The "it," of course, is negligence per se based upon claims that the defendant somehow violated the Food, Drug & Cosmetic Act ("FDCA").Pull up a cyberchair and pay attention because we're going to explain some ways of defeating such claims - as a matter of law - that you probably haven't considered.First, a little bit on why FDCA-based negligence per se is so dangerous and difficult a cause of action to deal with. [read post]

Arizona: Arizona Family Law Blog by Nirenstein, Ruotolo & Gonzalez, P.L.C. [read post]

Liability may attach if the officer is adjudged in hindsight to have acted outside the scope of his or her delegated authority or to have failed to act on a matter that was not (sic) within his or her expected areas of responsibility.[8]   More recently, five decisions by federal district courts in California ruled that the business judgment rule applies only to independent directors, not officers. [read post]

Liability may attach if the officer is adjudged in hindsight to have acted outside the scope of his or her delegated authority or to have failed to act on a matter that was not (sic) within his or her expected areas of responsibility.[8]   More recently, five decisions by federal district courts in California ruled that the business judgment rule applies only to independent directors, not officers. [read post]