Dixon v. Ford Motor Company: “The Best Causation Opinion of 2012” [David Oliver] “Any exposure” causation: “Pennsylvania Supreme Court delivers significant asbestos ruling” [Point of Law]
Maryland high court may consider pro-plaintiff shift from contributory negligence to comparative fault [Sean Wajert]
In last-minute ploy, Albany lawmakers extend time limits for suing local governments [Torch via PoL, Times-Union]
Mental diagnoses: what to do when courtroom experts armed with DSM-5 shoot from the hip [Jim Dedman, Abnormal Use]
California appeals court, legislature decline to go along with trial lawyers’ crusade against Concepcion and class arbitration waivers [WLF, CL&P]
Critics challenge legality of Louisiana AG’s use of contingency lawyers [Melissa Landry, Hayride]
To curb client solicitation, NJ mulls withholding crash reports from noninterested parties for 90 days [NJLRA]

One Comment

I suppose comparative fault is more “pro-plaintiff” than contributory negligence (where if the plaintiff is just 1 percent liable, he recovers nothing), but a partner told me that juries ignore plaintiff negligence in cases where they want the plaintiff to win.
- July 19, 2012 1:27 PM
- By Anonymous Attorney