| |
|
|
Introduction |
|
|
|
Chapter 1: |
Recent Trends in Product Claims and Product Defenses |
Lori Leskin ~ Kaye Scholer LLP
Angela Vicari ~ Kaye Scholer LLP |
|
- § 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 |
Stephen Tillery ~ Korein Tillery LLC |
|
- § 2:1 : Defective Product Claims Without Serious Physical Injury2-2
- § 2:1.1 : Generally2-2
- § 2:1.2 : Pediatric Paxil Litigation2-2
- § 2:1.3 : “Light” Cigarette Litigation2-4
- § 2:1.4 : State Consumer Fraud Acts2-4
- § 2:2 : Filing Under Consumer Fraud Acts—Availability of Class Action Procedure2-5
- § 2:2.1 : Traditional Products Liability Cases—No Certification As Class Actions2-5
- § 2:2.2 : Consumer Fraud Act Cases Certified As Class Actions2-6
- § 2:2.3 : Class Action Law and Procedure2-7
- § 2:3 : Pre-Filing Considerations2-9
- § 2:3.1 : Do State Laws Allow Products Claims to Be Recast Under Other Statutes?2-10
- § 2:3.2 : Do State Consumer Protection Acts Provide for a Private Right of Action?2-10
- § 2:3.3 : Pleading a “Deception” or an “Unfairness” Claim2-10
- [A] : Deception Claims2-11
- [B] : Unfairness Claims2-12
- § 2:3.4 : Damages2-15
- [A] : Actual Damages2-15
- [A][1] : Recovery for Purely Economic Loss2-15
- [A][2] : Measurement of Actual Damages—Benefit of the Bargain and Diminution in Value2-15
- [A][3] : Excepting Damage Claims for Personal Injury/Wrongful Death2-16
- [B] : Punitive Damages2-17
- § 2:3.5 : Attorney’s Fees2-17
- § 2:3.6 : Statute of Limitations2-18
- § 2:4 : Claim Pursuant to State Consumer Fraud Act Despite Serious Physical Injuries2-19
- § 2:5 : Conclusion2-21
|
|
Chapter 3: |
Recasting Product Liability Claims As Consumer Fraud Cases--Defendant's Perspective |
Craig C Martin ~ Jenner & Block
Adam C.G. Ringguth ~ Jenner & Block LLP |
|
- § 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 Claims3-8
- § 3:2 : Defeating Consumer Fraud Claims at the Motion to Dismiss Stage3-9
- § 3:2.1 : Generally3-9
- § 3:2.2 : Standing to Sue3-10
- [A] : Generally3-10
- [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 |
Rebecca S Herbig ~ Bowman & Brooke LLP
Sandra Giannone-Ezell ~ Bowman and Brooke LLP |
|
- § 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 |
Alan Untereiner ~ Robbins Russell |
|
- § 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 |
Pearson N Bownas ~ Jones Day
Mark Herrmann ~ Jones Day |
|
- § 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 |
Harvey L. Kaplan ~ Shook, Hardy & Bacon L.L.P.
William J Crampton ~ Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
Marc Shelley ~ Shook Hardy Bacon LLP |
|
- § 7:1 : Overview7-2
- § 7:2 : Overseas Class Action Models7-3
- § 7:2.1 : Generally7-4
- [A] : Scope7-5
- [B] : Standing7-5
- [C] : Opt-In or Opt-Out Model7-6
- [D] : With or Without Certification7-7
- § 7:2.2 : Securities Forerunner7-9
- § 7:3 : Australia and Canada7-10
- § 7:3.1 : Australia7-10
- § 7:3.2 : Canada7-14
- § 7:4 : England and Wales7-17
- § 7:5 : Africa7-19
- § 7:5.1 : Nigeria7-19
- § 7:5.2 : South Africa7-20
- § 7:6 : Israel7-21
- § 7:7 : Europe7-23
- § 7:7.1 : Overview7-23
- § 7:7.2 : Belgium7-24
- § 7:7.3 : Bulgaria7-25
- § 7:7.4 : Denmark, Norway, and Sweden7-25
- § 7:7.5 : Finland7-27
- § 7:7.6 : France7-28
- § 7:7.7 : Italy7-29
- § 7:7.8 : Lithuania7-31
- § 7:7.9 : Malta7-31
- § 7:7.10 : Poland7-32
- § 7:8 : European Union7-33
- § 7:9 : Latin America7-35
- § 7:9.1 : Overview7-35
- § 7:9.2 : Argentina7-35
- § 7:9.3 : Brazil7-36
- § 7:9.4 : Chile7-37
- § 7:9.5 : Costa Rica7-38
- § 7:9.6 : Ecuador7-39
- § 7:9.7 : Mexico7-41
- § 7:9.8 : Peru7-42
- § 7:10 : Asia7-43
- § 7:10.1 : Overview7-43
- § 7:10.2 : People’s Republic of China7-43
- § 7:10.3 : Hong Kong7-46
- § 7:10.4 : Japan7-47
- § 7:10.5 : Korea7-48
- § 7:11 : Forecasting the Future for Class Actions Overseas7-48
|
|
Chapter 8: |
Litigation in Foreign Countries Against U.S. Companies |
Joseph Petrosinelli ~ Williams & Connolly LLP |
|
- § 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 |
