0 results for 'Mobil'
Business Groups Say NJ Too Soft on Expert Witnesses
Business interests and lawyers who represent them are urging that New Jersey discard its 22-year-old rule governing the admission of expert testimony and replace it with the more stringent federal standard.In-house Attorney-Client Privilege and 'Lawyerly Things'
Advice provided by in-house lawyers too often is at risk of being stripped of the protection of the attorney-client privilege.In-house Attorney-Client Privilege and 'Lawyerly Things'
Advice provided by in-house lawyers too often is at risk of being stripped of the protection of the attorney-client privilege.State Won't Need to Review Feds' Files on Charged Driller
Although the ExxonMobil subsidiary the state attorney general last year charged criminally for violations related to fracking can subpoena federal investigators for Brady material, a Lycoming County judge has ruled that state prosecutors will not need to review the federal government's investigative files on the company.Can an Email Account Be Searched Without Probable Cause?
In their Privacy Matters column, Richard Raysman and Peter Brown describe two leading cases that reject the government's petitions for unfettered access to a target's email accounts; a case that reaches a contrary conclusion, even after concluding that the government's request lacked probable cause; and a series of opinions analyzing the same warrant request that came to diametrically opposite conclusions.Avoiding Discovery Disputes Over Attorney-Client Privilege
Companies often wind up in disputes concerning the discovery of reports, memoranda, emails and other documents written by their in-house lawyers in connection with prospective business transactions. Such disputes can raise difficult questions about the scope of the attorney-client communication privilege. No matter what the expectations of in-house lawyers and company executives, it can be hard to predict whether a court will shield such documents from discovery or compel them to be produced to other parties. And the disclosure of potentially privileged documents containing sensitive information and advice can have serious ramifications—not only for a specific case but for a company's long-term interests and objectives.Melnick v. Exxon Mobil Corp., PICS Case No. 14-0954 (Pa. Super. June 9, 2014) Stabile, J. (6 pages).
Benzene Exposure • Storage Tank and Spill Prevention Act • Medical MonitoringToxic Mold Case: Experts, Gatekeeping, Admissibility
In his Evidence column, Michael J. Hutter analyzes the Court of Appeals' holding in 'Cornell v. 360 West 51st Street Realty' and its elucidation of the "general acceptance" standard for expert testimony.Ruling on Mold Clarifies 'Reliability' Needed From Experts
In his Complex Litigation column, Michael Hoenig, a member of Herzfeld & Rubin, writes: Just two weeks ago, the New York Court of Appeals issued its key decision in 'Cornell v. 360 W. 51st St. Realty,' yet again offering detailed guidance to bench and bar on a variety of expert reliability issues. Although the court's approach generally tracks 'Parker v. Mobil Oil,' there are additional lessons of note.'Oddone' and Experience-Based Expert Opinion
In his Evidence column, Michael J. Hutter, a professor at Albany Law School, writes that a threshold question in applying 'Frye' is whether the principle or procedure that would be the subject of an expert's testimony is "scientific" and if so, whether it is "novel." In 'People v. Oddone,' the Court of Appeals addressed the first part of this question in the context of an expert opinion based on the expert's personal experience.State AI Legislation Is on the Move in 2024
Brought to you by LexisNexis®
Download Now
2024 ESI Risk Management & Litigation Readiness Report
Brought to you by Pagefreezer
Download Now
Creating a Culture of Compliance
Brought to you by Ironclad
Download Now
A Buyer's Guide to Law Firm Software
Brought to you by PracticePanther
Download Now