : Definition of “Cosmeceuticals”13-21
    • § 13:6.2 : Consequences of Marketing Cosmetics As Drugs13-22
  • § 13:7 : Conclusion13-23
Chapter 14: Emerging Issues for Products Made Overseas
  • § 14:1 : Overview14-2
  • § 14:2 : Jurisdictional Challenges14-3
    • § 14:2.1 : Generally14-3
    • § 14:2.2 : U.S. Jurisdictional Framework14-3
    • § 14:2.3 : Specific Jurisdiction Over Foreign Product Manufacturers: “Stream of Commerce” Theory and Its Emerging Application14-6
    • § 14:2.4 : “Reasonableness/Fairness” of Jurisdiction Over Foreign Product Manufacturers14-9
    • § 14:2.5 : “Alter Ego” Jurisdiction: An End Around the Jurisdictional Challenges?14-10
  • § 14:3 : Discovery of Documents and People Abroad14-14
    • § 14:3.1 : Generally14-14
    • § 14:3.2 : Emerging Issues in Discovery Methods14-15
      • [A] : Developments in the Selection of the Discovery Regime14-15
      • [B] : Party “Control” of Information Abroad14-18
      • [C] : Developments in Discovery Under the Hague Convention14-20
    • § 14:3.3 : Barriers to Discovery14-21
      • [A] : Barriers to Discovery in the EU14-21
      • [B] : Barriers to Discovery in China14-24
        • [B][1] : China’s Limited Participation in the Hague Convention14-24
        • [B][2] : China State Secrecy Law14-25
        • [B][3] : China Data Privacy Law14-26
  • § 14:4 : Enforcing U.S. Judgments Overseas14-27
  • § 14:5 : The Future14-28
  • § 14:6 : Conclusion14-30
Chapter 15: Update on the Law of Damages in Product Liability Litigation; and Appendices 15A-15B
  • § 15:1 : Compensatory Damages15-2
    • § 15:1.1 : Damage Caps for Non-Economic Loss15-2
    • § 15:1.2 : Collateral Source Rule15-3
  • § 15:2 : Recovery for Emotional Distress15-4
  • § 15:3 : Recovery for Pure Economic Loss15-5
  • § 15:4 : Recovery of Punitive Damages15-7
    • § 15:4.1 : Generally15-7
    • § 15:4.2 : Federal Basis for Punitive Damages Award15-8
    • § 15:4.3 : State Law Basis for Punitive Damages Award15-9
    • § 15:4.4 : Punitive Damages Caps15-10
    • § 15:4.5 : Constitutional Challenges to Punitive Damages Awards15-10
    • § 15:4.6 : Ratio of Punitive Damages to Actual Damage Award15-10
  • § 15:5 : Federal Preemption of State Tort Claims for Defective Drugs and Medical Devices15-13
  • Appendix 15A : State Punitive Damages LegislationApp. 15A–1
  • Appendix 15B : State Punitive Damages CapsApp. 15B–1
Chapter 16: Using Early Case Assessments to Develop Strategy; and Appendix 16A
  • § 16:1 : Overview16-2
  • § 16:2 : Definition of Early Case Assessment16-2
  • § 16:3 : Uses of Early Case Assessment16-3
  • § 16:4 : Parsing the Definition16-4
    • § 16:4.1 : An Intentional Process16-4
    • § 16:4.2 : With Specific Components16-5
    • § 16:4.3 : Designed to Guide Strategy16-6
    • § 16:4.4 : Done As Early As Possible16-6
    • § 16:4.5 : Using Information That Will Be Incomplete but Not Inadequate16-7
      • [A] : Focusing on Case-Determinative Information16-7
      • [B] : Assessing the Importance of Unknown Information: Sensitivity Analysis16-8
  • § 16:5 : Conducting the Early Case Assessment16-9
  • § 16:6 : Documenting the Early Case Assessment16-11
  • § 16:7 : Implementing the Early Case Assessment16-11
  • § 16:8 : Revisiting the Strategy16-13
  • § 16:9 : Building Strong Counsel/Client Ties16-13
  • § 16:10 : Conclusion16-14
  • Appendix 16A : Template for an Early Case AssessmentApp. 16A–1
Chapter 17: Impact of Insurance Policies
  • § 17:1 : Coverage for Defense, Indemnification and/or Settlement of Products Liability Claims17-2
    • § 17:1.1 : Generally17-2
    • § 17:1.2 : Duty to Defend17-3
      • [A] : Generally17-3
      • [B] : Primary Policies17-3
      • [C] : Excess and Umbrella Policies17-5
  • § 17:2 : Duty to Indemnify17-6
    • § 17:2.1 : Generally17-6
    • § 17:2.2 : Insuring Provisions17-7
      • [A] : CGL Policies17-7
      • [B] : Claims-Made Policies17-8
      • [C] : Excess and Umbrella Policies17-8
      • [D] : Insured Contracts17-9
    • § 17:2.3 : Exclusions17-10
      • [A] : Generally17-10
      • [B] : Products/Operations/Completed Operations17-11
      • [C] : Known Losses17-12
      • [D] : Business Risks, Recalls17-12
      • [E] : Punitive Damages17-14
    • § 17:2.4 : Conditions17-14
  • § 17:3 : Amount of Coverage Available17-15
    • § 17:3.1 : Policy Limits17-15
      • [A] : Aggregate, Per-Occurrence and “Batch” Limits17-15
      • [B] : Number of Occurrences17-15
      • [C] : Trigger Theories and “Stacking” of Annual Limits17-17
      • [D] : Allocation17-19
      • [E] : Exhaustion17-20
      • [F] : Operations vs. Products Limits17-20
    • § 17:3.2 : Supplementary Payments17-21
  • § 17:4 : Coverage Litigation17-22
    • § 17:4.1 : Impact of Coverage Disputes on Liability Defense17-22
    • § 17:4.2 : Ability to Resolve Coverage Dispute Before Underlying Claim17-23
    • § 17:4.3 : Insurer’s Liability for Unreasonable Failure to Settle Claims Within Policy Limits17-24
    • § 17:4.4 : Insured’s Right to Independent Counsel17-25
  • § 17:5 : Conclusion17-27
Chapter 18: Advantages and Disadvantages of Multidistrict Litigation
  • § 18:1 : Overview18-2
  • § 18:2 : Advantages of Multidistrict Litigation18-2
    • § 18:2.1 : Efficient and Expeditious Pretrial Procedures: Avoidance of Duplication18-2
    • § 18:2.2 : Determinations by a Single Forum18-3
    • § 18:2.3 : A Global Point of View18-5
  • § 18:3 : Disadvantages of the MDL Process18-6
  • § 18:4 : Defendant’s Perspective18-6
    • § 18:4.1 : Benefits18-6
      • [A] : Centralized Discovery18-7
      • [B] : Lower Transactional Costs18-7
      • [C] : Single Dispositive Motions18-8
      • [D] : Uniform Pleadings, Interrogatories, and Discovery Approaches18-8
      • [E] : Daubert Challenges18-8
    • § 18:4.2 : Disadvantages18-9
  • § 18:5 : Plaintiff’s Perspective18-10
    • § 18:5.1 : Benefits18-10
    • § 18:5.2 : Disadvantages18-11
      • [A] : Inconvenient Forum18-11
      • [B] : Trial Delay18-11
