Low impact auto cases may be simple or complex. A simple case would be one of clear liability with significant property damage, a likable client and a medical doctor who is able to easily describe the injury and its relationship to the accident. A complex case involves accident reconstructionist and biomechanical experts, very little property damage, a connective tissue or “soft tissue” injury, a client with pre-existing conditions, and a variety of health care providers ranging from a neurologist to a chiropractor. Obviously, it is extremely important at the outset of any case to recognize the difference between a simple and a complex low impact auto case especially in terms of value, costs, and expenses of litigating the case.

The question of whether to pursue litigation over Cox-2 inhibitors -- which currently include, primarily, Vioxx (Rofecoxib) and Celebrex (Celecoxib) -- is a question that many firms are pondering at the present time.

Focus groups are more important to civil litigation than you may think. Dr. Richard A. Krueger, describes focus groups as: “(1) people, (2) assembled in a series of groups, (3) possessing certain characteristics …, (4) providing data, (5) of a qualitative nature, (6) in a focused discussion. “ Focus groups were designed for attorneys to test their case theories and strategies on a sample “jury.” The tests produce a meaningful method for the attorney to try his or her case. Some consultants suggest that focus groups do not determine a jury’s vote, but the information gathered can determine how the jury reacts to different information. While focus groups are extremely helpful in forming trial strategies, it is imperative that each attorney understand the concept and structure of focus groups.

On February 21, 2001, the United States Supreme Court issued its opinion in Buckman Company v. Plaintiffs Legal Committee, 531 U.S. 431, 2001 U.S. LEXIS (Feb. 21, 2001). Buckman stands for the proposition that state law fraud-on-the-FDA claim’s and nothing more, are impliedly preempted by the Food Drug and Cosmetic Act. See, Globetti v. Sandoz Pharmaceutical Corporation, 2001 WL 41960 (N.D. Ala. 2001).

The recent development with the most impact on punitive damages is the United States Supreme Court opinion in State Farm v. Campbell, 123 S.Ct. 1513, 538 U.S. 408, 155 L.Ed.2d 585 (2003). In Campbell, insureds brought an action against State Farm to recover for bad faith failure to settle within the policy limits, fraud and intentional infliction of emotional distress. The underlying case was filed in Utah. At the trial court level, the jury entered a verdict in favor of the insureds and awarded $145 million dollars in punitive and $1 million in compensatory damages. The United States Supreme Court, Justice Kennedy, held that an award of $145 million dollars in punitives on $1 million dollars in compensatory damages violated due process. Here, the United States Supreme Court went to great lengths to declare the punitive damages award excessive.