Stiff an expert witness and an attorney may face more than just a lawsuit for the unpaid fees. The attorney could also risk losing his or her license to practice law.
Texas attorney Marc G. Rosenthal found that out earlier this month when the State Bar of Texas Commission for Lawyer Discipline filed a disciplinary action against him. A major charge of the action is that Rosenthal failed to timely pay an expert witness. Continue reading »
Attorneys with larger law firms, as well as the vendors that work with them, may find there’s a new sheriff in town, one who earned his badge at business school.
In an era when in-house counsel are increasingly demanding that their outside firms be more transparent – particularly in the areas of billing and fees, workflow, and staffing –firms are bringing on MBAs to take more active roles in matter oversight, and it’s a change that will influence the entire legal industry. Continue reading »
A number of recent cases have involved experts walking out of deposition, switching sides or changing opinions at the last minute. Faced with these unfortunate circumstances, some upset clients and attorneys have turned to legal recourse and sued the experts involved. Continue reading »
On the first of this month, Judge Phyllis Hamilton of the U.S. District Court for Northern California declared the use of the hypothetical license theory to be invalid in Oracle v SAP. She granted a motion by SAP to eliminate the $1.3 billion award for lost licensing fees and instead offered Oracle the option of accepting a remittitur of $272 million in lost profits or returning to trial to determine lost profits. Continue reading »
The damages debate between Oracle and Google rages on as another expert witness is added to the mix. The newest addition to this case does not represent either side, and instead is a court-appointed, neutral expert. Continue reading »
Remember those hopeful, pre-Bilski days when patent lawyers believed the Supreme Court would bring clarity to the law of business-process and software patents? Instead, the court’s June 2010 opinion left patent professionals longing for more precision. Although the court endorsed the Federal Circuit’s “machine-or-transformation” test for analyzing the patentability of a process under § 101 of the Patent Act, it rejected that as the only test. Even then, it failed to say what other tests should be employed, short of emphasizing the broad rule that a process cannot be patented if it is purely an “abstract idea.” Continue reading »
In a 93-5 vote on Tuesday, the America Invents Act of 2011 cleared the Senate after a filibuster. It is now at the White House and is expected to be signed by President Obama early next week.
As you are probably well aware, the Act moves the United States to a first-to-file system, gives the USPTO more authority to set fees, broadens the definition of prior art, and is meant to expedite the review of patent applications. The Act may even affect the use of experts in patent litigation. Continue reading »
Last month, we discussed in general terms the implications of scripting your expert. When it comes to expert reports, however, do the same rules apply?
Many trial attorneys consider some level of involvement in the expert report to be vital. As a skilled storyteller, the attorney can assist the expert in conveying both the subject matter and the story. Continue reading »
We are taking a break from our typical blog posts to take a moment to celebrate an IMS achievement. For the fifth year in a row, IMS ExpertServices has just been recognized by Inc. Magazine’s list of the fastest growing private companies in America. Continue reading »
| © 2011 BullsEye | All Rights Reserved | Published by IMS ExpertServices |