Jill M. Hutchison ~ Jenner & Block LLP
Stacy Jakobe ~ Jenner & Block |
|
- § 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 |
Loren Brown ~ DLA Piper US LLP
Allen P. Waxman ~ Eisai Inc. |
|
- § 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 Theory10-11
- [E] : Unjust Enrichment10-13
- § 10:2.2 : Government Investigations10-14
- [A] : Generally10-14
- [B] : Under-Reporting or Selective Reporting of Clinical Trial Results10-14
- [C] : The Anti-Kickback Statute and False Claims Act10-16
- § 10:3 : Failure to Disclose Material Clinical Trial Results: Securities Claims10-18
- § 10:3.1 : Generally10-18
- § 10:3.2 : Government Regulation of Pharmaceutical and Biotechnology Companies10-18
- § 10:3.3 : Securities Litigation Involving the Pharmaceutical and Biotechnology Industry10-20
- § 10:4 : Injury Claims by Clinical Trial Subjects10-24
- § 10:4.1 : Generally10-24
- § 10:4.2 : Medical Malpractice Claims10-24
- § 10:4.3 : Lack of Informed Consent Claims: Failure to Disclose Financial Relationships and Other Conflicts of Interest10-25
- § 10:4.4 : Novel Liability Theories10-26
- § 10:4.5 : Suits Attempting to Force Manufacturers to Continue to Provide Study Medications10-26
- § 10:4.6 : Novel Defendants—Institutional Review Boards10-29
- § 10:4.7 : Increased International Scrutiny of Clinical Trials10-29
- § 10:5 : Conclusion10-31
|
|
Chapter 11: |
Emerging Issues in Medical Device Litigation |
David R Geiger ~ Foley Hoag LLP
Nabeel Ahmad ~ Foley Hoag LLP |
|
- § 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 Preemption11-3
- [A] : Claims for Off-Label Use or Promotion11-3
- [B] : Claims for Failure to Make Changes in Warnings11-8
- [C] : Manufacturing Defect Claims11-10
- [D] : Express Warranty Claims11-14
- § 11:2 : Claims Arising from the Presence in the Operating Room of a Medical Device Manufacturer’s Sales Representative11-16
- § 11:2.1 : Generally11-16
- § 11:2.2 : Invasion of Privacy11-17
- § 11:2.3 : Battery11-19
- § 11:2.4 : Negligently Advising or Failing to Advise the Physician11-21
- § 11:2.5 : Unauthorized Practice of Medicine11-25
- § 11:2.6 : Recommended Practices for Manufacturer’s Representatives11-27
- § 11:3 : Admissibility of Testimony by “FDA Experts” and Human Factors Experts11-28
- § 11:3.1 : “FDA Experts” and Human Factors Experts Generally11-28
- § 11:3.2 : Rule 702 Challenges to Experts11-28
- [A] : Lack of Helpfulness to the Fact-Finder11-28
- [B] : Improper Invasion of Judge’s Role11-33
- [C] : Lack of Competence to Testify11-36
- [D] : Lack of Reliability of Testimony11-37
- § 11:3.3 : Rule 704 Challenges to Experts—Opinions on an Ultimate Issue11-39
- § 11:3.4 : The FDA’s Amicus Brief in Strong v. American Cyanamid—Rules 702 and 704, and Deference to the FDA11-40
- § 11:3.5 : Admissibility of Testimony by Human Factors Experts11-42
|
|
Chapter 12: |
Emerging Issues in Automotive Product Liability Litigation; And Chapter 12A: Emerging Issues in Food Law and Litigation |
Kristin R. Eads ~ Faegre Baker Daniels
Holly A Hempel ~ Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough LLP
Sara Turnipseed ~ Nelson Mullins LLP
Sarah L Brew ~ Halleland Lewis Nilan & Johnson
Joel Smith ~ Nelson Mullins
Allison Crawford ~ Nelson Mullins |
|
- § 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
- § 12A:1 : Overview12A-2
- § 12A:2 : Regulatory Framework12A-3
- § 12A:2.1 : Generally12A-3
- § 12A:2.2 : FDA12A-4
- § 12A:2.3 : USDA12A-6
- § 12A:2.4 : FTC12A-7
- § 12A:3 : Foodborne Illness Litigation12A-8
- § 12A:3.1 : Generally12A-8
- § 12A:3.2 : Strict Liability12A-8
- § 12A:3.3 : Defect12A-9
- [A] : Generally12A-9
- [B] : Definition of Defective Food12A-10
- [C] : Proof of Defect12A-12
- § 12A:3.4 : Causation12A-13
- § 12A:3.5 : Causation in Foodborne Illness Outbreaks12A-15
- § 12A:3.6 : Liability Across the Supply Chain12A-16
- [A] : Generally12A-16
- [B] : Sellers and Distributors12A-17
- [C] : “Manufacturer” of Food Products12A-17
