It’s hard to believe, but fully five months after COVID-19 was officially declared to be a “pandemic,” it’s still extraordinarily difficult to get oneself tested – particularly if one is not already sick or exposed. Maine has been one of the most successful states in reducing the virus’ spread, with the third lowest rate of
First PREP Act Immunity Decision That We’ve Seen
Back in March, we discussed the Administration’s declaration of tort immunity under the “PREP Act” (42 U.S.C. §§247d-6a, et seq.) for “countermeasures” combating the COVID-19 epidemic. Today, we’re discussing the first cast that we know of to construe this declaration.
That case is Estate of Maglioli v. Andover Subacute Rehabilitation Center I, 2020
FDA Surrenders On Science
To us – and we suspect to most of the exceptional public servants employed by the FDA – Sunday, August 23, 2020 will be a day they would rather forget. On that day the Agency issued an “emergency use authorization” (“EUA”) for what is known as “convalescent plasma” for the treatment of COVID-19,
Here Are the Zambelli-Weiner Documents That the Big Fight Was About
April Zambelli-Weiner is an epidemiologist (meaning she’s not an M.D.), on the plaintiffs’ side, who claims expertise in a wide variety of areas. In addition to the Zofran (birth defect) litigation that prompted this (and a prior) post, her name pops up in litigation over leukemia, Walsh v. BASF Corp., ___ A.3d
COVID-19 Vaccine Issues
Some of us belong to the Food and Drug Law Institute. One benefit of FDLI membership is a daily newsletter on FDA-related issues. The other day that newsletter’s top two links were both COVID-19 related – and we found both of them concerning.
The first item the newsletter featured was this story on “The
Odd Forum Non Decision Implicates Longstanding Choice Of Law Issue
Every now and then something happens that’s unique. It’s hardly unique for defense counsel to send us a case, with his/her client’s consent and invite us to blog about it – but only once in twelve years has that happened where the result was a loss. That decision was Mantgem v. Spinal Kinetics, No.
Major Questions Remain in Wake of Trump Drug Pricing Executive Orders
This post is a little different. Several of my colleagues – Reed Smith attorneys Robert J. Hill, Joseph W. Metro, Kevin M. Madagan, Andrew Y. Lu, Sung W. Park, Janine R. Tougas – wrote a client alert on the four recent executive orders that concerned pharmaceutical pricing. We had
That Research Didn’t Take Long
As consumers, and connoisseurs, of personal jurisdiction precedent, we were interested in the latest turn in Thalidomide-related litigation in Pennsylvania. You can see our prior posts about the former – and extremely time barred – personal injury litigation, here and here. The personal jurisdiction angle was mentioned more recently in a 360 (that is,
What Exactly Did the Pennsylvania Supreme Court Do in Walsh?
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court recently decided Walsh v. BASF Corp., ___ A.3d ___, 2020 WL 4135151 (Pa. July 21, 2020), reaffirming product identification as an essential element of product liability.
Below, the Superior Court had turned a trial court’s routine Fryebert-like exclusion ruling in a chemical exposure case into scary new precedent in
Johnson v. Monsanto – Even a Hostile Court Can’t Entirely Deny Preemption
One of the cases we follow closely, with daily searches, is Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. v. Albrecht, 139 S. Ct. 1668 (U.S. 2019). It’s an implied preemption case, so while we like to think we catch all the drug/device cases anyway, Albrecht can affect preemption in a wide variety of tort situations.
We’d