In recent years, Super Bowl halftime shows have gotten increasingly flashy. However, in 2008, the recently deceased rock icon Tom Petty challenged this, putting on a stellar show during Super Bowl XLII, which saw the New York Giants dramatically upset the New England Patriots at the University of Phoenix Stadium in Glendale, Arizona. During his twelve-minute performance, Petty and The Heartbreakers ran through some of his greatest hits, laying out superb renditions of “American Girl,” “I Won’t Back Down,” “Free Fallin’”, and “Runnin’ Down a Dream” and letting the music speak for itself during his fairly stripped-down performance.This 1977 Interview Proves That Tom Petty Was Coolness Personified [Watch] You can watch Tom Petty and The Heartbreaker’s full Super Bowl XLII halftime show below, which the NFL published earlier in the week in remembrance of the late and great rock and roll hero.
Tag Archiv: 成都茶友群
Yet this all-or-nothing approach may not be to patients’ advantage First-time opioid prescriptions drop by 50 percent Pharma-to-doc marketing a vulnerability in opioid fight A nation nearer to the grave Another decline in U.S. life expectancy signals urgent need for more comprehensive strategy against opioids, suicide, specialist says Harvard-Michigan summit on issue explores addiction, policy Drug companies and distributors are facing thousands of lawsuits filed by U.S. cities, towns, and tribal governments whose communities have been ravaged by the opioid epidemic, which has claimed hundreds of thousands of lives from overdoses. Resolving all those legal actions separately is impractical, many legal experts say. Instead, lawyers for the states and attorneys general are exploring a solution that would resolve all the cases in a so-called “global deal.” Currently two drug companies and three distributors have proposed a settlement framework for such a deal worth approximately $48 billion that would include cash and medication to treat addiction. But many local governments are wary of such an arrangement, skeptical about how the money would be divided. The Gazette spoke with Alexandra Lahav, 2019-20 Matina S. Horner Distinguished Visiting Professor at Harvard’s Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study, and professor at the University of Connecticut who studies tort law, about how global settlements operate.Q&AAlexandra LahavGAZETTE: What is a global settlement? Do all parties involved have to sign on or agree to it?LAHAV: A global settlement is an agreement that includes everyone involved in a large-scale litigation. An example is the class action. In a class action, all the people who meet a certain description — for example, cellphone customers during a certain period — are included in the class. They are represented by a named plaintiff, and if that lawsuit reaches a settlement they would all be bound by it and not be able to sue on their own. But there are other ways to reach a global settlement as well. For example, a defendant can offer a single amount in settlement on condition that everyone who has a claim against them agrees to be part of that settlement. What makes a settlement global is that everyone or nearly everyone agrees to sign on.GAZETTE: Can you talk a bit about the discussions around crafting an agreement to settle the thousands of opioids lawsuits?LAHAV: Right now, several attorneys general have suggested a global settlement in the opioids litigation. In that case, there is a very novel settlement structure on the table. The court has certified a class action, which includes all the cities and towns in the United States. They have the option to opt out of this class. If they don’t, then they are deemed to have agreed to the following structure: When a settlement is reached, the terms will be circulated to the class. If 75 percent approve of the settlement, it will bind everyone, even the 25 percent who did not approve. This is called a “negotiated class action,” and it has never been tried before. It was the idea of a Harvard law professor, William Rubenstein, and a Duke law professor, Francis McGovern.“It seems to me there isn’t an appetite to have all of these companies go bankrupt. For example, some of them distribute a lot of drugs that people depend on,” said Alexandra Lahav. Photo by Tony RinaldoGAZETTE: What is the challenge with this type of arrangement?LAHAV: There are a few. First, will everyone agree to join this settlement structure, knowing that they will be bound by a supermajority vote? Second, what about the attorneys general who have brought separate lawsuits, many of whom have opposed this settlement structure? Also what is the relationship between the state attorney general that represents the state as a whole, and all of the state’s subdivisions? For example, let’s say all the cities and towns in Massachusetts are included in a settlement. What then is the role of Attorney General Maura Healey? Is the whole greater than the sum of its parts? I haven’t heard of anybody who knows the answer to this. It’s sort of a local government question in a way. And each state law is going to be different with respect to the power of cities and towns to sue when the state is also suing.GAZETTE: What’s the advantage of settling the lawsuits in this way?LAHAV: It’s not realistic that every case is going to go to trial. We are talking about many thousands of cases, and the system just can’t handle it. You can imagine a world where the judge holds a trial every six months, and the defendant settles one for $200 million here and another for $200 million there, and this goes on and on and on. That’s just not good for the communities, and it’s not good for the defendants. The idea behind a global settlement is to come up with something that benefits both and that resolves the dispute.GAZETTE: How would a global settlement like this compare to the Big Tobacco case in 1998?LAHAV: There are some similarities, in that both are public health crises that led to massive lawsuits. But there are also a few important differences. First, the tobacco cases were settled exclusively by state attorneys general. Here both attorneys general and individual municipalities are suing, and they have more competing interests. This makes it harder to reach a global agreement. Second, there appears to be less money available here than there was in the tobacco case, which settled for around $200 billion.GAZETTE: Do you think public anger and the desire for an admission of guilt or an apology factor into whether or not these cases end in a settlement, or are taken to trial?LAHAV: It seems to me there isn’t an appetite to have all of these companies go bankrupt. For example, some of them distribute a lot of drugs that people depend on. Others have played a relatively small role in the opioid crisis. That said, I do think people want accountability. But you know, one of the things about the American system that’s so interesting is that we do settle a lot of cases, and