- § 12A:4 : Class Actions12A-18
- § 12A:4.1 : Foodborne Illness Outbreaks12A-18
- § 12A:4.2 : Consumer Fraud Litigation12A-19
- [A] : Generally12A-19
- [B] : Reliance12A-21
- [C] : Causation12A-22
- [D] : Injury12A-23
- [E] : Failure to Sufficiently Plead12A-23
- [F] : Preemption and Primary Jurisdiction12A-23
- § 12A:5 : Conclusion12A-27
|
|
Chapter 13: |
Emerging Issues in Cosmetics and Other Beauty Product Litigation |
Vickie Turner ~ Wilson Petty Kosmo & Turner LLP
Meryl Maneker ~ Wilson Petty Kosmo & Turner |
|
- § 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 Act13-4
- § 13:3 : Increased State Oversight of Cosmetics and Beauty Products13-5
- § 13:3.1 : Generally13-5
- § 13:3.2 : California Safe Cosmetics Act13-5
- § 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] : Nanomaterials13-10
- § 13:4.2 : Product Liability and Other Litigation Related to Cosmetic Ingredients13-12
- [A] : Traditional Product Liability Claims13-12
- [B] : “No Injury” Product Liability Claims13-13
- [C] : Private Actions to Enforce State Health and Safety Requirements13-14
- § 13:5 : Organic and Other Content Claims13-15
- § 13:5.1 : Generally13-15
- § 13:5.2 : Definition of “Organic”13-16
- § 13:6 : Products Claiming Attributes of Cosmetics and Drugs13-16
- § 13:6.1 : Definition of “Cosmeceuticals”13-16
- § 13:6.2 : Consequences of Marketing Cosmetics As Drugs13-17
- § 13:7 : Conclusion13-18
|
|
Chapter 14: |
Emerging Issues for Products Made Overseas |
Debra E Pole ~ Sidley Austin Brown & Wood LLP
Sara J Gourley ~ Sidley Austin LLP |
|
- § 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 |
Evan Buxner ~ Evan D Buxner LLC
Dionne Koller ~ University of Baltimore - School of Law |
|
- § 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: Template for an Early Case Assessment |
Mark E. (Rick)Richardson ~ GlaxoSmithKline |
|
- § 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 |
Linda S Woolf ~ Goodell DeVries Leech & Dan
Richard Barnes ~ Goodell DeVries Leech Dann
Kamil Ismail ~ Goodell DeVries Leech Dann |
|
- § 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 Provisions17-6
- [A] : CGL Policies17-6
- [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 Operations17-10
- [C] : Known Losses17-11
- [D] : Business Risks, Recalls17-12
- [E] : Punitive Damages17-13
- § 17:2.4 : Conditions17-14
- § 17:3 : Amount of Coverage Available17-14
- § 17:3.1 : Policy Limits17-14
- [A] : Aggregate, Per-Occurrence and “Batch” Limits17-14
- [B] : Number of Occurrences17-15
- [C] : Trigger Theories and “Stacking” of Annual Limits17-17
- [D] : Allocation17-18
- [E] : Exhaustion17-19
- [F] : Operations vs. Products Limits17-20
- § 17:3.2 : Supplementary Payments17-20
- § 17:4 : Coverage Litigation17-21
- § 17:4.1 : Impact of Coverage Disputes on Liability Defense17-21
- § 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 Limits17-23
- § 17:4.4 : Insured’s Right to Independent Counsel17-24
- § 17:5 : Conclusion17-25
|
|
Chapter 18: |
Advantages and Disadvantages of Multidistrict Litigation |
Lauren Gershuny ~ Genova Burns Vernoia
Sheila Boston ~ Kaye Scholer
Wendy Fleishman ~ Lieff Cabraser |
|
- § 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 |
Lee Davis Thames ~ Butler Snow
Lemuel Montgomery ~ Butler Snow |
|
- § 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 |
Sarah L Brew ~ Halleland Lewis Nilan & Johnson
Kathryn Hibbard ~ Greene Espel |
|
- § 20:1 : Overview20-2
- § 20:2 : Crisis Management Planning Process20-3
- § 20:2.1 : Formation of a Crisis Management Team20-3
- § 20:2.2 : Assessing Risks20-5
- § 20:2.3 : Developing a Written Crisis Management Plan20-7
- [A] : Generally20-7
- [B] : Communications Tree20-8
- [C] : Responsibilities of the Crisis Management Team20-8
- [D] : Communications Plan20-10
- [D][1] : Generally20-10
- [D][2] : Holding Statements20-10
- [D][3] : Key Stakeholders20-11
- [D][4] : Process for Drafting and Approving Internal and External Statements20-12
