Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
In the January 2003 Practice Tip, I discussed the list of 'issues, witnesses and exhibits' one should compile to highlight the evidence required to establish a prima facie product liability case. In this issue, I discuss two individuals with whom the trial lawyer should meet within the 30 days prior to trial: the client and the physician. In a future tip, I will discuss meeting with the engineering expert. For ease of reference, all individuals are deemed male. For purposes of the discussion, the case concerns injury caused by a defective machine.
Meet with the Client
First and foremost, the lawyer should meet with his client ' in this case, the plaintiff. The most important thing to stress is the client's testimony in this pre-trial meeting. In addition, the client should be made aware of the fact that jurors may be watching him from the first moment he sets foot in the courthouse.
Lawyer, Physician, and Plaintiff
Lawrence Goldhirsch is Trial Counsel to Weitz & Luxenberg, PC in New York. Phone: 212-558-5500.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
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.
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 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.
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?