Last weekend we returned to Utah, one of the most beautiful states in the USA. Over the years we had taken in the polite delights of Salt Lake City, the powderpuff snow of Park City, and the cinematic enthusiasms of the Sundance Festival. This time was different. It was an occasion to explore Zion National
We don’t often get to discuss decisions from Maine. In fact, a quick spin through the blog and you’ll see Maine really only comes up in various canvases or surveys of state law. We don’t dislike the state. We love the lobster — that they take very seriously. We can’t say we love the winters
Until very recently, the only state high court decisions (from VA and DE) on our ediscovery for defendants cheat sheet involved sanctions against plaintiffs for destroying social media evidence.
No longer.
In Forman v. Henkin, ___ N.E.3d ___, 2018 WL 828101 (N.Y. Feb. 13, 2018), the New York Court of Appeals reaffirmed that discovery
(Note that this post comes from the Cozen O’Connor side of the blog.)
Good morning. Do you have your coffee? If so, start sipping it. You will need it. Because this morning we’re going to discuss leads for implantable cardiac defibrillators (“ICD”), Riata Leads to be precise. Now, while this may not be the most
Today’s guest post is by friend of the blog Dick Dean, of Tucker Ellis. He had an interesting idea the last time he posted about personal jurisdiction, and he’s following up with another one – this time rousing the previously dormant Commerce Clause. As always, our guest posters are 100% responsible (all credit
When a drug or device case goes to trial, who is the most important witness? Let’s straightaway eliminate the plaintiff as a possible answer to that question. Based on what we’ve heard from jurors (both real and mock), when plaintiffs prevail it is often despite themselves. So then who? A credible company witness can turn
This should not be controversial. It has been settled since Hahn v. Richter, 673 A.2d 888 (Pa. 1996) that in Pennsylvania prescription drugs are exempt from strict liability. And since Tincher v. Omega Flex, Inc., 104 A.3d 328 (Pa. 2014) re-worked Pennsylvania’s strict liability law, we’ve only reported one federal court decision
We’ll be hitting all the Presidents’ Day sales today, but something tells me we’ll be disappointed because we won’t be able to buy, beg, borrow, or steal a new one. So we keep trying.
With plaintiffs desperate to find some way to continue pursuing aggravated, aggregated product liability litigation in their favorite venues after Daimler
If you’re not interested in Pennsylvania product liability law at the moment, come back tomorrow. This particular post is not limited to (or even primarily about) prescription medical products.
Back in 2014 the Pennsylvania Supreme Court worked a revolution in product liability when it decided Tincher v. Omega Flex, Inc., 104 A.3d 328 (Pa.
With one glance at the calendar, regular readers of this blog will have been able to predict the content of these prefatory paragraphs, later to be (tenuously) tied to today’s case. On Monday and Tuesday, as we have for nearly twenty years, we attended the annual Westminster Kennel Club Dog Show, the second-oldest continuous sporting