      • [C] : Loss of Plaintiff’s Individual Interests18-11
      • [D] : Challenges to Plaintiffs’ Counsel: the Common Benefit Assessment Order18-12
  • § 18:6 : Conclusion18-13
Chapter 19: Strategies for Co-Defending Product Actions
  • § 19:1 : Overview19-2
  • § 19:2 : Early Considerations in Multi-Defendant Actions19-3
    • § 19:2.1 : Reconfiguring the Players19-3
      • [A] : Generally19-3
      • [B] : Compulsory Joinder19-4
      • [C] : Permissive Joinder and Severance19-5
      • [D] : Third-Party Practice19-5
    • § 19:2.2 : Coordinating Removal Among Co-Defendants19-6
  • § 19:3 : Choosing the Defense Strategy19-9
  • § 19:4 : Facilitating Cooperation Among Co-Defendants19-10
    • § 19:4.1 : The Joint Defense Privilege and Joint Defense Agreements19-10
      • [A] : Generally19-10
      • [B] : Ethical Considerations Surrounding Joint Defense Agreements19-11
      • [C] : Drafting the Joint Defense Agreement19-14
    • § 19:4.2 : Informal Discovery Among Co-Defendants19-16
  • § 19:5 : Common Dangers of Joint Defense19-17
    • § 19:5.1 : Protecting Confidential and Proprietary Information with Self-Executing and Multi-Tiered Protective Orders19-17
    • § 19:5.2 : Ethical Considerations When Representing Multiple Defendants19-18
    • § 19:5.3 : Settlement Agreements Involving Less Than All Co-Defendants; the Dangers and Risks of Mary Carter Agreements19-20
  • § 19:6 : Cooperation Among Co-Defendants with Adverse Interests19-23
    • § 19:6.1 : Dealing with Indemnity Obligations19-23
    • § 19:6.2 : Sharing (or Not Sharing) Experts19-24
    • § 19:6.3 : Mediation Strategy and Settlement Allocation Among Co-Defendants19-25
      • [A] : Generally19-25
      • [B] : Inform the Decision Makers19-25
      • [C] : Evaluate the Insurance Coverage19-26
      • [D] : Consider a Joint Mediation Plan19-26
    • § 19:6.4 : Handling the Hostile Co-Defendant19-27
  • § 19:7 : Checklist for Co-Defending Product Actions19-27
Chapter 20: Crisis Management
  • § 20:1 : Overview20-2
  • § 20:2 : Crisis Management Planning Process20-3
    • § 20:2.1 : Form a Crisis Management Team20-3
      • [A] : Identify Internal Team Members20-4
      • [B] : Identify External Advisors20-5
      • [C] : Appoint a Chairperson20-6
      • [D] : Identify Alternate Members and Prepare to Redirect Workflow20-6
    • § 20:2.2 : Risk Assessment20-6
    • § 20:2.3 : Developing a Written Crisis Management Plan20-9
      • [A] : Standard Elements20-9
      • [B] : Responsibilities of the Crisis Management Team20-10
      • [C] : Communications Tree20-12
      • [D] : Communications Plan20-13
        • [D][1] : Process for Drafting and Approving Internal and External Statements20-14
        • [D][2] : Planning How to Communicate the Business’s Internal and External Statements20-17
        • [D][3] : Communications to Litigation Players20-19
      • [E] : Social Media Plan20-19
      • [F] : Fact Gathering20-22
      • [G] : Post-Crisis Strategy20-23
      • [H] : Sample Documents20-23
    • § 20:2.4 : Practicing the Written Crisis Management Plan20-23
  • § 20:3 : The Attorney’s Role20-24
    • § 20:3.1 : Attorney-Client Privilege20-25
    • § 20:3.2 : Work Product Doctrine20-26
  • § 20:4 : Conclusion20-27
Chapter 21: Power of the Media in Bet-the-Company Litigation
  • § 21:1 : Overview21-2
  • § 21:2 : The Media During a Crisis21-3
    • § 21:2.1 : Role of the Media21-3
    • § 21:2.2 : Using the Media21-3
    • § 21:2.3 : Case Studies21-4
      • [A] : Bridgestone/Firestone: What Not to Do When Faced With a Crisis21-4
        • [A][1] : Background21-4
        • [A][2] : Avoiding Responsibility21-4
        • [A][3] : Withholding Information21-5
        • [A][4] : Failure to Develop a Media Response Plan21-6
      • [B] : Odwalla: Effective Use of the Media During a Crisis21-7
      • [C] : Effective Crises Management21-8
        • [C][1] : Generally21-8
        • [C][2] : Designating a Media Response Team21-8
        • [C][3] : Taking Responsibility21-9
  • § 21:3 : Developing an Effective Media Response Plan Before a Crisis Hits21-10
    • § 21:3.1 : Generally21-10
    • § 21:3.2 : Internal Organization—Forming a Media Response Team21-11
    • § 21:3.3 : Developing Media Relationships21-12
    • § 21:3.4 : Establishing Online Support Systems21-12
    • § 21:3.5 : Conveying Company Commitment to Customers21-13
  • § 21:4 : Responding to a Crisis21-13
    • § 21:4.1 : Managing Media Under Fire21-13
    • § 21:4.2 : Steps to Take When Responding to a Crisis21-14
      • [A] : Developing a Strategic Media Message21-14
      • [B] : Timely Delivery of Media Message21-14
      • [C] : Opening Line of Communication21-15
      • [D] : Progressive Planning21-15
  • § 21:5 : Litigation and the Media21-15
    • § 21:5.1 : Generally21-15
    • § 21:5.2 : Handling the Media Without Jeopardizing Lawsuits21-17
      • [A] : Consistent Company Media Message and Strategy21-17
      • [B] : Retaining Experienced Legal Counsel21-17
      • [C] : Consistent Company Media Message and Strategy21-18
  • § 21:6 : Conclusion21-18
Chapter 22: Class Action Settlements
  • § 22:1 : Overview22-3
  • § 22:2 : Features of Class Action Settlements22-4
    • § 22:2.1 : Role of the Class Representative and Class Counsel22-4
      • [A] : Traditional Settlements22-4
      • [B] : Class Action Settlements22-4
    • § 22:2.2 : Judicial Approval22-5
      • [A] : Need for Judicial Approval22-5
      • [B] : Increased Judicial Scrutiny22-5
      • [C] : Standard for Judicial Approval22-6
    • § 22:2.3 : Transparency in the Settlement Process22-7
    • § 22:2.4 : Multiple Parties with Goals of Derailment22-9
      • [A] : Generally22-9
      • [B] : Differences in Goals and Acceptability of Terms22-9
      • [C] : Class Member Objections22-10
  • § 22:3 : Basic Steps for Class Action Settlements22-10
    • § 22:3.1 : Generally22-10
    • § 22:3.2 : Negotiation Process22-11
      • [A] : Generally22-11
      • [B] : Timing of the Class Settlement22-11
