Product Liability

Expert Analysis

• Policing Bad Claims In Consolidated Litigation: Part 1

  

  With the proliferation of consolidated litigation, courts have lamented the lack of scrutiny often given to individual cases in these proceedings. Recent federal court decisions demonstrate an increased willingness to police meritless claims by assessing whether counsel’s pre-suit investigation was adequate, say Danielle Bagwell and Anne Gruner of Duane Morris LLP.

• 'High Availability' — A Key Term In Law Firm IT Strategy

  

  While most law firm executives and partners may instinctively want to tune out terms like "high availability" and "disaster recovery" — concepts that IT managers usually worry about — there are five reasons you should lean in and wrestle with the vocabulary, say Jeff Norris of Managed Technology Services LLC and Greg Inge of information security consulting firm CQR.

• 5th Circ.'s New Maritime Contract Test Takes Shape

  

  Recent cases demonstrate Louisiana courts' willingness to embrace the Fifth Circuit's simplified analysis of what constitutes a maritime contract in the context of insurance obligations. The courts are homing in on whether parties expected to use a vessel, and how significant the use is, says Hansford Wogan of Jones Walker LLP.

• The 'Post-Fact' Jury In The 'Fake News' Era

  

  The "fake news" phenomenon is ever more prominent in the political arena — but not in the jury box. At a trial, jurors don’t have to rely on the media or any other source to tell them the facts and issues, since they have a front-row seat to the action, says Ross Laguzza, a consultant at R&D Strategic Solutions LLC.

• Opinion

  Fixing Rule 41: A Balanced Approach To Voluntary Dismissal

  

  As written and often applied, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41 — governing voluntary dismissal — allows claimants to aggressively pursue baseless claims, essentially risk-free. A simple change would recalibrate the rule to allocate risk more rationally, properly align incentives and better protect parties responding to meritless suits, say attorneys at Cooley LLP.

• Peering Behind The Peer Review Curtain

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court's opinion in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals specified peer review as one criterion for evaluating scientific evidence. But not all peer review is created equal, and sometimes additional exploration — whether through discovery into your adversaries’ experts, or early investigation of your own potential experts — may make sense, says William Childs of Bowman and Brooke LLP.

• Series

  Judging A Book: Lipez Reviews 'Last Great Colonial Lawyer'

  

  In his new book, "The Last Great Colonial Lawyer: The Life and Legacy of Jeremiah Gridley," Charles McKirdy argues that Gridley — someone I had never heard of — was the last great colonial lawyer, and that his cases illuminate his times. The author largely substantiates both claims, says First Circuit Judge Kermit Lipez.

• How 2 Cases Have Settled NY Insurance Allocation Law

  

  The past two years have seen insurance coverage lawyers coming to terms with the impact of two landscape-changing decisions from New York's highest court, Viking Pump and Keyspan. Together, these cases make clear that under New York law, the allocation approach that will apply to long tail claims is governed by the presence of certain policy language, say Cort Malone and Vivian Michael of Anderson Kill PC.

• 6 Tips For Drafting Autonomous Vehicle Contracts

  

  During the past year, I have been tossed headfirst into the murky water of autonomous vehicle contract drafting, where no well-tested forms exist and negotiating parties often do not know what terms to request. But what is required more than anything is just old-fashioned, common-sense business lawyering, says Jim Jordan of Munsch Hardt Kopf & Harr PC.

• Why A Hoverboard Suit Against Amazon Went Up In Flames

  

  Should an e-commerce firm be held liable for the defects of every item it sells on its global internet marketplace? The plaintiffs in Fox v. Amazon.com argued exactly that, and the district court answered with a resounding “no.” Online marketplaces are simply not in a position to supervise every product sold on their platforms, says Jed Winer of Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP.