Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
28 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
Name the mass torts (4) |
1. Mass accident 2. Mass marketed product 3. Mass exposure 4. Mass economic loss
|
|
|
Give 2 examples of Mass Economic Loss cases |
1. False representations – Enron 2. Securities cases |
|
|
Give 2 examples of Mass Exposure cases (2) |
1. Chemical leaks 2. Lead in water |
|
|
Give 2 examples of a Mass Marketed Product cases (2) |
1. Asbestos 2. Breast implants |
|
|
Give 2 examples of Mass Accident cases (2) |
1. Plane crash 2. Hotel fire |
|
|
Client Solicitation |
The Federal Aviation Disaster Family Assistance Act requires a 45-day waiting period before contacting families or relatives of an individual involved in an accident. |
|
|
Class Action Lawsuits |
Representative plaintiffs sue on behalf of a class of plaintiffs. |
|
|
Name the two types of suits for class action lawsuits (2) |
1. Permissive 2. Mandatory
|
|
|
Permissive |
Individuals can “opt out” of the class and sue on their own |
|
|
Mandatory |
Individuals do not have the option of “opting out.” This type of class is usually used in cases where D has limited resources on the rationale to guard against depleting a D’s funds. |
|
|
Class actions must be ___________. |
certified |
|
|
What are the FRCP 23 requirements for class actions? (5) |
1. Numerosity 2. Commonality 3. Typicality 4. Fair and adequate representation 5. Notice |
|
|
Numerosity |
There must be a number of plaintiffs |
|
|
Commonality |
The plaintiffs must share the same legal issues |
|
|
Typicality |
There must be typical claims and defenses within the class |
|
|
Fair and adequate representation |
The court must be satisfied that the representative plaintiffs will represent the class fairly and adequately |
|
|
Define “Junk Science” |
showing an association between one thing and an effect |
|
|
Using "Junk Science" is ___ _________. |
not causation |
|
|
"Junk Science" is... |
Unreliable and therefore, potentially, misleading. |
|
|
The test for admissibility of scientific evidence for years was the Frye test. The Frye Test results from the case of Frye v. U.S. What was the decision on that case? |
Expert opinion on scientific principals or discovery is admissible only if it has gained general acceptance as being reliable in the relevant scientific community |
|
|
Congress encated FRE 702 which was.... (2) |
1. Broader 2. Allowed qualified experts to testify as toinformation that will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence |
|
|
What was wrong with the Frye Test? (2) |
1. It was very narrow 2. It would seem to exclude cutting-edge, but arguably reliable evidence |
|
|
What was wrong with the FRE 702 standard? |
1. It seemed too vague 2. It would be easy to argue that “anything” could assist the trier of fact. |
|
|
Finally, in Dauber v. Merrell Dow, FRE 702 was upheld as not being an "open door" to getting just anything in; what could be admitted was relevant and reliable evidence.The judge rules on admissibility before the jury can hear the expert’s testimony. What are the perimeters of admissibility resulting from that case? (4) |
1. Whether the scientific opinion can be, and has been, empirically tested 2. Whether it has been peer reviewed 3. Whether there is a known/potential rate of error 4. Whether it has gained general acceptance in the scientific community. |
|
|
The evidence presented by experts must not... |
mislead the jury. |
|
|
What happened in the [Amchem] case? (Asbestos) |
The class certification was rejected by the US SupremeCourt due to the different nature of each individual’s claims. |
|
|
What happened during the [In re Breast Implant Litigation]? (Breast Impants) |
Causation was problematic (it is still a problem) and expert testimony was not ruled admissible. There was great pressure for Dow to settle and the company created a fund to pay for claims. |
|
|
What is the rationale behind class action lawsuits? (3) |
1. Achieve global peace. 2. Aggregate small claims 3. Consolidate cases |
