Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email GroupSales@alm.com to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Reducing Frivolous Litigation
In the first installment of this article, published last month, we discussed the problem of frivolous lawsuits against drug and medical device firms and how state legislatures have been moving to curb frivolous suits in another arena – professional negligence – through the introduction of a requirement for an affidavit of merit. This month, we look at how the lessons learned in the case of professional negligence suits could be applied to reduce the filing of unfounded complaints against drug and medical device makers.
Should Affidavits of Merit Be Required in Drug and Medical Device Litigation?
While the primary purpose of professional negligence affidavit-of-merit statutes is to reduce frivolous professional liability lawsuits, professional negligence suits are not the only actions prone to abuse. Frivolous litigation is also rampant in pharmaceutical and medical device mass tort litigations. See Damiani DJ: Proposals for Tort Reform in the Evaluation of Expert Testimony in Pharmaceutical Mass Tort Cases. 13 Alb. L.J. Sci. & Tech. 517, 518-519 (2003). Accordingly, if affidavit-of-merit statutes can successfully reduce frivolous professional liability actions, similar statutes should also successfully reduce frivolous pharmaceutical and medical device actions. In either type of litigation, affidavit-of-merit statutes require both the plaintiff and the attorney to invest time prior to or at the onset of the litigation (instead of years later) and make a frank determination regarding the merits of the suit. All parties, and society as a whole, benefit from limiting litigation to meritorious claims. In particular, permitting only meritorious actions to proceed would lower prescription prices for the public, since the cost of frivolous litigation costs would no longer be passed along to the consumer.
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?