Californians who are interested in business immigration issues might want to learn about a lawsuit that was recently filed by a group of Chinese investors. The investors are suing because they did not receive the green cards that they believe they were promised for investing in a Las Vegas hotel.
Earlier this week, Johnson & Johnson was hit hard in another talcum liability case. As readers may know, the company is currently facing thousands of lawsuits involving allegations that the company failed to warn consumers of the known connection between use of its talc-containing products and the development of ovarian cancer.
Patent protection is an important way for businesses in competitive industries to protect valuable product innovations, and securing and defending patents is an important ongoing task for businesses which continually develop competitive new products. When necessary, patent infringement can and should be addressed in court, where various remedies may be sought, but one way companies can proactively address the issue is by licensing the use of patented product designs or utilities.
Before you decide to work with another company, you need to sign a contract. A contract dictates what you expect from the other company and what it expects of you. For example, if you are paying $2,000 cash biweekly for deliveries on a specific date, that should be listed clearly in the contract along with information on what happens if the delivery or payment is not made on time.
In our previous post, we began looking at some of the basic principles of manufacturers’ duty to warn consumers of risks associated with their products. As we noted, warnings must be provided for risks which are known or which reasonably could have been discovered by the manufacturer.
Last time, we mentioned that one potential basis for product liability litigation in California is failure to warn consumers of the dangers of a product. There are a handful of elements that must be proven to make such a claim. First of all, a failure to warning claim can be aimed at either manufacturers or suppliers of the product.
Imagine that you have been running a small medical practice for many years. During this time, you have used the same vendor for you office's medical supplies. Recently, your orders have contained mistakes. At first, the mistakes were minor, but they have slowly gotten worse during the last few months. The last order arrived more than a week late and only contained half of the supplies you needed. The new representative that you have been dealing with has not taken any steps to correct the problems.
In recent posts, we’ve been looking at the issue of product liability as it relates to Tesla’s Autopilot feature. The technology has been blamed for a number of accidents, and has become the subject of litigation because of potential safety risks to consumers.
Last time, we mentioned the increasing prevalence of automatic driving technology in new vehicle models, and the various levels of automation these technologies fall into. As we noted, determining liability in the event of an accident involving automatic driving technology is an issue that is going to become increasingly important.
As readers know, automatic driving features are increasingly making their way into newly manufactured automobiles. There is a wide variety of such technologies, and not all of them have the same functions. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has provided a classification system of the various technologies.