- [D][5] : Communicating the Business’s Internal and External Statements20-14
- [D][6] : Communications to Litigation Players20-16
- [E] : Fact Gathering20-16
- [F] : Sample Documents20-17
- § 20:2.4 : Practicing the Written Crisis Management Plan20-18
- § 20:3 : The Attorney’s Role in a Crisis20-18
- § 20:3.1 : Attorney-Client Privilege20-19
- § 20:3.2 : Work Product Doctrine20-20
- § 20:4 : Conclusion20-21
|
|
Chapter 21: |
Power of the Media in Bet-the-Company Litigation |
Joanne M Gray ~ Goodwin Procter LLP |
|
- § 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 |
Richard Goetz ~ O'Melveny & Myers LLP
Carlos M. Lazatin ~ O'Melveny & Myers LLP
Esteban Rodriguez ~ O'Melveny & Myers LLP |
|
- § 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] : Heightened Judicial Scrutiny22-5
- § 22:2.3 : Transparency in the Settlement Process22-6
- § 22:2.4 : Multiple Parties with Goals of Derailment22-8
- [A] : Generally22-8
- [B] : Differences in Goals and Acceptability of Terms22-8
- [C] : Class Member Objections22-9
- § 22:3 : Basic Steps for Class Action Settlements22-9
- § 22:3.1 : Generally22-9
- § 22:3.2 : Negotiation Process22-10
- [A] : Generally22-10
- [B] : Timing of the Class Settlement22-10
- [B][1] : Generally22-10
- [B][2] : Pre-Suit Settlements22-11
- [B][2][a] : Advantages22-11
- [B][2][b] : Disadvantages22-11
- [B][3] : Early Rulings22-12
- [B][4] : Class Certification Ruling22-12
- [B][5] : Deciding Whether to Proceed to Trial22-12
- [B][5][a] : Generally22-12
- [B][5][b] : Risks for Plaintiffs22-13
- [B][5][c] : Risks for Defendants22-13
- [C] : Good-Faith, Arm’s-Length Negotiations22-14
- [D] : Defining the Settlement Class22-14
- [D][1] : For Plaintiffs22-15
- [D][2] : For Defendants22-15
- [D][3] : Sub-Classes22-16
- [D][4] : Class Exclusions22-16
- [E] : Defining the Scope of the Release22-17
- [E][1] : What Claims Will Be Released?22-17
- [E][2] : What Is the Time Period Covered by the Release?22-19
- [E][3] : Who Will Be the “Released Parties”?22-19
- [F] : Consideration to Class Members22-20
- [F][1] : Generally22-20
- [F][2] : Settlement Fund Allocation22-21
- [F][2][a] : Lump Sum Settlements22-21
- [F][2][b] : Coupon Settlements22-22
- [F][3] : Settlements for Sub-Classes22-24
- [F][4] : Undistributed or Unclaimed Distribution22-24
- [F][5] : Equitable Relief or Changes in Business Practices22-25
- [F][6] : Fairness of the Settlement Consideration22-26
- [G] : Incentive Award to Class Representative22-27
- [H] : Confirmatory Discovery22-27
- [I] : Notice and Administration Procedures22-28
- [I][1] : Generally22-28
- [I][2] : First-Class Mail22-29
- [I][3] : Bulk Mail22-29
- [I][4] : E-mail22-30
- [I][5] : Other Methods of Notice22-30
- [I][6] : Settlement Administration22-31
- [J] : Negotiating Class Counsel’s Fees22-32
- [K] : Drafting the Settlement Agreement22-33
- § 22:3.3 : Preliminary Approval Process22-34
- [A] : Generally22-34
- [B] : Motion for Preliminary Approval22-34
- [B][1] : Generally22-34
- [B][2] : Topics Covered by the Motion22-35
- [B][2][a] : Summary of the History of the Litigation22-35
- [B][2][b] : Background of Settlement Negotiation22-35
- [B][2][c] : Summary Description of Settlement Terms22-36
- [B][2][d] : Provide Sound Bases for Modified Class Definition22-36
- [B][2][e] : Description of Key Factual and Legal Issues22-37
- [B][2][f] : Demonstrate Qualification for Class Certification22-37
- [C] : Preliminary Approval Hearing22-39
- [D] : Dealing with Potential Objectors22-40
- [D][1] : Generally22-40
- [D][2] : Types of Objectors22-41
- [D][3] : Defeating Objectors22-41
- [D][4] : Settling with Objectors22-43
- [E] : Requests to Enjoin Competing Class Actions22-43
- § 22:3.4 : Fairness Hearing Process22-44
- [A] : Generally22-44
- [B] : Setting the Timetable for the Fairness Hearing22-45
- [C] : CAFA’s Notice Requirements for Government Officials22-46
- [D] : Submissions for the Fairness Hearing22-48
