Today's Date: Add To Favorites
Courts Reject Two Major Vioxx Verdicts
Court Watch | 2008/05/30 09:30

Two major court victories for Merck on Thursday pushed the litigation over the painkiller Vioxx closer to conclusion and highlighted the increasing difficulty that plaintiffs’ lawyers were having in winning lawsuits against big drug companies. A state appeals court in Texas overturned a $26 million jury verdict against the company in a lawsuit brought by Carol Ernst, whose husband, Robert, died in 2001 after taking Vioxx. In reversing the verdict, the appeals court found that plaintiffs had not proved that Vioxx caused Mr. Ernst’s death.

Separately, an appeals court in New Jersey sharply reduced a verdict in another Vioxx case. The court ruled that the jury should not have been allowed to award punitive damages against Merck or to find that Merck had committed consumer fraud. Only compensatory damages of $4.5 million were permitted, the court said.

The rulings on Thursday leave lawyers for plaintiffs with just three victories, all with relatively small awards, in the nearly 20 Vioxx cases that have reached juries. Mark Lanier, a plaintiffs’ lawyer who was involved in both cases decided Thursday, criticized the decisions and promised appeals. But plaintiffs face an uphill battle.

Bruce Kuhlik, Merck’s general counsel, said the company was pleased with the rulings.

“Our faith in the judges and the fairness of the process has been well placed,” he said.

Thursday’s ruling may further discourage lawyers from pursuing lawsuits against drug makers. Already, plaintiffs’ lawyers are nervously awaiting a Supreme Court ruling in a case that will be heard this fall and could bar most lawsuits against companies for injuries said to be caused by prescription medicines approved by the Food and Drug Administration.



Brazil's top court approves stem cell research
Biotech | 2008/05/30 09:27
Brazil's Supreme Court ruled Thursday that scientists can conduct embryonic stem cell research, which holds the promise of curing Parkinson's disease and diabetes but raises ethical concerns about the limits on human life.

Six of the court's 11 justices upheld a 2005 law allowing embryonic stem cell research and turned down a petition filed that same year by then-Attorney General Claudio Fontelles, who argued the law was unconstitutional because it violates the right to life.

The remaining five judges argued that while the 2005 law is constitutional, research should only be carried out "with restrictions" such as not allowing the embryo to be destroyed and submitting each case for the approval of an ethics commission.

The ruling drew immediate fire from church officials in the world's largest Roman Catholic country.

The National Conference of Brazilian Bishops issued a statement saying it "regretted" the ruling, comparing it to a death sentence. The bishops' conference said its position "is not a matter of religion, but of the defense of human life, beginning with conception."

The law opens the way for research with embryos resulting from in-vitro fertilization that have been frozen for at least three years.

Advocates have said that a favorable Supreme Court ruling could make Brazil Latin America's leader in stem cell research.

They praise Brazilian scientists for their work with adult stem cells for the treatment of cardiovascular diseases and Type 1 diabetes, and have said that similar breakthroughs could be achieved with embryonic stem cells.



Son of India politician sentenced to life in prison
International | 2008/05/30 06:27
A New Delhi court sentenced a wealthy Indian politician's son to life in prison Friday for the murder of his sister's boyfriend in a case seen as a test of the justice system's ability to take on the powerful.

Earlier in the week the court convicted Vikas Yadav in the abduction and murder of Nitish Katara in 2002. His cousin, Vishal Yadav, was also convicted.

The prosecution said the defendants killed Katara because they did not approve of his relationship with Vikas Yadav's sister, Bharti. The court said Friday the case did not merit the death sentence under Indian law.

A lawyer representing the Katara family, Kamini Jaiswal, told the CNN-IBN news channel she was satisfied with the sentence, while Yadav's lawyer, K.N. Balgopal told reporters they would appeal the conviction.

Vikas Yadav's father, Dharam Pal Yadav, is a wealthy and powerful lawmaker from India's Uttar Pradesh state, notorious for strongmen who dominate state politics using money, power and harassment to further their interests.

The case was seen as a bellwether of the courts' ability and willingness to take on powerful figures who often use bribery and influence to escape punishment.

