Last month we were one of the first on the web with a review of the new Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence, Fourth Edition. Since it was nearly 1700 pages long – literally longer than “War & Peace” – we did only the most cursory of analyses, describing differences in topics and authors
Bexis’ Product Liability Treatise – Free to a Good Home
Since the beginning of the Blog, we have shilled for only one product: Bexis’ “Drug and Medical Device Product Liability Deskbook” (published by Law.com and updated twice annually). While Bexis is continuing the blog in 2026 (after he turned 70), he is not continuing to update this treatise. Frankly, it’s a lot of
Just What We Need − Another Pro-Plaintiff Law Review Article
Not too long ago one of our bloggers (McConnell) critiqued a p-side law review article he had received from a lawyer on the other side with whom he was friendly. Bexis isn’t as friendly with opposing counsel – Paul Rheingold being a rare exception. But probably due to his activity in the American Law Institute
Discovery of Artificial Intelligence Prompts
At the recent ACI Drug and Medical Device annual conference, Bexis created something of a stir by broaching the subject of litigation discovery into the “prompts” that are typically used to create output from generative artificial intelligence. A fair number of the attendees apparently had not considered that possibility. Well, it’s already being done, and
Shady Grove Gets Shadier
We’ve only discussed Shady Grove Orthopedic Associates, P.A. v. Allstate Insurance Co., 559 U.S. 393 (2010), a couple of times. Shady Grove, displaced – in federal court – a variety of state-law limitations on class actions because those restrictions were at odds with Fed. R. Civ. P. 23, and in federal
Mallory in the States – Now Two-Plus Years Post-Deluge
It’s now been about two-and-a-half years since the Supreme Court sided with forum-shopping plaintiffs in Mallory v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co., 600 U.S. 122 (2023). Mallory was, in places 5-4, and elsewhere 4-1-4, and everywhere extremely fact specific – to the point of including a defendant-specific image of its Pennsylvania contacts. 600 U.S. at
Introducing the New Reference Manual for Scientific Evidence
Since it was published in 2011, the third edition of the Federal Judicial Center’s Reference Manual for Scientific Evidence has been the go-to guide for federal judges seeking to sort out scientific testimony, and a major source of non-precedential authority for both sides when arguing motions under Fed. R. Evid. 702. 2011, however, was fifteen
Who Is the “Expert” When Expert Witnesses Use AI?
This “just desserts” story caught our eyes earlier this year – a hot-shot expert witness, on artificial intelligence, no less, got caught with his own hand in the AI cookie jar. As a result, his credibility was destroyed, and his testimony was excluded. The litigation leading to Kohls v. Ellison, 2025 WL 66514 (D.
Shameless Plug − CLE Webinar on the Best and Worst Drug/Medical Device and Vaccine Decisions of 2025
As 2025 came to an end, we presented our loyal readers with our annual review of our ten worst decisions of the past year and our ten best decisions of the past year.
Now, in the new year, as we do each year, we’re pleased to announce that four (we hope) of your bloggers –
Guest Post – The AI LEAD Act: A Step Toward Regulating AI Product Liability in the United States
Today’s guest post is by Reed Smith‘s Jamie Lanphear. Like Bexis, she follows tech issues as they apply to product liability litigation. In this post she discusses a pro-plaintiff piece of legislation recently introduced in Congress that would overturn the current majority rule that electronic data is not considered a “product” for purposes