        • [B][1] : Generally22-11
        • [B][2] : Pre-Suit Settlements22-12
          • [B][2][a] : Advantages22-12
          • [B][2][b] : Disadvantages22-13
        • [B][3] : Early Rulings22-13
        • [B][4] : Class Certification Ruling22-13
        • [B][5] : Deciding Whether to Proceed to Trial22-14
          • [B][5][a] : Generally22-14
          • [B][5][b] : Risks for Plaintiffs22-14
          • [B][5][c] : Risks for Defendants22-15
      • [C] : Good-Faith, Arm’s-Length Negotiations22-15
      • [D] : Defining the Settlement Class22-16
        • [D][1] : For Plaintiffs22-16
        • [D][2] : For Defendants22-16
        • [D][3] : Sub-Classes22-17
        • [D][4] : Class Exclusions22-18
      • [E] : Defining the Scope of the Release22-18
        • [E][1] : What Claims Will Be Released?22-18
        • [E][2] : What Is the Time Period Covered by the Release?22-20
        • [E][3] : Who Will Be the “Released Parties”?22-21
      • [F] : Consideration to Class Members22-21
        • [F][1] : Generally22-21
        • [F][2] : Settlement Fund Allocation22-22
          • [F][2][a] : Lump Sum Settlements22-22
          • [F][2][b] : Coupon Settlements22-23
        • [F][3] : Settlements for Sub-Classes22-26
        • [F][4] : Undistributed or Unclaimed Distribution22-26
          • [F][4][a] : Generally22-26
          • [F][4][b] : Cy Pres Funds22-27
        • [F][5] : Equitable Relief or Changes in Business Practices22-29
        • [F][6] : Fairness of the Settlement Consideration22-30
      • [G] : Incentive Award to Class Representative22-31
      • [H] : Confirmatory Discovery22-32
      • [I] : Notice and Administration Procedures22-32
        • [I][1] : Generally22-32
        • [I][2] : Notice’s Content and Methods of Distribution22-33
          • [I][2][a] : First-Class Mail22-35
          • [I][2][b] : Bulk Mail22-35
          • [I][2][c] : E-mail22-36
          • [I][2][d] : Other Methods of Notice22-36
        • [I][3] : Notice’s “Reach”22-36
        • [I][4] : Settlement Administration22-37
      • [J] : Negotiating Class Counsel’s Fees22-38
      • [K] : Drafting the Settlement Agreement22-39
    • § 22:3.3 : Preliminary Approval Process22-40
      • [A] : Generally22-40
      • [B] : Motion for Preliminary Approval22-40
        • [B][1] : Generally22-40
        • [B][2] : Topics Covered by the Motion22-41
          • [B][2][a] : Summary of the History of the Litigation22-41
          • [B][2][b] : Background of Settlement Negotiation22-41
          • [B][2][c] : Summary Description of Settlement Terms22-42
          • [B][2][d] : Provide Sound Bases for Modified Class Definition22-43
          • [B][2][e] : Description of Key Factual and Legal Issues22-43
          • [B][2][f] : Demonstrate Qualification for Class Certification22-43
      • [C] : Preliminary Approval Hearing22-46
      • [D] : Dealing with Potential Objectors22-47
        • [D][1] : Generally22-47
        • [D][2] : Types of Objectors22-47
        • [D][3] : Defeating Objectors22-48
        • [D][4] : Discovery of Objectors22-49
        • [D][5] : Settling with Objectors22-50
      • [E] : Requests to Enjoin Competing Class Actions22-51
    • § 22:3.4 : Fairness Hearing Process22-52
      • [A] : Generally22-52
      • [B] : Setting the Timetable for the Fairness Hearing22-52
      • [C] : CAFA’s Notice Requirements for Government Officials22-53
      • [D] : Submissions for the Fairness Hearing22-55
      • [E] : Use of Experts and Other Witnesses for the Fairness Hearing22-56
      • [F] : Conduct of the Fairness Hearing22-57
  • § 22:4 : Risks of a Failed Class Settlement22-58
    • § 22:4.1 : Changes to the Players and Dynamics22-58
    • § 22:4.2 : Defendant’s Diminished Leverage22-59
    • § 22:4.3 : Bar to Challenging Class Certification22-59
    • § 22:4.4 : Financial Impact on the Defendant22-61
Chapter 23: Mass Tort Settlement Strategies
  • § 23:1 : Overview23-2
  • § 23:2 : Settlement Strategies23-3
    • § 23:2.1 : Settlement Class Actions23-3
      • [A] : Generally23-3
      • [B] : Heightened Scrutiny of Certification Requirements23-4
      • [C] : Opt-Out Rights23-6
      • [D] : Appellate Review Concerns23-7
    • § 23:2.2 : Inventory Settlements23-8
      • [A] : Generally23-8
      • [B] : Benefits23-8
      • [C] : Drawbacks23-9
    • § 23:2.3 : Settlement Funds23-10
    • § 23:2.4 : Hybrid Approach23-12
    • § 23:2.5 : Aggregate Settlement Agreements with Plaintiffs’ Attorneys23-14
      • [A] : Generally23-14
      • [B] : Propulsid® Litigation23-15
        • [B][1] : Background23-15
        • [B][2] : First Settlement Agreement23-15
        • [B][3] : Second Settlement Agreement23-17
  • § 23:3 : Private Settlement Agreement: Vioxx Settlement23-18
    • § 23:3.1 : Background23-18
    • § 23:3.2 : Pre-Settlement Proceedings23-18
    • § 23:3.3 : Settlement Agreement23-20
    • § 23:3.4 : Subsequent Developments and Issues23-25
  • § 23:4 : Additional Issues for Consideration23-29
Chapter 24: Arbitration
  • § 24:1 : Overview24-1
  • § 24:2 : Agreement to Arbitrate24-2
    • § 24:2.1 : Generally24-2
    • § 24:2.2 : Benefits24-3
    • § 24:2.3 : Pitfalls24-3
      • [A] : Broad Language24-3
      • [B] : Multiple Outcomes24-4
      • [C] : Finality24-5
  • § 24:3 : Post-Claim Agreements to Arbitrate24-5
  • § 24:4 : Individual Claims by End-Users24-6
    • § 24:4.1 : Generally24-6
    • § 24:4.2 : Arbitration Considerations24-6
    • § 24:4.3 : Voluntary Arbitration Rules24-7
  • § 24:5 : Arbitration in “Mass Tort” Product Liability Claims24-8
    • § 24:5.1 : Background24-8
    • § 24:5.2 : Benefits24-9
  • § 24:6 : Conclusion24-10
Chapter 25: Privilege in a Global Product Economy
  • § 25:1 : Overview25-2
  • § 25:2 : Attorney-Client Privilege25-3
    • § 25:2.1 : Generally25-3
    • § 25:2.2 : Who Is the Client?25-5
    • § 25:2.3 : Whose Law Applies?25-7
  • § 25:3 : Question of Voluntary Waiver25-8
    • § 25:3.1 : Voluntary Waiver During Government Investigations25-9
