We are pleased to share with you the current version of the Doing Business In Brazil, drafted by Souto Correa Advogados, a full service law firm in Brazil. Please reach out to PLAC member Roberta Feiten with questions or if you would like more information.
“What Real Jurors Like/Dislike About Lawyers” As courts are slowly resuming proceedings including some forms of jury trials, trial counsel, their trial teams, litigators generally and claims supervisors need to recalibrate their thinking about jurors.
Michael Hoenig’s Complex Litigation column, issued in the New York Law Journal on September 11, 2020 (digital; in print on September 14), shares information about what over 500 real jurors, serving in some 50 trials (civil and criminal), liked and disliked about lawyers trying their cases. The findings were gleaned by a respected federal judge from voluntary, anonymous surveys of the jurors expressing, in their own words, what pleased or irritated them. Read the full article here.
PLAC is a specialty bar association focusing on complex litigation and regulatory issues in the area of product development and product liability. Our not-for-profit association of product manufacturers, suppliers, retailers and select regulatory, litigation and appellate professionals who work to shape the common law of product liability and complex regulation, provide guidance on changing regulations, and strategically help corporations manage risk throughout the entire product lifecycle. PLAC is a unique resource for companies who must defend their products’ integrity and their companies’ reputation.
On August 13, PLAC filed a brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit in Burton, et al v Armstrong Containers, et al addressing the admissibility of expert testimony, jury instructions defining “injury,” and the nature of required causal connection between defect and injury. PLAC argued (1) it was improper to admit specific causation testimony based on epidemiological studies and post-injury cognitive performance tests; (2) it was improper to instruct the jury without defining “injury” or otherwise clarifying that elevated blood lead levels, without manifestation of any consequential symptoms, are not a compensable in jury; and (3) it was improper to fail to instruct the jury that the injury must be caused by the defendant’s tortious conduct rather than merely result from exposure to the product. Oral argument has been set of December 9.
PLAC member Alan Lazarus of Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP authored PLAC’s brief.
PLAC's mission is to obtain fairness and balance in the common law of product liability. A primary tool to accomplish this mission is PLAC's Amicus Curiae Program, often called “The heart and soul of PLAC.”
PLAC has filed more than 1,100 amicus briefs, written by some of the nation’s top appellate practitioners. Our briefs have been accepted in virtually every state and federal court in the U.S. They are routinely acknowledged, quoted, and praised by courts in published opinions.
PLAC’s amicus briefs help shape the law for all manufacturers on important issues.
Fall 2021 Conference: PLAC's Fall Conference will be held at the Broadmoor, September 29-October 1, 2021 in Colorado Springs, CO.
January 21 at 2:00 PM ET: The Future of CBD Law: 2021 and Beyond January 26 at 2:00 PM ET: Defending 30(b)(6) Depositions in the COVID Age and Beyond
Questions? Email us at plac@plac.com.
Connect with us on LinkedIn