Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
In the late 1990s, the New Jersey Legislature sought to curb what was viewed as excessive and often frivolous litigation in New Jersey. Over a series of several years, legislation was enacted to reduce the perceived prevalence of, first, medical malpractice and, then, automobile accident lawsuits.
In 1995, the legislature passed the Affidavit of Merit Statute (AOM), N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-26 et seq. The first real challenge to an interpretation of this new AOM Statute did not occur until 1998, the same year in which the legislature passed the 1998 Automobile Insurance Cost Reduction Act (AICRA), N.J.S.A. 39:6A-1.1 to 35. The latter legislation significantly enhanced the requirements for personal injury plaintiffs to breach the limitation-on-lawsuit threshold, or verbal threshold, in order to recover for personal injury/non-economic damages. This statute had the desired effect of substantially limiting the number of lawsuits filed. Therefore, while not necessarily decreasing the costs of insurance (those costs held steady), it increased competition and created greater choice in the marketplace by developing an atmosphere that permitted both new insurers to enter the marketplace and old insurers who had left to return to the marketplace.
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.
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.
Each stage of an attorney's career offers opportunities for a curriculum that addresses both the individual's and the firm's need to drive success.
A defendant in a patent infringement suit may, during discovery and prior to a <i>Markman</i> hearing, compel the plaintiff to produce claim charts, claim constructions, and element-by-element infringement analyses.