Expert Testimony May Not Always Be Required for Professional Negligence Cases in Connecticut
By Daniel S. Clark Jr, Esq. ofHinshaw & Culbertson LLP
Cammarota v. Guerrera, 148 Conn.App. 743 (2014)
Plaintiff/appellant and his brother, retained defendant/appellee as their counsel to prepare an agreement related to the development of real property. The agreement contained the terms of the development of the property, the division of assets, and the allocation of payments between the brothers.
Google and the Great Divide: U.S. Privacy Rights versus EU Privacy Rights
By Melissa K. Ventrone, Esq., Anjali C. Das, Esq. and Alicia A. Garcia, Esq. of Wilson Elser Moskowitz Edelman & Dicker LLP
Will the "right to be forgotten" be the new mantra in cyber cases in the United States? Or will the "right to know" continue to prevail? In Europe, proponents of the "right to be forgotten" argue that individuals should be able to force search engines such as Google or Bing to remove old or irrelevant information from the Internet for the sake of privacy. This idea clashes with the U.S. view that anything put on the Internet is fair game - the "right to know."
Engineer's Insurance for Large Projects and the Self-Insured Retention
By Marc Zimet, Esq. of Jampol Zimet LLP
Professional liability insurance is crucial for engineers wishing to mitigate their risk and exposure to professional liability claims. Engineers completing large scale projects are frequently required by the owner or developer to purchase project specific coverage, which, for example, could range from $10 to $50 million in coverage. Such a policy will often have a deductible or self-insured retention in a larger than normal amount, ranging from $250,000 to $2 million. Engineers considering such a large project and finding themselves needing a policy that carries with it a large self-insured retention should be mindful of several things.
New Mexico Appeals Court Affirms the Use of Medical Marijuana in a Workers' Compensation Case
By James E. Pocius, Esq. of Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin, P.C
In a decision dated May 19, 2014, in the case of Gregory Vialpando v. Ben's Automotive Services and Redwood Fire and Casualty, the Court of Appeals of the State of New Mexico ruled that medical marijuana is considered reasonable and necessary medical care.