We posted about Thomson v. Novartis on Sunday, noting that it was an odd case analyzing an unusual removal issue.
The Civil Procedure Prof Blog saw our post and agreed that the issue was unusual.
Apparently, however, the issue won’t be unusual for long. We received this note from a reader:
I read your post from Sunday (as I read your posts every day) on the Thomson case and removal before service on the forum defendant. There are remand motions presently pending before Judge Ackerman in the New Jersey federal court in actions consolidated under Brown, 07-3092, and Eriksen, 07-3456 that might result in another opinion on the issue. In most of the cases, the primary basis for removal was federal question (New Jersey Product Liability Law re: punitive damages requires proof of fraud on FDA). However, in a number of cases, pre-service removal by the forum defendant (defendant Organon is a New Jersey Corporation) was also used as a basis for removal. Organon is represented by Spriggs & Hollingsworth, who were counsel to Novartis in Thomson.
Thanks for sharing that information with us. We’ll watch with interest.