Who’d a thunk it? People write scholarly articles about the ethics of legal blogging!
(We probably should have thought about that before we started this gig, huh?)
Anyway, Rachel Lee’s student note in the most recent Stanford Law Review is titled “Ex Parte Blogging: The Legal Ethics of Supreme Court Advocacy in the Internet
We’ve already commented on what a bad idea the pending NY bill to abolish the learned intermediary rule is. Of course every defense lawyer who frequents this site already knows that, but if anybody out there needs persuading, here’s some more information.
Or you can just go read the package insert for just about any
Supposedly, Einstein said that, “insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.”
If that’s the case, then these marketing-based class actions seeking refunds of the purchase price (or some fraction of it) for prescription drugs are at the Einsteinian extreme. As we’ve mentioned before, class certification in these sorts
Here’s a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) tangent to the Sprint Fidelis Products Liability Litigation:
Plaintiffs requested information about Medtronic’s Sprint Fidelis Leads from the FDA under FOIA.
The FDA produced documents, but redacted portions of the documents under an exemption to FOIA.
Plaintiffs sought “an order compelling Medtronic to consent to a production of
In Heisner v. Genzyme, No. 08-C-593, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 37322 (N.D. Ill. Apr. 30, 2009), Heisner allegedly died as a result of an allergic reaction to Seprafilm, an anti-adhesive surgical barrier implanted in her body during a surgery. Seprafilm is a Class III medical device approved by the FDA through the premarket approval process.
Judge Jack Weinstein is ordinarily pretty lenient when it comes to whether expert witnesses satisfy the Daubert standards for testifying.
Yesterday, however, he excluded an expert in the Zyprexa MDL on Daubert grounds.
(Don’t get us wrong here. Judge Weinstein also denied motions to exclude two experts yesterday. But we’re choosing to focus on the
For those who are following the Medical Device Safety Act of 2009 — the bill that would reverse the Supreme Court’s pro-preemption decision in Riegel v. Medtronic, here are two links:
First, a short list of the names and affiliations of the witnesses who testified yesterday before the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee.
Second, the
As members of the American Law Institute (“ALI”) we’ve been closely following the evolution of the Institute’s Principles project on Aggregate Litigation (“PLAL”) – read: class actions – ever since we joined. In prior posts we’ve found plenty about which we were critical. See here, here, here, and here. But for
At this point, we feel as though we’re obligated to track this issue: When a plaintiff files a complaint in state court that names both residents and non-residents of the forum state as defendants, can the non-resident defendant remove before the resident defendant is served?
When we last posted on this subject, we noted that
A lot of state courts are getting the message that the federal courts received over a decade ago. Class action litigation involving prescription drugs is a no go. Richard Goetz over at O’Melveny passes along the latest – a California Superior Court denial of class certification in a consumer fraud action over Vioxx.
What led