For The Defense, October 2010 - DRI Today

More documents

Recommendations

Info

D R U G A N D M E D I C A L D E V I C EFrom the ChairBy Jack B. “Skip” McCowanWe are very lucky tobe able to say that drugand medical devicelitigation is our primaryarea of practice.Taking Stock in theWork of Some of theBest Trial Lawyersin the Country12 n For The Defense n October 2010■ Jack B. “Skip” McCowan is a partner in the San Francisco office of Gordon & Rees. He is a member of the drug and medicaldevice and commercial litigation practice groups with more than 30 years of experience. He has represented a wide variety ofcompanies in trials in federal and state courts throughout California as well as other states. Mr. McCowan also has a substantialrecord of appellate success. His leadership at the firm includes serving as chair of the Diversity Committee.
As I complete my first year as the chairof DRI’s Drug and Medical DeviceCommittee, I welcome this chanceto look back on the last 12 months totake stock in what the committee hasaccomplished, and to encourage membersof the committee to take advantage,over the next 12 months, of theopportunities to participate in the work of the committee.I invite you to join your fellow outside and in-house counselcolleagues at the 27th Annual Drug and Medical DeviceSeminar in Chicago on May 4–5, 2011. The planning is completefor what will be another outstanding program. The hallmarkof our seminar, which places it in a category with nocontenders, is our ability to offer attendees the best trial lawyersin the country who represent drug and medical devicecompanies to demonstrate their trial skills. Even the mostexperienced trial lawyers will leave our seminar with newideas for how to convince a jury of the merit of their cases.Last May in San Francisco, the 26th annual seminar tookplace as a result of the hard work of many members of theplanning committee. I cannot overstate the dedication ofthese lawyers who spent hundreds of hours on weekly conferencecalls to make sure the seminar was up to the standardsset by those who preceded me as chair of the committee.I would like to recognize the following individuals for theirwork in planning the seminar. Scott Sayler of Shook Hardy& Bacon, as the committee’s vice-chair, worked closely withJim Rogers of Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough, our programchair, to sift through the ideas for programs and vetthe names of potential presenters. We were lucky to have thecounsel and guidance of William Ray of Watkins & Eager,who was the Law Institute’s liaison to our planning committee.Carter Thompson of Baker, Donelson, Bearman,Caldwell & Berkowitz, with the help of Gail Rodgers of DLAPiper, did a great job marketing the seminar. Sara Gourley ofSidley Austin and Mark “Rick” Richardson of GlaxoSmith-Kline spearheaded the efforts to convince companies of thebenefits of holding panel counsel meetings at the seminar.The result of the hard work of these people was a combinationof timely presentations of the law, trial skills demonstrations,outstanding networking opportunities at DRI sponsoredreceptions and receptions co- sponsored by many law firms.Lana Varney of Fulbright & Jaworski teamed up for thefirst program with experts in trial graphics and jury researchto talk about and show examples of trial graphics that reallywork in medical device and drug cases. Tamar Halpren ofPhillips Lytle, a well-known expert on developing the “sci-For The Defense n October 2010 n 13
Page 2: DRI—The Voiceof the Defense BarVo
Page 6 and 7: D R I N E W SMembers on the MoveThe
Page 8 and 9: A F F I L I AT E S I N A C T I O NA
Page 10 and 11: A F F I L I AT E S I N A C T I O N2
Page 12 and 13: C E L E B R AT I N G 5 0 Y E A R SD
Page 16 and 17: D R U G A N D M E D I C A L D E V I
Page 31 and 32: physician cut a catheter connector
Page 33 and 34: and extensive. Riegel preemption co
Page 35 and 36: This requires a client and counsel
Page 37 and 38: and outside counsel: the success of
Page 39 and 40: ies, such as the types of data, how
Page 41 and 42: courts that have taken up whether t
Page 43 and 44: the drug continue to outweigh the r
Page 47 and 48: vidual issues and the class action
Page 49: class members either would not have
Page 58 and 59: G O V E R N M E N T E N F O R C E M
Page 65 and 66:
• A history of corruption exists
Page 67 and 68:
G O V E R N M E N T E N F O R C E M
Page 69 and 70:
Sharp v. Next Entm’t Inc., 163 Ca
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
later cases have significantly narr
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
The Task Force helped to identify m
Page 79 and 80:
skype ®iChat ®video teleconferenc
Page 82 and 83:
T H I N K G L O B A L LYInternation
Page 84 and 85:
False Claims Act, from page 72gover
Page 86 and 87:
Identification, from page 26are usu
Page 88 and 89:
Carefully Craft Jury InstructionsDo
Page 90 and 91:
A D V O C AT E S A N D N E W M E M
Page 92:
My time is precious and my resource
show all

For The Defense, October 2010 - DRI Today

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?