in most of those settlements, there is no apology, and there is no admission of liability. Instead, we sort of take the amount of money as the apology and the admission of liability, as if the dollars speak for the accountability.GAZETTE: What can be put in place in these settlements to stop similar crises from happening?LAHAV: This is a very difficult question to answer. The general theory of deterrence says that if wrongdoers are forced to pay for the harms they cause, then in the future companies considering wrongdoing will not do similar things. We hope that is the case. But it isn’t clear that a litigation can prevent the kind of regulatory failure that we saw in the opioids situation. If there is a settlement it’s likely to provide some relief to states and localities that are suffering, but it is not clear what preventative effect it will have.GAZETTE: What do you expect to happen next and what are the chances that the global settlement under consideration will be achieved?LAHAV: Right now there is a settlement proposal on the table proposed by several attorneys general for $48 billion over a period of years. But it is not clear that it will be agreed to by the lawyers for the local governments, who at the moment are opposing it. And some states have also voiced concerns. In order to reach a global settlement, that proposal would need the agreement of the lawyers representing this class of localities. I think we will see a settlement eventually, but when and for how much remains to be seen.GAZETTE: Are there specific reasons why plaintiffs like or prefer a global settlement, and why defendants prefer it?LAHAV: Defendants prefer a global settlement because they can wrap up their liability at once. This allows them to announce to the markets the scope of liability. It also gives them the opportunity to move on. Plaintiffs may prefer global settlements because they have greater leverage than they would individually to negotiate a better deal overall, but they may also feel left behind or left out, especially as they lose the power to negotiate individually.GAZETTE: Do you expect to see criminal trials in these cases? And would they also be solved with a global settlement?LAHAV: I don’t know if there will be criminal trials, but any criminal action would be completely separate from the global settlement we have been discussing. Any global settlement would only resolve civil claims against these companies.This interview was edited for clarity and condensed for space. Related Conference finds that it keeps users from seeking help, taints views of medical professionals Stigma of opioids a hurdle to solving crisis
The 28-year-old Nigerian scored four goals in 25 appearances for the Mariners after joining on a one-year deal in the summer.Advertisement Grimsby Town have terminated the contract of striker Moses Ogbu bymutual consent. Loading… Boss Ian Holloway told BBC Radio Humberside: “I think he needs to go and see if he can be happy again. I’m trying to make his life better. Read Also:Tammy Abraham unhappy over FIFA 20 rating “We had a chat, he took it brilliantly and we had a big hug at the end of it.” FacebookTwitterWhatsAppEmail分享
Press Association The Senegal international went from opening the scoring to completing his hat-trick in two minutes and 56 seconds – the quickest in Premier League history, beating the record of four minutes and 33 seconds set by Liverpool’s Robbie Fowler in 1994 against Arsenal. “I’m happy,” Mane said. “If you see the last few weeks, it has not been easy, but you have to accept it – that’s football. “We just tried to give our best in training to work hard, and finally we’ve got the rewards. “I think we did a great performance, because we worked together as a team. “Everybody was very, very focused on working together.” Mane’s hat-trick was the catalyst for a timely win for Southampton in the race for European qualification. It saw Saints move on to a best ever Premier League points tally of 60 and Mane was quick to praise fellow star man Long. The Ireland international provided two assists and his second goal was a late contender for goal of the season, having beaten Shay Given with a curling 40-yard strike. “Thank you to him because he did a good job with a great performance,” Mane told Southampton’s official YouTube channel. “I’m happy for him today because he scored two goals for the team – his second was a nice goal, unbelievable – and he always works hard in training. “I’m very happy. It’s important to score for the team but I am just happy that the team won for the fans – they’re always amazing, unbelievable. Everybody is happy.” Fortunately for Villa, the fact Hull lost 2-0 at Tottenham meant their safety was assured just a few hours later – welcome news to Tim Sherwood after a gut-wrenching first half at St Mary’s. “It’s hard,” the Villa boss said. “It’s difficult. You feel it in your stomach. You feel sick. “There’s not a lot you can do about it. You have to be professional. You have to realise you’ve got a job to do to try and help as best you can. “At half-time we just tried to calm them down and just make them aware that it wasn’t good enough which they were all aware of. They’re not stupid and to make sure that we tried to get some pride out of the second period.” Sadio Mane’s delight was as clear as it was understandable after setting Southampton on course for a memorable victory with the fastest ever Premier League hat-trick. Saints’ impressive season had looked to be petering out, only for it to set alight as they ran amok against FA Cup finalists Aston Villa at St Mary’s. Shane Long’s brace and a Graziano Pelle volley helped Ronald Koeman’s side to a wonderful 6-1 win, although it was Mane’s quick-fire treble which provided the main talking point.
Babajide Sanwo-Olu With 24 Africa nations and best of African players on parade, 2019 AFCON Live in the city of Lagos promises to be 29 days of unforgettable football experience, full of maximum fun, comradeship and entertainment.Share this:FacebookRedditTwitterPrintPinterestEmailWhatsAppSkypeLinkedInTumblrPocketTelegram In fulfilment of Governor Babajide Sanwo-Olu’s commitment to engender community engagement, Lagos for-all and unity among Lagosians regardless of ethnic and religion background, Lagos State Government has concluded plans to beam live matches of the 32nd edition of the 2019 Africa Cup of Nations (AFCON) at designated viewing centres across the city of Lagos through ‘LAGOS IS A GOAL’ initiative.Put together by the Lagos State Government through Lagos State Sports Commission in partnership with Slimburg Ltd (the official partner/agent), Egypt 2019 Live in Lagos underscore the influence of sports in community engagement and nation building.The governor has continued to thank and appreciate Lagosians for their overwhelming support and unwavering steadfastness during the last general elections. Sanwo-Olu pledged to uplift the fortune and impact on sports “For a Greater Lagos.”