Ouster to affect Cipollone case? Cigarette judge removed
Article Abstract:
US District Judge H. Lee Sarokin has been removed from the tobacco case Haines v Liggett Group for failure to appear impartial. The 3d Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Judge Sarokin may also have breached evidentiary rules and privileges when he ruled that the crime-fraud exception applied to a plaintiff request for work-product documents. The case charges the tobacco industry with fraud for failing to fully inform consumers about the dangers of smoking. The decision could affect the retrial of Cipollone v Liggett Group Inc, in which Sarokin also presided.
Publication Name: The National Law Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0162-7325
Year: 1992
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
Judge goes to seminar; lawyers want recusal
Article Abstract:
Defendants in In re: Asbestos School Litigation want Judge James McGirr Kelly to recuse himself from the case because he unknowingly attended a 1990 asbestos seminar funded by plaintiffs in the litigation. So far, the judge has declined and instead wants to disqualify all experts who lectured at the conference from giving evidence at the trial. The Washington Legal Foundation, a public-interest firm, has tried unsuccessfully to have Judge Kelly disqualified. The Third Circuit is still deliberating on the recusal and other issues raised by the case.
Publication Name: The National Law Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0162-7325
Year: 1992
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
En banc dissent: no more asbestos punitives
Article Abstract:
The 3rd US Circuit Court of Appeals has urged in Dunn v. HOVIC that punitive damages should no longer be available in asbestos cases lest they deplete the money available to compensate those suffering from asbestos-related diseases. The recommendation to end punitive damages came in the minority opinion in this case, stating that the large number of compensatory claims was more of a deterrent than punitive damages in individual cases could be. The majority opinion disagreed, discounting the notion of runaway punitive damages.
Publication Name: The National Law Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0162-7325
Year: 1993
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
- Abstracts: No excuses allowed; judge removed for punishing prospective jurors who claimed bias
- Abstracts: Firm agrees to record S & L settlement; shifting standards require lawyers to disclose more to regulatory agencies
- Abstracts: Custody case brings calls for reform; advocates for children, birth parents disagree on need for new adoption laws
- Abstracts: A perspective on the Electromation case from the U.S. Department of Labor. Electromation and the future of labor-management cooperation in the U.S
- Abstracts: Courts give hope to the downsized: judges, jurors punish corporate deception in ERISA, bias lawsuits. Bias law booms; huge verdicts, new laws rock the employment litigation bar