Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email GroupSales@alm.com to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Case Briefing
Plaintiff Possibly Injured By Alleged Antitrust Activity
The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit properly denied defendants' motion to dismiss this antitrust suit, as under the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit's 'necessary predicate' test, dismissal is warranted only where it is apparent from the allegations in the complaints that the plaintiffs' injury would have occurred even if there had been no antitrust violation. Cardizem CD Antitrust Litigation. Louisiana Wholesale Drug Co. v. Hoechst Mation Roussell Inc., No. 00-2483, 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 11681; 2003 Fed. App. 0195P (6th Cir., 6/13/03).
This case arose out of an agreement entered into by the defendants, Hoescht Marion Roussel Inc. (HMR), the manufacturer of the prescription drug Cardizem CD, and Andrx Pharmaceuticals, then a potential manufacturer of a generic version of that drug. The agreement provided, in essence, that Andrx, in exchange for quarterly payments of $10 million, would refrain from marketing its generic version of Cardizem CD even after it had received FDA approval.
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?