      • [A] : “Holder” Memo25-9
      • [B] : “Thompson” Memo25-10
      • [C] : “McCallum” and “McNulty” Memos25-10
      • [D] : Senator Arlen Specter and Deputy Attorney General Mark R. Filip25-12
    • § 25:3.2 : Voluntary Waiver During SEC Investigations25-14
      • [A] : The Seaboard Report25-14
      • [B] : The SEC’s Enforcement Manual and Enforcement Initiative25-15
    • § 25:3.3 : Selective Waiver25-17
  • § 25:4 : Questions of Involuntary Waiver by In-House Counsel During EU Investigations25-19
    • § 25:4.1 : Generally25-19
    • § 25:4.2 : The “Attorney” and Privilege in the EU25-19
  • § 25:5 : Attorney-Client Privilege Issues Today25-23
    • § 25:5.1 : The Implications of Voluntary Waiver25-23
    • § 25:5.2 : The Implications of Involuntary Waiver Post-Akzo Nobel25-24
  • § 25:6 : Conclusion25-25
Chapter 26: Fact Finding in the Digital Age
  • § 26.1 : Overview26-2
  • § 26.2 : Conducting Background Investigations26-3
    • § 26.2.1 : Generally26-3
    • § 26.2.2 : The Internet26-3
      • [A] : Generally26-3
      • [B] : Search Engines26-5
      • [C] : Bulletin Board Postings26-7
      • [D] : Social Networking Sites26-8
      • [E] : Blogs26-10
  • § 26.3 : Subscription Databases26-11
    • § 26.3.1 : Generally26-11
    • § 26.3.2 : LexisNexis26-12
    • § 26.3.3 : Westlaw26-12
    • § 26.3.4 : World-Check26-12
  • § 26.4 : Researching People26-13
  • § 26.5 : Researching Expert Witnesses26-16
  • § 26.6 : Researching Companies26-18
  • § 26.7 : Researching Product Liability26-19
  • § 26.8 : Some Caveats26-20
    • § 26.8.1 : Authentication26-20
    • § 26.8.2 : Hearsay26-21
    • § 26.8.3 : Language Limitations26-22
  • § 26.9 : Recovering Electronic Data26-22
    • § 26.9.1 : Generally26-22
    • § 26.9.2 : Deleted Data26-23
    • § 26.9.3 : Computer Forensic Process26-23
  • § 26.10 : Conclusion26-27
Chapter 27: E-Discovery—Emerging Legal Issues and Guiding Law; and Appendices 27A-27B
  • § 27.1 : Overview27-3
  • § 27.2 : E-Discovery Life Cycle—Electronic Discovery Reference Model27-4
  • § 27.3 : Scope of Discovery and the Duty to Preserve Evidence27-6
  • § 27.4 : Cooperation and Transparency27-8
    • § 27.4.1 : Negotiating the Scope and Procedure of Discovery27-8
      • [A] : Rules Intended to Promote Early Discussion of E-Discovery27-8
      • [B] : Cooperation, Collaboration and Transparency27-10
    • § 27.4.2 : Rule 26(g)27-11
  • § 27.5 : Defense through Process: Managing the Electronic Discovery Life Cycle27-12
    • § 27.5.1 : Identification and Preservation of ESI27-12
      • [A] : Duty to Search for and Preserve Relevant ESI27-12
      • [B] : Duty to Preserve—Triggering Mechanisms27-16
      • [C] : Legal Holds—Issuing Preservation Notices27-18
        • [C][1] : Role of Senior Management and Counsel27-18
        • [C][2] : Preservation in the Face of Automatic Purging Routines27-18
        • [C][3] : Emergency and Covert Preservation/Collection27-19
        • [C][4] : Preservation Notice or Request to Third Parties27-20
        • [C][5] : Assertion of Privilege27-22
      • [D] : Penalties and Sanctions27-23
        • [D][1] : Rule 37(e) (formerly 37(f)): The Not-So-Safe “Safe Harbor”27-26
    • § 27.5.2 : Collection27-28
      • [A] : Rule 26(b)(2)(B): “Two-Tiered” Discovery of Inaccessible ESI27-30
      • [B] : Forensics27-32
    • § 27.5.3 : Processing27-33
      • [A] : De-duplication and Near-De-Duplication27-35
      • [B] : Culling and Search27-35
      • [C] : Technology-Assisted Search, Retrieval, and Review27-39
    • § 27.5.4 : Review of ESI27-41
      • [A] : Introduction27-41
      • [B] : Privilege, Work Product, and Confidentiality27-42
        • [B][1] : Jurisdictions Vary in Approach to Privilege Waiver27-43
        • [B][2] : Clawback Procedure and Agreements27-44
        • [B][3] : Federal Rule of Evidence 50227-45
          • [B][3][a] : FRE 502(b)27-46
          • [B][3][b] : FRE 502(d) and (e)27-47
          • [B][3][c] : Rule 502 Protection and the Scope of Document Review27-48
      • [C] : Outsourcing to U.S. or Offshore Contract Attorneys27-50
  • § 27.6 : Production of Documents27-51
    • § 27.6.1 : Format27-51
    • § 27.6.2 : Organization27-53
  • § 27.7 : Presentation of ESI: Admissibility Issues27-53
    • § 27.7.1 : Generally27-53
    • § 27.7.2 : Five-Step Analysis27-54
      • [A] : Generally27-54
      • [B] : Relevance27-55
      • [C] : Authenticity27-55
      • [D] : Hearsay27-58
      • [E] : Original Writing Rule27-59
      • [F] : Probative Value versus Unfair Prejudice27-60
  • § 27.8 : Third-Party Discovery—Rule 45 and Rule 3427-61
    • § 27.8.1 : Generally27-61
    • § 27.8.2 : Scope of Discovery from a Nonparty27-62
    • § 27.8.3 : Cost Burden on a Nonparty—Basis for Cost-Shifting27-64
  • § 27.9 : International Discovery27-66
  • § 27.10 : Social Media Discovery27-67
  • § 27.11 : Shifting Costs to the Adversary27-67
    • § 27.11.1 : Generally27-67
    • § 27.11.2 : Rowe Entertainment Factors27-68
    • § 27.11.3 : Zubulake Test27-70
    • § 27.11.4 : Sedona Guidelines on Cost-Shifting27-71
    • § 27.11.5 : Taxable Costs27-72
  • § 27.12 : State Trial Court Rules27-73
    • § 27.12.1 : E-Discovery Guidelines for State Trial Courts27-74
    • § 27.12.2 : State Rulemaking Efforts27-74
  • § 27.13 : Conclusion27-74
  • Appendix 27A : State Rulemaking EffortsApp. 27A–1
  • Appendix 27B : Jurisdictional Approaches to Privilege Waiver Through Inadvertent DisclosureApp. 27B–1
Chapter 28: E-Discovery—Practical Considerations
  • § 28:1 : Overview28-2
  • § 28:2 : Guiding Principles28-3
    • § 28:2.1 : Generally28-3
    • § 28:2.2 : Be Transparent28-3
    • § 28:2.3 : Limit Unreasonable Discovery Requests28-6
    • § 28:2.4 : Avoid Discovery on Discovery28-7
    • § 28:2.5 : Allow for Litigation-Specific Circumstances28-7
  • § 28:3 : Developing and Implementing the E-Discovery Plan28-9
    • § 28:3.1 : Preservation28-9
      • [A] : Generally28-9
      • [B] : Hold Notice Language and Distribution28-10
