Westlaw Journals weekly round-up

September 11, 2013

Westlaw Journals Weekly RoundupThe new Westlaw Journals blog brings you litigation headlines in over 30 substantive areas of law. Here are some highlights from the past week:


Connecticut high court says judge didn’t have to ask jury about news article: A Connecticut judge did not have to ask jurors in a medical malpractice trial whether they read a New York Times article about the case because they had already been instructed to avoid media coverage of the suit, the state Supreme Court has ruled Aug. 13 in an issue of first impression. The panel of five justices unanimously reversed the Connecticut Appellate Court’s 2011 ruling that Judge David Tobin should have polled the jury about the “inflammatory” New York Times article in order to confirm their impartiality. (Medical Malpractice)

Father, son forfeit car vandalism claim for refusing to give statements: A father and son forfeited their auto policy’s benefits by refusing to give their insurance company sworn statements on a vandalism claim after the insurer declined to send them a transcript of a prior statement, a California appeals court has ruled. “We conclude [the] insurer was not required to provide a transcript and the request for [examinations under oath was] reasonable under the circumstances of this case,” the 2nd District Court of Appeal said in an unpublished opinion Aug. 13. (Insurance Coverage)

6th Circuit restores Michigan man’s product defect claims over rifle injury: Holding that a trial court improperly excluded two plaintiffs’ experts, a federal appeals court has restored design and manufacturing defect claims against Savage Arms Inc. by a Michigan man who was injured when his rifle exploded. On Aug. 9, the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said the trial judge erred in automatically granting the gun maker summary judgment after finding the plaintiffs’ experts’ causation testimony inadmissible. (Expert & Scientific Evidence)

Suit over Cisco’s role in China’s ‘Great Firewall’ must proceed, advocacy group says: A Maryland federal court should hear a lawsuit accusing U.S.-based Cisco Systems of selling surveillance technology to China that it allegedly knew would be used to commit human rights abuses, an Internet rights advocacy group says. The Electronic Frontier Foundation filed an amicus curiae brief Aug. 15 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland lawsuit lodged by Du Daobin and other pro-democracy Chinese activists. (Computer & Internet)