Archives for May 2012
by: Melissa L. Stuart, Attorney
I recently wrote an article for the Friendship Circle, a non-profit organization that provides resources and support for families of individuals with special needs. I am particularly passionate about this organization because in addition to my law degree, I also hold a Master’s degree in clinical psychology and worked at the Riley Children’s Hospital in the Christian Sarkine Autism Treatment Center as a Research Specialist prior joining Cohen & Malad.
by: Richard E. Shevitz, Attorney
Facebook has certainly garnered a lot of attention over its initial public offering (IPO) that took place on May 18, 2012. Many stories in the media have highlighted the $16 billion that the company was able to raise while other stories focused on the wealth accumulated by CEO Mark Zuckerberg and the rockstar Bono.
At issue currently is the value of the stock, which has fallen over 18% in its first three days of trading. There has been much speculation as to what information was known and made available to institutional investors as well as the investing public prior to the IPO. Reports are now surfacing from Reuters regarding an amended IPO prospectus that was filed with the SEC in early May.
by: David B. Allen, Attorney
The following is an excerpt from an article written for Indiana Trial Lawyers Association Verdict publication. The full article can be found in the June 2012 edition of Verdict.
Litigation is pending around the country against manufacturers of transvaginal mesh implants that were used to repair the condition of pelvic organ prolapse (POP). Many women suffered great harm by these untested and unsafe products. For the period 2008 to 2010, the most frequent complications reported to the FDA from the use of surgical mesh devices for POP repair included vaginal mesh erosion, pain, infection, urinary problems, bleeding and organ perforation.
Rarely does a month go by without a pharmaceutical or medical device company making headline news for illegal marketing or failing to disclose dangerous side effects of its products. Many times the conduct is so egregious you are left wondering how a drug or device even made it to the market in the first place. Surely the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the worldwide regulatory “gold” standard, would not have approved a product that was bad for us? Conventional wisdom tells us that the FDA is the gatekeeper for our safety. The FDA monitors and tests all products so its rubber stamp of approval must be absolute proof that consumers are safe? Unfortunately, this is an example where perception varies greatly from reality.
Learn more about our Business Litigation practice and attorneys
Repudiating a District Court holding to the contrary, the Indiana Supreme Court recently confirmed that employers may enforce their rights under standard noncompete agreements without fearing a counterclaim under the state’s Blacklisting Statute. On a certified question from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, Loparex, LLC v. MPI Release Technologies, No. 94S00-1109-CQ-546 (Ind. Mar. 21, 2012), the court clarified Ind. Code § 22-5-3-2 in three respects. Most significantly, it held that an unsuccessful suit by an employer to preclude competitive employment by a former employee is not a basis for recovery under the statute.
It’s easy for a young lawyer to feel overwhelmed in the first few years practicing law. From writing briefs and filing motions to reviewing documents and preparing for trial, there is very little time left for much else. However, it’s important for a young lawyer to think about and plan time for business development, especially if they would like to become a partner some day.