Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates
P.C.
75 Ponce De Leon Ave NE Ste 101
Atlanta,
GA 30308(470) 294-1674
www.garymartinhays.com
By John A. Greenhall, Anthony L. Byler and Kathleen M. Morley | February 5, 2018
Attorneys are bound by developing ethical rules and duties relating to e-discovery. These rules and duties deserve emphasis because courts, and clients, are increasingly concerned about the manner in which attorneys conduct discovery and, particularly, e-discovery.
The Legal Intelligencer | Commentary
By David R. Cohen and Todd R. Fairman | February 5, 2018
Most lawyers know to advise their clients to preserve evidence in their “care, custody or control” relevant to pending or threatened litigation. But exactly how far does “control” go? Can a party be sanctioned for spoliation for failing to issue a legal hold notice to a third party who has no obligation to follow your legal hold instructions?
The Legal Intelligencer | Commentary
By Joseph Francoeur, Michelle Vizzi and Sade A. Forte | February 5, 2018
Attorneys need to be aware of technological advances in terms of preservation of evidence and new avenues for seeking relevant evidence. Spoliation sanctions, including adverse jury instructions, have been issued for the failure to preserve text messages. In addition, data from wearable technology, such as the Apple Watch and the Fitbit, can become relevant and material, while also raising concerns about consumer privacy rights.
The Legal Intelligencer | Commentary
By Tess Blair and Tara Lawler | February 5, 2018
The perennial question of “possession, custody or control” may become more complicated in light of the U.S. Supreme Court recently granting certiorari in the landmark case of In the Matter of a Warrant to Search a Certain Email Account Controlled and Maintained by Microsoft. Companies will need to watch for this decision and its potential impact on discovery and information governance when data crosses borders.
By The Legal Intelligencer | January 30, 2018
In the Legal's Products Liability, Mass Torts & Class Action supplement, read about company-generated documents and emails, navigating choppy waters…
The Legal Intelligencer | Commentary
By Eric Rosenberg | January 30, 2018
Over the last seven years, the U.S. Supreme Court has rapidly and dramatically altered the landscape of personal jurisdiction law. Specifically, the court issued six opinions that overturned a lower court's exercise of personal jurisdiction, reinforced due process limitations on state assertions of jurisdiction, and narrowed the scope of constitutionally permissible general and specific personal jurisdiction.
The Legal Intelligencer | Commentary
By Larry Coben | January 30, 2018
After the Pennsylvania Supreme Court issued its decision in Tincher v. Omega Flex, the committee appointed by the court to prepare jury instructions issued “suggested standard products liability instructions” (published by the PBI) in an effort to provide guidance to the bench and bar.
The Legal Intelligencer | Commentary
By Carl J. Schaerf and Lee C. Schmeer | January 29, 2018
Companies contracting with the federal government should be aware that significant changes are likely under the Trump administration in the manner in which the government solicits and funds contracts and the extent to which the government recognizes knowledge of risks related to the goods or services subject to such contracts. When faced with litigation involving government contracts, companies often employ the Government Contractor's Defense, which shields a contractor that has complied with reasonably precise government specifications from liability provided the contractor has warned the government of risks not otherwise known to the government.
The Legal Intelligencer | Commentary
By Michael C. Zogby and Shane M. O'Connell | January 29, 2018
Courts have worked to construct rules for use before and during trial that ensure only true business records—that is, records of regularly conducted activity that carry an air of trustworthiness and reliability—are admitted into evidence, while avoiding admission of day-to-day communications and other documents that cannot be categorized as business records.
The Legal Intelligencer | Commentary
By Stephen J. Finley | January 29, 2018
The last several years have brought significant developments to Pennsylvania products liability law, ranging from the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's decisions in Tincher v. Omega Flex and Lance v. Wyeth to rulings on the scope of evidence in the trial of a products liability case, to the application of the Pennsylvania Fair Share Act to a strict product liability claim.
Presented by BigVoodoo
The Legal Intelligencer honors lawyers leaving a mark on the legal community in Pennsylvania and Delaware.
The premier educational and networking event for employee benefits brokers and agents.
Consulting Magazine recognizes leaders in technology across three categories Leadership, Client Service and Innovation.
Truly exceptional Bergen County New Jersey Law Firm is growing and seeks strong plaintiff's personal injury Attorney with 5-7 years plaintif...
Shipman is seeking an associate to join our Labor & Employment practice in our Hartford, New Haven, or Stamford office. Candidates shou...
McCarter & English, LLP, a well established and growing law firm, is actively seeking a talented and driven associate having 2-5 years o...
MELICK & PORTER, LLP PROMOTES CONNECTICUT PARTNERS HOLLY ROGERS, STEVEN BANKS, and ALEXANDER AHRENS