Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
This article briefly examines the controversial topic of ex parte contacts, and describes how such contacts were successfully employed to obtain summary judgment in two separate cases pending within the Aredia'/Zometa' mass tort litigation. It is not a 50-state survey on the viability of ex parte contacts. Rather, the article provides practical examples of how they can be used, with the hope that by doing so, it might draw attention to the vital role that ex parte contacts play in the defense of pharmaceutical product liability litigation.
At the same time, we hope to counteract the argument that ex parte contacts serve no legitimate purpose given the availability of “formal” discovery mechanisms. As these examples from the Aredia'/Zometa' litigation and countless other examples show, ex parte contacts play a key role in combating ever-changing liability theories and ensuring that non-meritorious cases meet a just, if not speedy, end.
The Basics
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?