      • [C] : Continuing Obligation28-12
      • [D] : ESI Preservation Considerations28-12
      • [E] : Separating Employees28-13
      • [F] : Tips to Reduce Preservation Costs28-13
    • § 28:3.2 : Collection28-14
      • [A] : Generally28-14
      • [B] : Collection Plan28-15
        • [B][1] : Scope Statement28-15
        • [B][2] : Who to Collect From28-16
        • [B][3] : Collection Interview28-16
      • [C] : Execution of a Document Collection28-17
        • [C][1] : Hard Copy Collection28-18
        • [C][2] : Electronic Collection28-19
      • [D] : Tips to Reduce Collection Costs28-21
    • § 28:3.3 : Processing28-22
      • [A] : Vendors28-22
      • [B] : Vendor Selection28-23
      • [C] : Processing Issues28-24
        • [C][1] : De-duplication28-24
        • [C][2] : Filters28-25
        • [C][3] : Review Enhancers28-26
      • [D] : Tips to Reduce Processing Costs28-26
    • § 28:3.4 : Review28-27
      • [A] : Review Guidelines28-27
        • [A][1] : Responsiveness28-27
        • [A][2] : Confidentiality28-27
        • [A][3] : Privilege28-28
      • [B] : Review Team28-29
      • [C] : Technology-Assisted Review28-29
      • [D] : Tips to Reduce Review Costs28-30
    • § 28:3.5 : Production28-31
      • [A] : Protective Orders28-31
      • [B] : Case Management Orders28-32
      • [C] : Preparation of Productions28-32
      • [D] : Tracking Productions28-33
      • [E] : Tips to Reduce Production Costs28-33
  • § 28:4 : Conclusion28-34
Chapter 29: Expert Evidence—Law, Strategies and Best Practices; and Appendix 29A
  • § 29:1 : Overview29-2
  • § 29:2 : Standards for Admissibility of Expert Opinions: Daubert, Frye, or Something Else?29-4
    • § 29:2.1 : Frye and Daubert29-4
    • § 29:2.2 : Admissibility Under Rule 70229-6
      • [A] : Federal Evidence Rules to Be Construed Against “Permissive Backdrop”29-6
      • [B] : Trial Court As Evidentiary Gatekeeper29-6
      • [C] : Multiple Factors for Determining Reliability of Expert Scientific Testimony29-7
      • [D] : Other Evidentiary Rules29-8
    • § 29:2.3 : Daubert and Its Progeny29-8
      • [A] : Generally29-8
      • [B] : Recent Decisions About Admissibility of Expert Opinions29-12
      • [C] : Differences Between Daubert and Frye29-18
  • § 29:3 : Exemplar States29-20
    • § 29:3.1 : Arizona29-20
    • § 29:3.2 : California29-21
    • § 29:3.3 : Florida29-23
    • § 29:3.4 : Illinois29-24
    • § 29:3.5 : Indiana29-26
    • § 29:3.6 : Michigan29-28
    • § 29:3.7 : Minnesota29-29
    • § 29:3.8 : New Jersey29-30
    • § 29:3.9 : New York29-31
    • § 29:3.10 : Ohio29-32
    • § 29:3.11 : Pennsylvania29-33
    • § 29:3.12 : Texas29-34
    • § 29:3.13 : Virginia29-36
    • § 29:3.14 : Wisconsin29-37
  • § 29:4 : Daubert/Frye in Practice29-39
    • § 29:4.1 : Establishing Causation Through Expert Testimony29-39
    • § 29:4.2 : Preparing for Daubert/Frye Challenges29-40
  • § 29:5 : 2010 Amendments to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 2629-44
  • § 29:6 : Conclusion29-45
  • Appendix 29A : State Standards for Admissibility of Expert Evidence(as of August 2014)App. 29A-1
Chapter 30: Court-Appointed Experts
  • § 30:1 : Overview30-2
  • § 30:2 : Court-Appointed Experts Under Rule 70630-4
    • § 30:2.1 : Generally30-4
    • § 30:2.2 : Interpretation of Rule 706’s Provisions30-5
      • [A] : Trial Court’s Discretion Whether to Appoint Experts30-5
      • [B] : Procedure for Invoking Rule 70630-7
    • § 30:2.3 : Strategy30-7
      • [A] : Whether the Court Should Appoint Its Own Experts30-7
        • [A][1] : Benefits of Court-Appointed Experts30-8
        • [A][2] : Risks of Using Court-Appointed Experts30-9
      • [B] : Selecting a Court-Appointed Expert Witness30-10
      • [C] : Scope of Testimony30-12
    • § 30:2.4 : Instructions to Appointed Witnesses30-12
      • [A] : Text of Rule 70630-12
      • [B] : Strategy30-12
        • [B][1] : Court’s Instructions to Appointed Witnesses30-12
        • [B][2] : Research Methods of Court-Appointed Experts30-13
        • [B][3] : Communications with Others30-13
        • [B][4] : Ex Parte Communications with Parties or Their Experts30-13
        • [B][5] : Ex Parte Communications with the Court30-14
        • [B][6] : Acquisition of Information30-14
        • [B][7] : Reports30-15
        • [B][8] : Document Retention30-16
        • [B][9] : Depositions30-16
        • [B][10] : Motions in Limine30-16
        • [B][11] : Disclosure of Experts’ Status30-17
      • [C] : Payment of Experts’ Costs30-17
  • § 30:3 : Technical Advisors30-18
    • § 30:3.1 : Generally30-18
    • § 30:3.2 : Court’s Inherent Authority30-18
    • § 30:3.3 : Procedural Protections30-20
    • § 30:3.4 : Costs30-22
Chapter 30A: Statistical Evidence in Products Liability Litigation
  • § 30A:1 : Overview30A-2
  • § 30A:2 : Litigation Context of Statistical Issues30A-2
  • § 30A:3 : Qualification of Expert Witnesses Who Give Testimony on Statistical Issues30A-3
  • § 30A:4 : Admissibility of Statistical Evidence—Rules 702 and 70330A-3
  • § 30A:5 : Significance Probability30A-5
    • § 30A:5.1 : Definition of Significance Probability (The “p-value”)30A-5
    • § 30A:5.2 : The Transposition Fallacy30A-6
    • § 30A:5.3 : Confusion Between Significance Probability and The Burden of Proof30A-7
    • § 30A:5.4 : Hypothesis Testing30A-9
    • § 30A:5.5 : Confidence Intervals30A-9
    • § 30A:5.6 : Inappropriate Use of Statistical Significance— Matrixx Initiatives, Inc. v. Siracusano30A-11
      • [A] : Sequelae of Matrixx Initiatives30A-14
      • [B] : Is Statistical Significance Necessary?30A-15
  • § 30A:6 : Statistical Power30A-16
    • § 30A:6.1 : Definition of Statistical Power30A-16
    • § 30A:6.2 : Cases Involving Statistical Power30A-18
  • § 30A:7 : Evidentiary Rule of Completeness30A-20
  • § 30A:8 : Meta-Analysis30A-21
    • § 30A:8.1 : Definition and History of Meta-Analysis30A-21
    • § 30A:8.2 : Consensus Statements30A-22
