When the Supreme Court decided Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 127 S. Ct. 1955 (U.S. 2007), we thought right away that there wasn’t any good argument to limit the Court’s toughened pleading standard to some discrete subset of cases, such as antitrust. We said:
As product liability practitioners, we’re drawn to the Court’s broader
This post will completely miss the point.
(Yeah, yeah: So how does that distinguish this post from all the rest of ’em?)
In Pew v. Cardarelli, No. 06-5703-mv, slip op. (2d Cir. May 13, 2008), plaintiffs alleged that officers of an issuer failed to disclose, while marketing debt securities, that the issuer was insolvent.
After the MDL Panel coordinates a bunch of product liability cases, the transferee court is likely to appoint lead and liaison counsel for plaintiffs. Those lawyers often take the lead in conducting MDL-wide discovery, and they also “perform functions necessary for the management of the case but not appropriately charged to their clients.” Manual for
“Lord, I’m one;
Lord, I’m two;
Lord, I’m three;
Lord, I’m four;
I’m 500” posts away from home.
500 posts.
18 months.
200,000 pageviews.
“No rest for the weary,
ya just move on.
I guess you just keep goin’ ’til you’re gone.
Tired, Lord I’m tired.
Tired, Lord I’m
Herrmann’s agreed to give a pair of talks at the ALI-ABA Mass Litigation conference that will be held in Charleston, South Carolina, from May 29 to 31, 2008.
The cast of characters is mighty impressive, as ALI-ABA programs often are. Judges participating in the conference include Hon. Lee Rosenthal, Hon. Barbara Rothstein, and Hon. Shira
As we mentioned last week, we’re both going to be speaking on the same panel at the American Enterprise Institute’s conference next week about off-label use. That’s got us thinking – surprise, surprise – about off-label use.
So we’ve been reading a couple of things. One of them is the Justice Department’s recent amicus
Point of Law has this report (linking in turn to others) describing some of the action at yesterday’s hearing on Capitol Hill about federal preemption of claims against drug and device manufacturers.
Bexis represents Merck, and Herrmann is on a plane right now, so we can’t discuss substance, but the Wall Street Journal has reported that the $32 million Garza Vioxx verdict has been overturned by a Texas appellate court. Here’s a link to the opinion for anyone interested.
We’re too busy to watch ourselves (Herrmann’s on the road and Bexis is prepping for an appellate argument), but here’s a link to what’s supposed to be an online video feed of today’s congressional hearing on preemption. Drop us a comment if you like once it’s over so we’ll know what we missed.
According to
The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform will hold a hearing on Wednesday, May 14, 2008, titled, “Should FDA Drug and Medical Device Regulation Bar State Liability Claims?”