- [E] : Use of Experts and Other Witnesses for the Fairness Hearing22-49
- [F] : Conduct of the Fairness Hearing22-50
- § 22:4 : Risks of a Failed Class Settlement22-51
- § 22:4.1 : Changes to the Players and Dynamics22-51
- § 22:4.2 : Defendant’s Diminished Leverage22-52
- § 22:4.3 : Bar to Challenging Class Certification22-52
- § 22:4.4 : Financial Impact on the Defendant22-53
|
|
Chapter 23: |
Mass Tort Settlement Strategies |
Richard Goetz ~ O'Melveny & Myers LLP
Catalina Vergara ~ O'Melveny & Myers LLP |
|
- § 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 Approach23-11
- § 23:2.5 : Aggregate Settlement Agreements with Plaintiffs’ Attorneys23-13
- [A] : Generally23-13
- [B] : Propulsid® Litigation23-14
- [B][1] : Background23-14
- [B][2] : First Settlement Agreement23-15
- [B][3] : Second Settlement Agreement23-17
- § 23:3 : Private Settlement Agreement: Vioxx Settlement23-17
- § 23:3.1 : Background23-17
- § 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 |
Charles B Updike ~ Schoeman Updike & Kaufman
Beth Kaufman ~ Schoeman Updike & Kaufman |
|
- § 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 |
Michael A Tanenbaum ~ Sedgwick Detert Moran & Arnold LLP
Marina Hoppas ~ Sedgwick Detert Moran & Arnold LLP |
|
- § 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 |
Margaret A. Daley ~ Duff & Phelps
Erik Laykin ~ Duff & Phelps LLC |
|
- § 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 Engines26-4
- [C] : Bulletin Board Postings26-6
- [D] : Social Networking Sites26-7
- [E] : Blogs26-8
- § 26:3 : Subscription Databases26-9
- § 26:3.1 : Generally26-9
- § 26:3.2 : LexisNexis26-10
- § 26:3.3 : ChoicePoint and Westlaw26-10
- § 26:3.4 : World-Check26-10
- § 26:4 : Researching People26-11
- § 26:5 : Researching Expert Witnesses26-13
- § 26:6 : Researching Companies26-15
- § 26:7 : Researching Product Liability26-17
- § 26:8 : Some Caveats26-17
- § 26:8.1 : Authentication26-17
- § 26:8.2 : Hearsay26-18
- § 26:8.3 : Language Limitations26-19
- § 26:9 : Recovering Electronic Data26-19
- § 26:9.1 : Generally26-19
- § 26:9.2 : Deleted Data26-20
- § 26:9.3 : Computer Forensic Process26-21
- § 26:10 : Conclusion26-24
|
|
Chapter 27: |
E-Discovery--Emerging Legal Issues and Guiding Law; And Appendices 27A-27B |
Leaf D. Mcgregor ~ Fulbright & Jaworski LLP
Stephanie Smith ~ Fulbright & Jaworski LLP
Laurie Weiss ~ Fulbright & Jaworski LLP
Marti Cherry ~ Fulbright & Jaworski LLP |
|
- § 27:1 : Overview27-2
- § 27:2 : E-Discovery Life Cycle—Electronic Discovery Reference Model27-3
- § 27:3 : Federal and State Rules27-3
- § 27:3.1 : Brief Summary of the Amended Federal Rules of Civil Procedure27-4
- [A] : Rules 26(f) and 16(b): Early Attention to ESI Discovery Issues27-4
- [B] : Rule 34(b): Discuss Form of Production Before Production27-4
- [C] : Rule 26(a)(1)(A): Mandatory Disclosures Must Include ESI27-5
- [D] : Rule 26(b)(2)(B): “Two-Tiered” Discovery of Inaccessible ESI27-6
- [E] : Rule 26(b)(5): Inadvertent Production of Privileged Documents27-7
- [F] : Rule 33(d): Records in Lieu of Answering Interrogatories27-8
- [G] : Rule 37(e) (formerly 37(f)): The Not-So-Safe “Safe Harbor”27-8
- [H] : Rule 45: Third-Party Subpoena Practice27-10
- [I] : Advisory Committee Notes Contain Additional Guidance27-10
- § 27:3.2 : State Trial Court Rules27-11
- [A] : E-Discovery Guidelines for State Trial Courts27-11
- [B] : State Rulemaking Efforts27-11
- § 27:4 : Defense of Process: Managing the Electronic Discovery Life Cycle27-12
- § 27:4.1 : Identification and Preservation of ESI27-12
- [A] : Duty to Search For and Preserve Relevant ESI27-12
- [B] : Duty to Preserve—Triggering Mechanisms27-14
- [C] : Legal Holds—Issuing Preservation Notice27-16
- [C][1] : Role of Senior Management and Counsel27-16
- [C][2] : Preservation Notice or Request to Third Parties27-17
- [C][3] : Assertion of Privilege27-18
- [D] : Penalties and Sanctions27-19
- § 27:4.2 : Review of ESI27-22
- [A] : Privilege, Work Product, and Confidentiality27-22
