So far this year, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has decided issues ranging from securities law to what it means to be “Hispanic.” From that broad range, this quarterly review focuses on three cases of particular interest to Connecticut practitioners. The cases tackle issues such as courts’ overzealous gatekeeping with regard to expert testimony; the settlement dilemma of class actions of dubious merit; and a warning to those seeking to withdraw representation before getting court approval.
In In re Pfizer Securities Litigation, 14-2853-cv, the Second Circuit continued its recent crackdown on district courts that have overstepped their role as gatekeeper of expert witness testimony, reviving a class action lawsuit seeking tens of billions of dollars in shareholder losses from a pharmaceutical giant. See last year’s United States v. Litvak, 808 F.3d 160 (2d Cir. 2015), for a similar example. This time, the court addressed complicated questions about whether expert opinions can rely on novel legal theories and whether an entire opinion is invalid if only one severable theory is suspect.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
