Search for: "In re G.D."
Results 41 - 59
of 59
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
28 Sep 2009, 1:31 am
Naturally, we’re most interested in the recall cases involving prescription medical products. [read post]
28 Sep 2009, 1:31 am
Naturally, we’re most interested in the recall cases involving prescription medical products. [read post]
28 Apr 2011, 3:18 pm
Obviously, if we’re calling California conservative and Idaho liberal, then the issues associated with comment k don’t fit well into the usual legal cubby holes.Idaho, then – holding our noses all the way. [read post]
7 Nov 2014, 5:52 am
., 256 F.3d 1013, 1021 (10th Cir. 2001) (wrong to “construe [a treater’s] ‘heeding’ an adequate warning to mean [s/he] would have given the warning”) (applying Oklahoma law); In re Diet Drug Litigation, 895 A.2d 480, 490-91 (N.J. [read post]
9 Apr 2015, 11:59 am
The validity of the patent was sustained in a director-ordered re-exam. [read post]
18 Mar 2011, 10:04 am
G.D. [read post]
27 Aug 2010, 2:41 pm
G.D. [read post]
20 Mar 2009, 2:05 am
G.D. [read post]
7 Sep 2012, 3:23 pm
You Can’t Get There from HereWe’re somewhat less enamored with Romero v. [read post]
2 Jul 2009, 5:18 am
We don't read every warning that we encounter - and we're defense lawyers. [read post]
9 Jan 2014, 1:37 pm
We’ve covered a lot of topics since we started DDLaw in late 2006. [read post]
25 Apr 2015, 11:03 am
The first edition of the Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence [Manual] was published in 1994, a year after the Supreme Court delivered its opinion in Daubert. [read post]
15 Sep 2011, 5:00 am
G.D. [read post]
17 Sep 2009, 4:30 am
A couple of cases we've posted about recently started us thinking - a dangerous turn of events, we know. [read post]
17 May 2011, 7:23 am
Both aggregation and disaggregation of outcomes poses difficult problems for statistical analysis, and for epidemiology. [read post]
15 Apr 2011, 6:02 am
We took a look at a case called Birdsong v. [read post]
9 Apr 2015, 5:00 am
This time, we don’t care much about the peculiar facts, but rather we’re directing ourselves to the court’s odd reasoning that somehow there’s a conflict between the learned intermediary rule (adopted at some level now in everyAmerican jurisdiction – see our “headcount” post here − and the Uniform Contribution Among Tortfeasors Act (“UCATA”). [read post]
18 Dec 2014, 6:00 am
The primary track is the “official business, or topics of discourse”—the substance of what we want to say.12 A secondary, or collateral, track refers to the act of speaking itself: “to timing, delays, re-phrasings, mistakes, repairs, intentions to speak, and the like. [read post]