- [A][1] : Jurisdictions Vary in Approach to Privilege Waiver27-23
- [A][2] : Clawback Procedure and Agreements27-24
- [A][3] : Federal Rule of Evidence 50227-25
- [A][4] : Outsourcing to U.S. or Offshore Contract Attorneys27-27
- [B] : Technology-Assisted Search, Retrieval, and Review27-28
- § 27:5 : Presentation of ESI: Admissibility Issues27-31
- § 27:5.1 : Generally27-31
- § 27:5.2 : Five-Step Analysis27-31
- [A] : Generally27-31
- [B] : Relevance27-32
- [C] : Authenticity27-33
- [D] : Hearsay27-35
- [E] : Original Writing Rule27-37
- [F] : Probative Value versus Unfair Prejudice27-38
- § 27:6 : Third-Party Discovery—Rule 4527-38
- § 27:6.1 : Generally27-38
- § 27:6.2 : Scope of Discovery from a Nonparty27-39
- § 27:6.3 : Cost Burden on a Nonparty—Basis for Cost-Shifting27-42
- § 27:7 : Shifting Costs to the Adversary27-43
- § 27:7.1 : Generally27-43
- § 27:7.2 : Rowe Entertainment Factors27-44
- § 27:7.3 : Zubulake Test27-46
- § 27:7.4 : Sedona Guidelines on Cost-Shifting27-47
- § 27:8 : Conclusion27-48
- 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 |
Marie S Woodbury ~ Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
Denise Talbert ~ Shook Hardy Bacon LLP
John Vaglio ~ Shook Hardy Bacon LLP |
|
- § 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: State Standards for Admissibility of Expert Evidence |
Joshua Chow ~ Scharf Banks Marmor LLC |
|
- § 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 Frye29-16
- § 29:3 : Exemplar States29-18
- § 29:3.1 : Arizona29-18
- § 29:3.2 : California29-19
- § 29:3.3 : Florida29-21
- § 29:3.4 : Illinois29-22
- § 29:3.5 : Indiana29-24
- § 29:3.6 : Michigan29-26
- § 29:3.7 : Minnesota29-27
- § 29:3.8 : New Jersey29-28
- § 29:3.9 : New York29-29
- § 29:3.10 : Ohio29-30
- § 29:3.11 : Pennsylvania29-31
- § 29:3.12 : Texas29-32
- § 29:3.13 : Virginia29-33
- § 29:3.14 : Wisconsin29-35
- § 29:4 : Daubert/Frye in Practice29-36
- § 29:4.1 : Establishing Causation Through Expert Testimony29-36
- § 29:4.2 : Preparing for Daubert/Frye Challenges29-38
- § 29:5 : 2010 Amendments to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 2629-41
- § 29:6 : Conclusion29-42
- Appendix 29A : State Standards for Admissibility of Expert EvidenceApp. 29A–1
|
|
Chapter 30: |
Court Appointed Experts; And Chapters 30A-30C |
Paxton Williams ~ Scharf Banks Marmor LLC
Zach A. Mayo ~ Scharf Banks Marmor LLC
Nathan A. Schachtman ~ Nathan A. Schachtman, Esq., PC
Deirdre A. Fox ~ Scharf Banks Marmor LLC
Jonathan M Hoffman ~ Martin Bischoff
George D. Sax ~ Schoeman Updike Kaufman & Scharf |
|
- § 30:1 : Overview30-2
- § 30:2 : Court-Appointed Experts Under Rule 70630-3
- § 30:2.1 : Generally30-3
- § 30:2.2 : Interpretation of Rule 706’s Provisions30-4
- [A] : Trial Court’s Discretion Whether to Appoint Experts30-4
- [B] : Procedure for Invoking Rule 70630-6
- § 30:2.3 : Strategy30-6
- [A] : Whether the Court Should Appoint Its Own Experts30-6
- [A][1] : Benefits of Court-Appointed Experts30-7
- [A][2] : Risks of Using Court-Appointed Experts30-8
- [B] : Selecting a Court-Appointed Expert Witness30-9
- [C] : Scope of Testimony30-11
- § 30:2.4 : Instructions to Appointed Witnesses30-11
- [A] : Text of Rule 70630-11
- [B] : Strategy30-11
- [B][1] : Court’s Instructions to Appointed Witnesses30-12
- [B][2] : Research Methods of Court-Appointed Experts30-12
- [B][3] : Communications with Others30-12
- [B][4] : Ex Parte Communications with Parties or Their Experts30-13
- [B][5] : Ex Parte Communications with the Court30-13
- [B][6] : Acquisition of Information30-14
- [B][7] : Reports30-14
- [B][8] : Document Retention30-15
- [B][9] : Depositions30-16
- [B][10] : Motions in Limine30-16
- [B][11] : Disclosure of Experts’ Status30-16
- [C] : Payment of Experts’ Costs30-16
- § 30:3 : Technical Advisors30-17
- § 30:3.1 : Generally30-17
- § 30:3.2 : Court’s Inherent Authority30-17
- § 30:3.3 : Procedural Protections30-19
- § 30:3.4 : Costs30-21