    • § 30A:8.3 : Use of Meta-Analysis in Litigation30A-23
    • § 30A:8.4 : Competing Models for Meta-Analysis30A-26
    • § 30A:8.5 : Recent Cases Involving Meta-Analyses30A-27
  • § 30A:9 : Statistical Inference in Securities Fraud Cases Against Pharmaceutical Manufacturers30A-29
  • § 30A:10 : Multiple Testing30A-35
  • § 30A:11 : Conclusion30-36
Chapter 30B: Product Liability Litigation Involving Children’s Products
  • § 30B:1 : Overview30B-2
  • § 30B:2 : Federal Statutes Governing Children’s Products30B-3
    • § 30B:2.1 : Consumer Product Safety Act30B-3
    • § 30B:2.2 : Child Safety Protection Act30B-5
    • § 30B:2.3 : Flammable Fabrics Act30B-7
    • § 30B:2.4 : National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act30B-9
  • § 30B:3 : State Statutes Governing Children’s Products30B-12
  • § 30B:4 : Common Law and Litigation for Children’s Products30B-12
    • § 30B:4.1 : Toxic Toys and State Consumer Fraud Statutes30B-12
    • § 30B:4.2 : Infant Formula30B-14
    • § 30B:4.3 : Child Carriers and Restraints30B-15
    • § 30B:4.4 : Playground Equipment30B-17
    • § 30B:4.5 : “Non-Product” Children’s Entertainment30B-17
  • § 30B:5 : Parent-Child Interaction30B-18
  • § 30B:6 : Conclusion30B-19
Chapter 30C: Product Litigation Over Defective Construction Products
  • § 30C:1 : Overview30C-1
  • § 30C:2 : Economic Loss Rule30C-3
    • § 30C:2.1 : Defining “Other Property” Under the Economic Loss Rule30C-5
    • § 30C:2.2 : Exception for Unreasonable Risk of Serious Harm to Persons or Property30C-11
  • § 30C:3 : Class Action in Construction Product Defect Cases30C-14
  • § 30C:4 : Construction Products in Widespread Mass Litigation—The Chinese Drywall Litigation30C-18
  • § 30C:5 : Statutes of Repose Applicable to Construction Product Defect Cases30C-22
Chapter 31: Pharmaceutical Companies—Parallel Proceedings and Product Litigation
  • § 31:1 : Overview31-2
  • § 31:2 : Breast Implant Litigation: Growth Cycle of a Mass Tort31-3
  • § 31:3 : FDA Actions that Can Reverberate in Litigation31-7
    • § 31:3.1 : FDA Investigations31-7
    • § 31:3.2 : FDA Action31-8
      • [A] : Generally31-8
      • [B] : Warning Letters31-8
    • § 31:3.3 : Preemption Defense31-9
    • § 31:3.4 : FDA-Based Defenses31-10
  • § 31:4 : False Claims Act Investigations and Lawsuits31-11
    • § 31:4.1 : Generally31-11
    • § 31:4.2 : Bases for FDA Lawsuits31-12
      • [A] : Off-Label Uses Caused Submission of False Claims31-12
      • [B] : Quality Failure Actions31-13
      • [C] : Over-Reimbursements for Pharmaceuticals by Federal Healthcare Programs31-14
      • [D] : Qui Tam Actions31-14
      • [E] : Interrelationship Between Forums31-16
  • § 31:5 : Criminal Investigation and Prosecutions31-17
    • § 31:5.1 : Overview31-17
    • § 31:5.2 : Waiver of Privileges31-18
    • § 31:5.3 : Pending Criminal Inquiries31-19
  • § 31:6 : Securities Fraud, Shareholder Derivative and ERISA Class Action Lawsuits31-20
  • § 31:7 : Media Spotlight31-22
  • § 31:8 : Congressional Investigations31-23
  • § 31:9 : Conclusion31-25
Chapter 32: Preparing for the Appeal
  • § 32:1 : Overview32-2
  • § 32:2 : Pre-Trial32-2
    • § 32:2.1 : Drafting Pleadings and Dispositive Motions32-2
    • § 32:2.2 : Motions in Limine32-3
    • § 32:2.3 : Experts32-4
    • § 32:2.4 : Pre-Trial Stipulation32-5
  • § 32:3 : Trial32-6
    • § 32:3.1 : The Record32-6
      • [A] : Generally32-6
      • [B] : Depositions32-6
      • [C] : Exhibits32-7
      • [D] : Non-Verbal Conduct32-8
      • [E] : Filing Documents During Trial32-8
    • § 32:3.2 : Voir Dire32-8
    • § 32:3.3 : Evidentiary Objections32-10
    • § 32:3.4 : Expert Testimony Revisited32-11
    • § 32:3.5 : Proffers of Evidence32-12
    • § 32:3.6 : Motion for Directed Verdict32-12
    • § 32:3.7 : Jury Instructions32-13
    • § 32:3.8 : Verdict Form32-16
    • § 32:3.9 : Closing Argument32-18
    • § 32:3.10 : Juror Misconduct32-18
  • § 32:4 : Post-Trial32-19
Chapter 33: Post-Sale Responsibilities in the United States and Foreign Countries
  • § 33:1 : Overview33-2
  • § 33:2 : U.S. Common Law33-3
    • § 33:2.1 : Generally33-3
    • § 33:2.2 : Third Restatement Law on Post-Sale Duty to Warn33-3
    • § 33:2.3 : State Courts33-5
  • § 33:3 : U.S. Regulatory Law33-6
    • § 33:3.1 : Generally33-6
    • § 33:3.2 : Addressing Global Safety Issues33-7
    • § 33:3.3 : Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 200833-7
  • § 33:4 : Foreign Regulatory Activity33-8
    • § 33:4.1 : Generally33-8
    • § 33:4.2 : European Response33-8
    • § 33:4.3 : Foreign Standards and Regulations33-9
  • § 33:5 : Meeting a Manufacturer’s Post-Sale Duties33-10
    • § 33:5.1 : Information-Gathering Network33-10
    • § 33:5.2 : Risk Assessment33-11
    • § 33:5.3 : Determining the Necessity of Post-Sale Action33-12
  • § 33:6 : Defending a Product After a Recall33-12
    • § 33:6.1 : Generally33-12
    • § 33:6.2 : Manufacturer Strategies33-13
      • [A] : Act Decisively and Expeditiously in Conducting the Recall33-13
      • [B] : Draft the Recall Message with Care33-13
      • [C] : Pick “Losers” and “Winners”33-13
      • [D] : Weigh Pros and Cons of Excluding Recall Evidence33-14
      • [E] : Police Claims Against Manufacturer33-15
      • [F] : Put the Risk of Injury into Perspective33-15
      • [G] : Tell the Due Care Story33-16
      • [H] : Prove Accident Not Due to Recall Condition33-16
      • [I] : Prove Another Factor Caused the Accident33-16
      • [J] : Try the Comparative Fault Case Against Others33-16
  • § 33:7 : Conclusion33-17
Chapter 34: Recent Developments in Product Recalls
  • § 34:1 : Overview34-2
  • § 34:2 : The Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 200834-5
    • § 34:2.1 : Consumer Products34-5
    • § 34:2.2 : New Notification Provisions34-6
      • [A] : Substantial Product Hazard Reporting Obligation34-7
      • [B] : Public Notice34-8
      • [C] : Recall Notices34-8
      • [D] : Corrective Action Plans34-10