Katara, then 24, was last seen the night before he was killed, attending a wedding with Bharti. His badly charred body was found later.

In most parts of largely conservative India, romantic relationships without parental approval are frowned upon and even considered an affront to family honor.



Recognition of gay marriages in NY faces battle
Breaking Legal News | 2008/05/30 03:28
Religious and social conservatives vowed Thursday to fight Gov. David Paterson's directive requiring state agencies to recognize gay marriages performed legally elsewhere, saying it flouts traditional values and is a big step toward legalizing same-sex unions in New York.

"The definition of marriage predates recorded history," said New York State Catholic Conference Executive Director Richard E. Barnes. "No single politician or court or legislature should attempt to redefine the very building block of our society in a way that alters its entire meaning and purpose."

Paterson issued a memo earlier this month saying that gay New Yorkers who marry where it is legal will have the right to share family health care plans, receive tax breaks by filing jointly, enjoy stronger adoption rights and inherit property.

He cited a February ruling in a New York Appellate Division court in which the judges determined that there is no legal impediment in New York to the recognition of a same-sex marriage.

Earlier this month, the California Supreme Court ruled that same-sex marriage in the nation's most populous state is legal. The ruling overturned a voter-approved ban on gay marriage.



S. Korean parties file suits to stop beef
World Business News | 2008/05/30 03:28
South Korea's political opposition asked the Constitutional Court on Friday to block U.S. beef from entering the country after the government announced it would resume imports within days under an accord with Washington.

The government's announcement came despite widespread public opposition to the beef deal, which critics say fails to adequately protect against mad cow disease. About 9,000 people took to the streets in Seoul on Thursday night to denounce the move.

Three main opposition parties filed lawsuits Friday asking the Constitutional Court to rule that the government's move violates the people's right to health, and to issue an injunction against a resumption of imports until it issues a verdict.

They also demanded that all Cabinet members resign.

Constitutional Court spokesman Judge Kim Bok-ki said the court will deliberate the case expeditiously, but he did not give a timeframe.

Quarantine inspections of American beef shipments are expected to begin next week.

Still, U.S. beef is not expected to become widely available immediately because four major discount chains say they have no plans to put it on their shelves because of negative public perceptions of American beef.



Lawyer sues Delta for ruining family vacation
Legal Business | 2008/05/29 09:34

A New York lawyer is suing Delta Air Lines for $1 million, saying his family vacation turned into a nightmare after they were stranded in an airport for days and treated disdainfully by airline employees. Richard Roth, who filed the lawsuit on behalf of himself and his mother, said he planned the Christmas 2007 trip to Buenos Aires to celebrate his mother's 80th birthday. She had grown up in the city, but had not returned in years, he said.

Instead, Roth, his two teenage children, his wife and mother spent three days in airports, went days without their luggage, were treated rudely by airline employees and were forced to spend $21,000 on unused hotel rooms in Argentina, replacement clothes, and other costs.

"Through its gross negligence, malfeasance and absolute incompetence, Mr. Roth holds Delta responsible for ruining his vacation," said the lawsuit, filed in New York state court.

Delta Air Lines Inc had no immediate comment. Roth said that he has been in touch with Delta about getting reimbursed, but was repeatedly rebuffed. He told Reuters on Wednesday filing the suit was a last resort.

After the initial flight from New York was delayed by more than two hours, the family was not allowed to board their connecting flight in Atlanta, Roth said.

A Delta employee "literally walked away chuckling that he had left them stranded," he said. After waiting in the airport for hours, Roth was told the next available flight would depart more than two weeks later.



Calif.: Same-sex marriages OK beginning June 17
Breaking Legal News | 2008/05/29 09:32
Barring a stay of a historic California Supreme Court ruling, same-sex couples will be able to wed in the state beginning June 17, according to a state directive issued Wednesday.

And such unions might soon be recognized at the other end of the country in New York, where the governor has directed state agencies to do so.

California said it chose June 17 because the state Supreme Court has until the day before to decide whether to grant a stay of its May 15 ruling legalizing gay marriage.