- § 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 Transpositional Fallacy30A-5
- § 30A:5.3 : Confusion Between Significance Probability and The Burden of Proof30A-6
- § 30A:5.4 : Hypothesis Testing30A-7
- § 30A:5.5 : Confidence Intervals30A-8
- § 30A:5.6 : Inappropriate Use of Statistical Significance—Matrixx Initiatives, Inc. v. Siracusano30A-9
- [A] : Sequelae of Matrixx Initiatives30A-12
- [B] : Is Statistical Significance Necessary?30A-13
- § 30A:6 : Statistical Power30A-14
- § 30A:6.1 : Definition of Statistical Power30A-14
- § 30A:6.2 : Cases Involving Statistical Power30A-15
- § 30A:7 : Meta-Analysis30A-17
- § 30A:7.1 : Definition and History of Meta-Analysis30A-17
- § 30A:7.2 : Consensus Statements30A-18
- § 30A:7.3 : Use of Meta-Analysis in Litigation30A-18
- § 30A:7.4 : Competing Models for Meta-Analysis30A-20
- § 30A:7.5 : Recent Cases Involving Meta-Analyses30A-21
- § 30A:8 : Conclusion30A-23
- § 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
- § 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 |
Robert N Weiner ~ Arnold & Porter
Jeffrey L Handwerker ~ Arnold & Porter |
|
- § 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 |
Andrew Manko ~ Carlton Fields
Alina Alonso ~ Carlton Fields PA
Wendy Lumish ~ Carlton Fields |
|
- § 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 |
Kenneth Ross ~ Bowman & Brooke
George Soule ~ Bowman & Brooke |
|
- § 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 |
Dean N. Panos ~ Jenner & Block LLP
Richard P Steinken ~ Jenner & Block LLC
Stephanie Jean-Jacques ~ |
|
- § 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 |
Elizabeth Abbene Coleman ~ Jenner & Block
Rayna M Matczak ~ |
|
- § 35:1 : Traditional Approach to Successor Liability35-1
- § 35:1.1 : Generally35-1
- § 35:1.2 : Traditional Exception #1: Agreement of the Parties35-3
- § 35:1.3 : Traditional Exception #2: Fraudulent Conveyance35-5
- § 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 Beware35-20
|
|
Chapter 36: |
Role of Corporate Executives |
Samuel Goldblatt ~ Nixon Peabody LLP
Benjamin Dwyer ~ Nixon Peabody, LLP |
|
- § 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 |
Sharon L Caffrey ~ Duane Morris LLP
Kenneth Argentieri ~ Duane Morris LLP |
|
- § 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 |
Paul Benson ~ Michael Best & Friedrich LLP
Adam Witkov ~ |
|
- § 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 : State Court Trends38-4
- § 38:4 : Negligent Spoliation38-6
- § 38:4.1 : Generally38-6
- § 38:4.2 : Negligent Spoliation by a Plaintiff38-6
- § 38:4.3 : Negligent Spoliation by a Defendant38-7
- § 38:4.4 : Negligent Spoliation by a Third Party38-9
- [A] : Generally38-9
- [B] : Duty to Preserve Evidence38-10
- § 38:5 : Intentional Spoliation38-11
- § 38:5.1 : Generally38-11
- § 38:5.2 : Intentional Spoliation by a Plaintiff38-12
- § 38:5.3 : Intentional Spoliation by a Defendant38-13
- § 38:5.4 : Intentional Spoliation by a Third Party38-14
- [A] : Generally38-14
- [B] : Third-Party Intentional Spoliation Not Protected38-16
- § 38:6 : Defenses and Sanctions38-17
- § 38:6.1 : Defenses38-17
- [A] : Good Faith38-17
- [B] : Opportunity to Examine38-18
- [C] : Immaterial Evidence38-18
- [D] : Statutes of Limitations38-19
- § 38:6.2 : Sanctions38-19
- [A] : Generally38-19
- [B] : Dismissal38-20
- [C] : Monetary Sanctions38-21
- [D] : Spoliation Inference/Rebuttable Presumption38-22
- [E] : Criminal Liability for Obstruction of Justice38-24
- § 38:7 : Conclusion38-24
|
|
Chapter 39: |
Presenting Complex Scientific Evidence |
Morton D. Dubin II ~ Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP |
|
- § 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 Conclusions39-11
- [G] : Understand Local Rules on Learned Treatises39-11
- [H] : “Gateway” Requirements39-13
- § 39:4.4 : Cross-Examination39-14
- [A] : Understand Local Rules on Learned Treatises39-14
- [B] : Know Your Limitations and the Skill of the Expert39-15