      • [E] : Product Certification34-11
      • [F] : Publicly Available Consumer Product Safety Information Database34-12
    • § 34:2.3 : Enforcement34-14
      • [A] : Enforcement Powers34-14
        • [A][1] : Penalties34-15
        • [A][2] : Additional Enforcement by State Attorney Generals34-18
        • [A][3] : Whistleblower Protections34-18
      • [B] : 2011 Amendments34-18
    • § 34:2.4 : Children’s Products34-19
      • [A] : Generally34-19
      • [B] : Lead and Phthalates34-20
      • [C] : Third-Party Testing34-21
  • § 34:3 : FDA Food Safety Modernization Act34-22
  • § 34:4 : Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 200834-26
  • § 34:5 : Conclusion34-27
Chapter 35: Issues of Successor Liability
  • § 35.1 : Traditional Approach to Successor Liability35-2
    • § 35.1.1 : Generally35-2
    • § 35.1.2 : Traditional Exception #1: Agreement of the Parties35-3
    • § 35.1.3 : Traditional Exception #2: Fraudulent Conveyance35-6
    • § 35.1.4 : Traditional Exception #3: Consolidation or Merger35-7
    • § 35.1.5 : Traditional Exception #4: Mere Continuation35-8
  • § 35.2 : Non-Traditional Approaches to Successor Liability35-10
    • § 35.2.1 : Generally35-10
    • § 35.2.2 : Non-Traditional Exception #1: Product Line35-11
    • § 35.2.3 : Non-Traditional Exception #2: Continuity of Enterprise35-16
  • § 35.3 : Buyer Beware35-19
Chapter 36: Role of Corporate Executives
  • § 36:1 : Overview36-1
  • § 36:2 : Limitations on Depositions of High-Level Executives36-2
    • § 36:2.1 : Generally36-2
    • § 36:2.2 : Law of “Apex” Depositions36-4
    • § 36:2.3 : Unique or Superior Knowledge36-6
    • § 36:2.4 : Less Burdensome Means36-10
  • § 36:3 : Plaintiff’s Strategic Considerations36-13
  • § 36:4 : Defense’s Strategic Considerations36-15
  • § 36:5 : Negotiating the Scope of Depositions36-16
  • § 36:6 : Preparation of a High-Level Executive for Deposition and Trial36-17
  • § 36:7 : Conclusion36-18
Chapter 37: Contacting Corporate Employees
  • § 37:1 : Overview37-1
  • § 37:2 : Initiating an Ex Parte Communication37-2
    • § 37:2.1 : Initial Considerations37-2
    • § 37:2.2 : Applicable Rules37-2
  • § 37:3 : Who Is a Represented Party?37-5
    • § 37:3.1 : Model Rule 4.237-5
    • § 37:3.2 : Court Opinions37-6
    • § 37:3.3 : American Bar Association37-9
  • § 37:4 : Approaching Corporate Employees37-10
  • § 37:5 : Conclusion37-11
Chapter 38: Spoliation of Product Evidence
  • § 38:1 : Overview38-2
  • § 38:2 : History of Spoliation of Evidence38-2
  • § 38:3 : Analysis of Recent Trends in Spoliation38-3
    • § 38:3.1 : Generally38-3
    • § 38:3.2 : Reasonably Foreseeable Litigation and Document Retention Policies38-3
    • § 38:3.3 : Spoliation of Electronically Stored Information38-5
    • § 38:3.4 : State Court Trends38-6
  • § 38:4 : Negligent Spoliation38-7
    • § 38:4.1 : Generally38-7
    • § 38:4.2 : Negligent Spoliation by a Plaintiff38-7
    • § 38:4.3 : Negligent Spoliation by a Defendant38-8
    • § 38:4.4 : Negligent Spoliation by a Third Party38-10
      • [A] : Generally38-10
      • [B] : Duty to Preserve Evidence38-11
  • § 38:5 : Intentional Spoliation38-13
    • § 38:5.1 : Generally38-13
    • § 38:5.2 : Intentional Spoliation by a Plaintiff38-13
    • § 38:5.3 : Intentional Spoliation by a Defendant38-14
    • § 38:5.4 : Intentional Spoliation by a Third Party38-16
      • [A] : Generally38-16
      • [B] : Third-Party Intentional Spoliation Not Protected38-18
  • § 38:6 : Defenses and Sanctions38-19
    • § 38:6.1 : Defenses38-19
      • [A] : Good Faith38-19
      • [B] : Opportunity to Examine38-20
      • [C] : Immaterial Evidence38-20
      • [D] : Statutes of Limitations38-20
    • § 38:6.2 : Sanctions38-21
      • [A] : Generally38-21
      • [B] : Dismissal38-22
      • [C] : Monetary Sanctions38-23
      • [D] : Spoliation Inference/Rebuttable Presumption38-24
      • [E] : Criminal Liability for Obstruction of Justice38-26
  • § 38:7 : Conclusion38-27
Chapter 39: Presenting Complex Scientific Evidence
  • § 39.1 : Overview39-2
  • § 39.2 : Selecting a Message39-2
    • § 39.2.1 : Generally39-2
    • § 39.2.2 : Understand the Scientific Evidence39-3
    • § 39.2.3 : Simplify the Trial Message39-3
    • § 39.2.4 : Expert Credibility Themes39-4
  • § 39.3 : Selecting a Messenger—Importance of the Right Expert39-6
  • § 39.4 : Considerations During Phases of the Trial Process39-7
    • § 39.4.1 : Jury Selection39-7
    • § 39.4.2 : Opening39-7
    • § 39.4.3 : Direct Examination39-8
      • [A] : State Opinions at the Outset39-8
      • [B] : Tactical Presentation of Qualifications39-9
      • [C] : Use of Visual Aids39-10
      • [D] : Get Experts on Their Feet39-10
      • [E] : Develop Themes39-10
      • [F] : Draw Implied Conclusions39-10
      • [G] : Understand Local Rules on Learned Treatises39-10
      • [H] : “Gateway” Requirements39-13
    • § 39.4.4 : Cross-Examination39-13
      • [A] : Understand Local Rules on Learned Treatises39-13
      • [B] : Know Your Limitations and the Skill of the Expert39-16
      • [C] : Focus on the Understandable39-16
      • [D] : Best Available Tools for Organization and Presentation39-16
      • [E] : Strategic Use of Bias Information39-17
    • § 39.4.5 : Closing39-17
Chapter 40: The Importance of Trial Preparation and Presentation in Litigation Today
  • § 40:1 : Overview40-2
  • § 40:2 : Advance Considerations40-3
    • § 40:2.1 : Document Management40-3
    • § 40:2.2 : Deposition Management40-3
    • § 40:2.3 : Choosing a Trial Consulting Company40-4
      • [A] : Evolving Technology40-4
      • [B] : In-House Support or a Trial Consulting Company?40-5
  • § 40:3 : Trial Preparation40-6
    • § 40:3.1 : Trial Logistics: The War Room40-6
    • § 40:3.2 : Demonstratives40-8
    • § 40:3.3 : Video Designations40-10
    • § 40:3.4 : Loading Trial Exhibits40-11
    • § 40:3.5 : War Room Equipment40-11
      • [A] : Generally40-11
      • [B] : Computers and Peripherals40-12
