Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
In our day-to-day lives, Americans recognize that the “list” or “sticker” prices for products or services do not always reflect their actual cost. But in the topsy-turvy world of the legal system, lawyers who represent plaintiffs in product liability and other personal injury cases seek damages for medical expenses based on amounts originally billed by healthcare providers that are significantly higher than the plaintiff – or anyone paying on her behalf – actually paid. In recent years, several states have limited or eliminated these “phantom damages.”
For example, more than three-quarters of Americans have “club cards” that they routinely use at the supermarket. When the customer presents the card and the store applies applicable discounts at the checkout counter, the total bill can easily come down 20% from the “regular” prices. If an individual purchased supplies for a work-related event at the supermarket, and submitted a request to her employer for reimbursement, she would not expect to receive a check reflecting the prices on the receipt prior to the deduction of discounts. Another illustration is the sticker price of a car. Car buyers recognize that the amount on the window of the vehicle is a starting point for negotiation, and that they ultimately pay less. Most states impose a sales tax on cars. A purchaser would not expect the state to base the amount of that tax on the sticker price of the car, but would anticipate paying an amount based on the actual cost. Obviously, in each case, consumers expect the transaction to be based on the amount actually paid, not a list price. They recognize that the sticker price may simply reflect the pricing practices of that industry, not the true cost.
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
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
When we consider how the use of AI affects legal PR and communications, we have to look at it as an industrywide global phenomenon. A recent online conference provided an overview of the latest AI trends in public relations, and specifically, the impact of AI on communications. Here are some of the key points and takeaways from several of the speakers, who provided current best practices, tips, concerns and case studies.
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.