Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Like baseball batters in a lineup, the home run potential of any given Daubert motion varies greatly. (A Daubert motion is one seeking to exclude unqualified expert evidence. See Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, 509 U.S. 579 (1993).) Statistics go out the window with every at-bat, because statistics cannot predict individual performance. Players without a good eye for the fast ball usually do not make it to the big leagues; lawyers without the skill set to deconstruct and demonstrate the methodological flaws in a disclosure of opinion testimony may get to play in the big leagues, but they have terrible batting averages. What can be done to improve the odds?
Focus on the Rule 26 (a)(2) Report
The starting point for any successful challenge under Federal Rules of Evidence (FRE) 702 and Daubert is the form and content of the witness's disclosure under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP) 26(a)(2).
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?