      • [C] : Networks40-13
      • [D] : File Servers40-13
      • [E] : Backups40-14
    • § 40:3.6 : On-Site Staffing40-15
      • [A] : Generally40-15
      • [B] : Shorter Duration Trials40-15
      • [C] : Longer Duration Trials40-15
      • [D] : Large-Scale Trials40-16
  • § 40:4 : Trial40-16
    • § 40:4.1 : Courtroom Equipment40-17
    • § 40:4.2 : Using Demonstratives40-18
    • § 40:4.3 : Displaying Documents and Demonstratives40-19
    • § 40:4.4 : Playing Video Depositions40-21
  • § 40:5 : Post-Trial40-23
    • [A] : Breakdown of Equipment40-23
    • [B] : Data Archiving40-23
  • § 40:6 : Conclusion40-23
Chapter 41: How to Win a Dismissal When the Plaintiff Declares Bankruptcy; and Appendix 41A
  • § 41:1 : Overview41-2
  • § 41:2 : Types of Bankruptcies41-3
    • § 41:2.1 : Chapter 741-3
    • § 41:2.2 : Chapter 1341-4
  • § 41:3 : Duty to Disclose Pending and Contingent Claims41-4
    • § 41:3.1 : Generally41-4
    • § 41:3.2 : Definition of “Pending Claims”41-5
  • § 41:4 : Standing41-6
    • § 41:4.1 : Generally41-6
    • § 41:4.2 : Standing and Bankruptcy41-6
  • § 41:5 : Judicial Estoppel41-8
    • § 41:5.1 : Generally41-8
    • § 41:5.2 : Judicial Estoppel and Bankruptcy41-9
    • § 41:5.3 : Elements Needed to Prove Entitlement to Summary Judgment41-11
      • [A] : Generally41-11
      • [B] : Knowledge41-12
      • [C] : Bad Faith41-13
      • [D] : Detrimental Reliance41-14
      • [E] : Public Policy41-14
    • § 41:5.4 : Choice of Law41-15
      • [A] : Generally41-15
      • [B] : Property Exemptions Specific to Particular Jurisdictions41-15
      • [C] : Significance of the Amount of Debt Discharged41-16
  • § 41:6 : Securing Dismissal or Summary Judgment41-16
  • § 41:7 : Plaintiff’s Responses to an Estoppel Motion41-18
    • § 41:7.1 : Generally41-18
    • § 41:7.2 : Amending the Bankruptcy Petition41-19
    • § 41:7.3 : Allowing the Bankruptcy Trustee to Prosecute the Case41-20
    • § 41:7.4 : Suing the Bankruptcy Attorney for Malpractice41-21
  • § 41:8 : Conclusion41-21
  • Appendix 41A : Cases Seeking Summary Judgment/Dismissal Based Upon Judicial Estoppel and/or Lack of Standing41A-1
Chapter 42: Emerging Jury Issues; and Appendices 42A-42B
  • § 42:1 : Overview42-2
  • § 42:2 : Traditional Demographics—No Longer Predictive of Jury Outcome42-2
  • § 42:3 : Pop Culture42-4
  • § 42:4 : Motive Is Important and Credibility Is Key42-4
  • § 42:5 : Tort Reform Debate42-6
  • § 42:6 : Views of Corporate Defendants42-6
  • § 42:7 : Heightened Expectations About Warnings42-6
  • § 42:8 : Safety-Consciousness of Companies42-7
  • § 42:9 : Effectiveness of Regulatory Agencies42-8
  • § 42:10 : The Whistleblower42-9
  • § 42:11 : Defendant’s Local Reputation42-11
  • § 42:12 : Out-of-State Lawyers42-11
  • § 42:13 : Outside Sources During Trial42-11
  • § 42:14 : Good Graphics42-13
  • § 42:15 : Jurors Online42-14
  • § 42:16 : Jury Questionnaires—Powerful Tools42-15
  • § 42:17 : Implicit Bias42-15
  • § 42:18 : Conclusion42-17
  • Appendix 42A : Sample Brief in Support of Motion for Supplemental Written Juror QuestionnaireApp. 42A-1
  • Appendix 42B : Jury Instructions Cautioning Against Use of the Internet and Social NetworkingApp. 42B-1
Chapter 43: Determining Juror Perceptions That Affect Verdicts
  • § 43:1 : Overview43-2
  • § 43:2 : Different Venues, Different Verdicts43-2
    • § 43:2.1 : Generally43-2
    • § 43:2.2 : Do Headlines Influence Jurors’ Verdicts?43-3
    • § 43:2.3 : Epicenter of American Tragedies43-4
    • § 43:2.4 : Hometown: Advantage or Disadvantage43-4
    • § 43:2.5 : Who Awards Damages?43-4
    • § 43:2.6 : Jury Selection43-5
  • § 43:3 : Calming Fears in Chemical Products Liability Trials43-6
    • § 43:3.1 : Chemical Case Scenario43-6
    • § 43:3.2 : Awarding Punitive Damages Against Chemical Companies43-7
    • § 43:3.3 : Attitudes about Corporations43-8
    • § 43:3.4 : Safety or Profits Theme43-9
    • § 43:3.5 : Recognition of Chemical Corporations43-9
    • § 43:3.6 : Demographic Findings43-9
    • § 43:3.7 : Experience Matters43-10
      • [A] : Familiarity Does Not Breed Contempt43-10
      • [B] : Safety Experience Matters43-10
      • [C] : Prior Court Experience Matters43-10
      • [D] : Shopping Habits Matter43-10
    • § 43:3.8 : Media Coverage Matters43-10
  • § 43:4 : Politics in the Community43-11
  • § 43:5 : Juror Perceptions of the FDA That Affect Verdicts in Pharmaceutical Lawsuits43-12
    • § 43:5.1 : Generally43-12
    • § 43:5.2 : Trust in Government Agencies43-12
    • § 43:5.3 : Recognition of Pharmaceutical Companies43-15
    • § 43:5.4 : Knowledge of Lawsuits Against Pharmaceutical Companies43-17
    • § 43:5.5 : Comparing Perceptions of Vioxx to Perceptions of the FDA43-18
    • § 43:5.6 : Jury Selection Determiners from the Vioxx Scenario43-20
    • § 43:5.7 : Why Jury Research Findings Matter43-21
  • § 43:6 : Can It Happen in Missouri?43-23
  Table of Cases
  Index

  Please click here to view the latest update information for this title: Last Update Information  
 


  Please click here to view the Table of Authorities: Table of Authorities  
 

Share
Email
UPKEEP SERVICE
Your purchase will also sign you up for “Upkeep Service,” whereby you will receive future automatic shipments of updates, new editions and supplements to this edition, as they become available, for a 30-day preview. Updates, new editions and supplements published within 90 days of your purchase will be issued free of charge; all other updates will be subject to an additional charge if kept beyond the preview period, invoiced at the time of delivery. This service will continue until canceled by you at any time. See here.

  • FOLLOW PLI:
  • twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • GooglePlus
  • RSS

All Contents Copyright © 1996-2017 Practising Law Institute. Continuing Legal Education since 1933.

© 2017 PLI PRACTISING LAW INSTITUTE. All rights reserved. The PLI logo is a service mark of PLI.