Gay-rights advocates and some clerks initially thought couples would be able to wed as early as Saturday, June 14. The court's decisions typically take effect 30 days after they are made.

The guidelines from Janet McKee, chief of California's office of vital records, to the state's 58 county clerks also contained copies of new marriage forms that include lines for "Party A" and "Party B" instead of bride and groom. The gender-neutral nomenclature was developed in consultation with county clerks, according to the letter.

"Effective June 17, 2008, only the enclosed new forms may be issued for the issuance of marriage licenses in California," the directive reads.

A group opposed to gay marriage has asked the court to stay its decision until after the November election, when voters are likely to face a ballot initiative that would once again define marriage as a union between a man and a woman. Passage of the initiative would overrule the Supreme Court.

Under the Supreme Court's regular rules of procedure, justices have until the end of the day June 16 to rule on the stay request, according to the memo sent by e-mail to county clerks. Lawyers involved in the marriage case have said previously the court could grant itself an extra 60 days to consider the stay.



[PREV] [1] ..[710][711][712][713][714][715][716][717][718].. [1187] [NEXT]
All
Class Action
Bankruptcy
Biotech
Breaking Legal News
Business
Corporate Governance
Court Watch
Criminal Law
Health Care
Human Rights
Insurance
Intellectual Property
Labor & Employment
Law Center
Law Promo News
Legal Business
Legal Marketing
Litigation
Medical Malpractice
Mergers & Acquisitions
Political and Legal
Politics
Practice Focuses
Securities
Elite Lawyers
Tax
Featured Law Firms
Tort Reform
Venture Business News
World Business News
Law Firm News
Attorneys in the News
Events and Seminars
Environmental
Legal Careers News
Patent Law
Consumer Rights
International
Legal Spotlight
Current Cases
State Class Actions
Federal Class Actions
Florida Attorney General Ash..
Americans’ trust in nation..
Trump asks the Supreme Court..
Rudy Giuliani is in contempt..
Small businesses brace thems..
Appeals court overturns ex-4..
Amazon workers strike at mul..
TikTok asks Supreme Court to..
Supreme Court rejects Wiscon..
US inflation ticked up last ..
Court seems reluctant to blo..
Court will hear arguments ov..
Romanian court orders a reco..
Court backs Texas over razor..
New Hampshire courts hear 2 ..


Class action or a representative action is a form of lawsuit in which a large group of people collectively bring a claim to court and/or in which a class of defendants is being sued. This form of collective lawsuit originated in the United States and is still predominantly a U.S. phenomenon, at least the U.S. variant of it. In the United States federal courts, class actions are governed by Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule. Since 1938, many states have adopted rules similar to the FRCP. However, some states like California have civil procedure systems which deviate significantly from the federal rules; the California Codes provide for four separate types of class actions. As a result, there are two separate treatises devoted solely to the complex topic of California class actions. Some states, such as Virginia, do not provide for any class actions, while others, such as New York, limit the types of claims that may be brought as class actions. They can construct your law firm a brand new website, lawyer website templates and help you redesign your existing law firm site to secure your place in the internet.
St. Louis Missouri Criminal Defense Lawyer
St. Charles DUI Attorney
www.lynchlawonline.com
Lorain Elyria Divorce Lawyer
www.loraindivorceattorney.com
Legal Document Services in Los Angeles, CA
Best Legal Document Preparation
www.tllsg.com
Car Accident Lawyers
Sunnyvale, CA Personal Injury Attorney
www.esrajunglaw.com
East Greenwich Family Law Attorney
Divorce Lawyer - Erica S. Janton
www.jantonfamilylaw.com/about
St. Louis Missouri Criminal Defense Lawyer
St. Charles DUI Attorney
www.lynchlawonline.com
Connecticut Special Education Lawyer
www.fortelawgroup.com
  Law Firm Directory
 
 
 
© ClassActionTimes.com. All rights reserved.

The content contained on the web site has been prepared by Class Action Times as a service to the internet community and is not intended to constitute legal advice or a substitute for consultation with a licensed legal professional in a particular case or circumstance. Affordable Law Firm Web Design