Search for: "PUBLIC SERV. CO. v. PARKINSON"
Results 1 - 10
of 10
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
9 Jul 2017, 10:21 am
In the typical welding fume case, plaintiff claimed that exposure to manganese in welding fume caused Parkinson’s disease or manganism. [read post]
11 Nov 2018, 7:18 am
The published case report by Ratner helps demonstrate that Allen v. [read post]
18 Nov 2021, 1:03 pm
Co. v. [read post]
21 Feb 2014, 11:04 am
Co. [read post]
26 Mar 2017, 3:09 pm
Quester v. [read post]
7 Mar 2014, 10:02 am
Plaintiff does not explain why she was unaware of these publications before “early 2012” when she allegedly discovered the misrepresentation for the first time, nor explains why these publications did not serve to put her on notice that Defendant may have made misrepresentations about [the drug’s] efficacy. [read post]
17 Oct 2021, 2:17 pm
Procter & Gamble Co., 580 F. [read post]
8 Apr 2019, 9:35 am
The Zofran defendants served subpoenas duces tecum and ad testificandum on two of the study authors, Drs. [read post]
20 Apr 2020, 5:01 am
In the face of her credentials, the MDL trial judge retreated to the usual chestnuts that are served up when a Rule 702 challenge is denied. [read post]
1 Oct 2009, 9:46 pm
I am thankful to my friend Eugene White for drawing to my attention a recent case from the ACT where a solicitor, David Landers, had some difficulties in dealing with ACT authorities on behalf of his client, a teacher who wanted to retire and get a payout due to illness.Because of the significance of this decision, I have set out the judgment in full.DAVID LANDER v COUNCIL OF THE LAW SOCIETY OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY[2009] ACTSC 117 (11 September 2009)APPEAL - Appeal against… [read post]
