Yes, we know our title is rather circular. In fairness, most of the allegations we have seen in cases attempting to impose liability on the sponsor of a clinical trial are too. We have been following proposed clinical trial liability in its various proposed forms for quite some time, including winning a jury trial
Guest Post: What the New Reference Manual for Scientific Evidence Teaches Us About AI in the Courtroom
Today’s guest post is from Nick Dellefave, an up and coming Holland & Knight litigator. The Blog has rolled out a few posts on the latest edition of the Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence. Nick adds to this opus with a dive into the intersection between scientific evidence, the role of trial judges
No Physical Injury, No Economic Damages, No Standing, No Class
Digital Health Liability Law In Flux
Not quite three years ago, we co-authored a chapter in a Digital Health guide put out by International Comparative Legal Guides. It bore the pithy title “Predicting Risk and Examining the Intersection of Traditional Principles of Product Liability Laws with Digital Health.” We continue to tinker with the principles of product liability law
This Post Is Not About Trademarks Or Defamation
Perhaps driven by fear of retribution for saying what you really think, an indirect method of communication has gained some popularity on the social media platforms of late. It goes like this: 1) a historical fact or spin on one is presented, such as on a past military conflict or a criminal conviction; and 2)
Nevada Court Rejects Purported Parallel Claim Based On A Purported Violation Based On A Purported Defect Based On Market Withdrawal
In case our title was too subtle, we think that a stack of purported inferences should neither state a claim for strict liability with a prescription medical device nor sidestep express preemption in the case of a Class III device. We have long been dubious of the idea of a true parallel claim as articulated
Venue? We’re Talking About Venue? Yes, Venue
As many of the Blog’s authors and readers wake up today, they will be in New York for the ACI Drug and Medical Device Litigation Conference. Clearly, the choice of venue matters when it comes to a conference. It also matters to plaintiff lawyers and the medical product manufacturers that they sue. The infamous
Unreliable Specific Causation Opinions Take Down Valsartan Bellwether
Back in April, we pondered whether the new judge in the Valsartan MDL would change things for the better. In contrast to the Zantac MDL, which was established a year later and has proceeded on a very similar contamination theory, the first several years of the Valsartan MDL saw a bunch of bad rulings on
Fourth Circuit Revives Problematic Public Nuisance Claim
This post is from the non-Dechert and non-RS side of the Blog.
Depending on the time, issue, and players, the supposed epithets of “judicial activism” or “activist judge” can be thrown in just about every juridical direction. If we were to try to parse out the most common reason for the use of these terms
State AG Action On Electronic Cigarettes Impliedly Preempted
We start with some disclaimers. Not the usual disclaimers about which of the Blog authors’ respective firms deny responsibility for the post. We disclaim that we care much about the availability of cigarettes and vaping products, except insofar as litigation over them says something about litigation over medical products and the general interplay between state