Litigated a prescription drug product liability case in Ohio lately? Say in, oh … the last quarter century or so?
If you have, then you’ve run into our old friend the heeding presumption. In the very first prescription drug product liability case that the Ohio Supreme Court ever encountered, it adopted a “presumption” that a
Mark Herrmann was never one to go anywhere quietly. His announcement that he was retiring from blogging, leaving Jones Day, and taking an in-house position at Aon, the big insurance brokerage (not necessarily in that order of importance) produced quite a reaction in the blawgosphere.
Jane Genova’s Law and More “congratulated” Mark on his career
It’s that time of year. Yeah, we know, it’s neither new nor original to do top ten lists – but it’s still fun. Except when it isn’t.
How much fun can it be to review all those times in the past year when we’ve been kicked in the teeth? That’s right. Here are our top
The steel cage match between us and Penn’s Professor Burbank continues over at PENNumbra. Our (that is Beck and the now-skedaddled Herrmann) reply in support of the Supreme Court’s Twombly/Iqbal rulings – and against Congress meddling with them – is now available.
If this were a appeal in court, that would be
You read right – Herrmann bailed. I can’t really blame him, Aon made him an offer that he couldn’t refuse. Take the in-house money and run, man. And get your nights and weekends back, too….
So it’s Bexis here, taking over the blog. First things first. Everything will continue essentially as is, except for Herrmann’s
There are not many days when I wish I were in Philadelphia.
But today’s one of them. I wish I were standing in Bexis’s office at Dechert this very minute. I want to see the look on his face:
Hey, Bexis: I’m outta here!
Sorry, guy.
After 20 years at Jones Day, I’ve been made
As readers of this blog know, Professor Stephen Burbank (U. Penn.) and the two of us are beating each other about the head and shoulders in an online debate hosted by PENNumbra, the online supplement to the University of Pennsylvania Law Review.
We think that Twombly and Iqbal got it right; the good
Ask a defense lawyer whether it makes sense to conduct a direct examination of his (fact) witness at the end of a deposition taken by plaintiff’s counsel.
A few rare lawyers will say that they’ll do limited “clean-up work” at the end of the deposition, so that any obvious errors are corrected on the record
In our never-ending search for fascinating stuff to share with you, we’ve stumbled across two recent articles analyzing aggregate litigation.
The first is “Embedded Aggregation in Civil Litigation,” by Richard Nagareda (Vanderbilt). Nagareda thinks about situations where decisions made in individual cases affect groups of people, such as constitutional limits on punitive damage
Right now, it looks like Lilly’s got the “big mo” in the Zyprexa litigation. Hard on the heals of Judge Weinstein’s dismissal of the Mississippi AG action, Lilly chalked up another win yesterday in Philadelphia against a third party payor. Here’s a copy, Pennsylvania Employees Benefit Trust v. Eli Lilly & Co., 2009 WL