- [C] : Focus on the Understandable39-15
- [D] : Best Available Tools for Organization and Presentation39-16
- [E] : Strategic Use of Bias Information39-16
- § 39:4.5 : Closing39-17
|
|
Chapter 40: |
High-Tech Litigation and the Uses of Technology |
Erica Massaro-Hales ~ FTI Consulting
Jamey Johnson ~ FTI Consulting |
|
- § 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] : High-Tech or Low-Tech?40-4
- [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 Staffing40-14
- [A] : Generally40-14
- [B] : Shorter Duration Trials40-15
- [C] : Longer Duration Trials40-15
- [D] : Large-Scale Trials40-16
- § 40:4 : Trial40-16
- § 40:4.1 : Courtroom Equipment40-16
- § 40:4.2 : Using Demonstratives40-18
- § 40:4.3 : Displaying Documents and Demonstratives40-19
- § 40:4.4 : Playing Video Depositions40-21
- § 40:5 : Post-Trial40-22
- [A] : Beakdown of Equipment40-23
- [B] : Data Archiving40-23
- § 40:6 : Conclusion40-23
|
|
Chapter 41: |
When the Plaintiff Declares Bankruptcy; And Appendix 41A: Summary Judgment/Dismissal Cases Based Upon Judicial Estoppel and/or Lack of Standing |
Anita Hotchkiss ~ Goldberg Segalla LLP |
|
- § 41:1 : Overview41-2
- § 41:2 : Types of Bankruptcies41-3
- § 41:2.1 : Chapter 741-3
- § 41:2.2 : Chapter 1341-3
- § 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 : Standing41-5
- § 41:4.1 : Generally41-5
- § 41:4.2 : Standing and Bankruptcy41-5
- § 41:5 : Judicial Estoppel41-7
- § 41:5.1 : Generally41-7
- § 41:5.2 : Judicial Estoppel and Bankruptcy41-8
- § 41:5.3 : Elements Needed to Prove Entitlement to Summary Judgment41-10
- [A] : Generally41-10
- [B] : Knowledge41-11
- [C] : Bad Faith41-12
- [D] : Detrimental Reliance41-13
- [E] : Public Policy41-13
- § 41:5.4 : Choice of Law41-14
- [A] : Generally41-14
- [B] : Exemptions Specific to Particular Jurisdictions41-14
- [C] : Significance of the Amount of Debt Discharged41-15
- § 41:6 : Securing Dismissal or Summary Judgment41-15
- § 41:7 : Plaintiff’s Responses to an Estoppel Motion41-17
- § 41:7.1 : Generally41-17
- § 41:7.2 : Amending the Bankruptcy Petition41-18
- § 41:7.3 : Allowing the Bankruptcy Trustee to Prosecute the Case41-19
- § 41:7.4 : Suing the Bankruptcy Attorney for Malpractice41-19
- § 41:8 : Conclusion41-20
- Appendix 41A : Summary Judgment/Dismissal Cases Based Upon Judicial Estoppel and/or Lack of StandingApp. 41A–1
|
|
Chapter 42: |
Emerging Jury Issues; And Appendices 42A-42B |
Chilton Davis Varner ~ King & Spalding LLP
C.K. "Peter" Rowland ~ |
|
- § 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 Warnings42-7
- § 42:8 : Safety-Consciousness of Companies42-8
- § 42:9 : Effectiveness of Regulatory Agencies42-8
- § 42:10 : Defendant’s Local Reputation42-9
- § 42:11 : Out-of-State Lawyers42-9
- § 42:12 : Outside Sources During Trial42-10
- § 42:13 : Good Graphics42-12
- § 42:14 : Jurors Online42-12
- § 42:15 : Jury Questionnaires—Powerful Tools42-13
- § 42:16 : Implicit Bias42-13
- § 42:17 : Conclusion42-15
- 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 |
Cynthia R Cohen ~ Verdict Success |
|
- § 43:1 : Overview43-2
- § 43:2 : Different Venues, Different Verdicts43-2
- § 43:2.1 : Generally43-2
- § 43:2.2 : Do Headlines Influence Jurors’ Verdicts?43-2
- § 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 : Juror Perceptions of the FDA that Affect Verdicts in Pharmaceutical Lawsuits43-11
- § 43:4.1 : Generally43-11
- § 43:4.2 : Trust in Government Agencies43-11
- § 43:4.3 : Recognition of Pharmaceutical Companies43-14
- § 43:4.4 : Knowledge of Lawsuits Against Pharmaceutical Companies43-16
- § 43:4.5 : Comparing Perceptions of Vioxx to Perceptions of the FDA43-17
- § 43:4.6 : Jury Selection Determiners from the Vioxx Scenario43-19
- § 43:4.7 : Why Jury Research Findings Matter43-20
- § 43:5 : Can It Happen in Missouri?43-22
|
|
Chapter 44: |
Table of Cases |
|
|
|
Chapter 45: |
Index to Product Liability Litigation: Current Law, Strategies and Best Practices |
|
|