With the Phillies stinking the joint out – off to their worst start since World War II – and both of Boranian’s local teams in last place, too (not as deeply buried as the Phillies), use of baseball imagery might seem a bit painful right now. Only our DC-based blogger has had anything worth cheering
Breaking News − Personal Jurisdiction – The Sound of One Shoe Dropping
We pointed out earlier that Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court, No. 16-466 (“BMS”), was not the only personal jurisdiction matter on the Supreme Court’s docket this term. Argued the same day as BMS was BNSF Railway Co. v. Tyrell, a Federal Employees Liability Act (“FELA”) personal injury case raising
Supreme Court Expands Forum-Shopping Crackdown
While we are waiting for the Supreme Court to rule in Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court, No. 16-466 (“BMS”), an interesting thing happened. Last week in TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Grp. Brands LLC, ___ S.Ct. ___, 2017 WL 2216934 (U.S. May 22, 2017), the Court interpreted the federal
Speaking of the First Amendment. . . .
Now that Dr. Scott Gottlieb is safely installed as FDA Commissioner, we at DDLaw can end our moratorium on blogposts about First Amendment issues. There was no way we wanted to give his opponents any ammunition by saying nice things about Dr. Gottlieb before his confirmation.
Not so now.
Given what Dr. Gottlieb has said
No Ifs, Ands Or Butts – Preemption Gutts, Rebutts, and Shutts Down Utts
Late last year we happily blogged about Utts v. Bristol-Myers Squibb Co., ___ F. Supp.3d ___, 2016 WL 7429449 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 23, 2016), chiefly because it held that design defect claims against a branded prescription drug (Eliquis) were preempted under the impossibility preemption reasoning in PLIVA, Inc. v. Mensing, 564 U.S. 604 (2011),
Discovery – Requestor Pays, Part of the Way, Anyway
One of the issues that the federal Civil Rules Committee’s discovery subcommittee considered, but that eventually fell by the wayside, on the way to the 2015 discovery rules amendments, were proposals to convert to a “requestor pays” discovery system. That would be a very significant change, and one of the criticisms that the other
“Pre-Approval” Design Defects − No Such Thing
As our post-Levine preemption cheat sheet demonstrates, Mensing/Bartlett preemption is breathing down the necks of all prescription drug design defect claims. Recent cases finding preemption of design defect claims due to the need for FDA pre-approval of “major” or “moderate” design changes (basically, anything that could be causal in a product liability
Guest Post – Justice for Patriots’ Fans
This guest post by Andrew C. Bernasconi, of Counsel at Reed Smith, is about a hopeful development in a False Claims Act case we’ve already blogged about once. The previous post queried, what happens when a FCA relator, blinded by the dollar signs in his/her eyes, resorts to questionable means to gin up
Breaking News: Cerveny – “Clear Evidence” Preemption Wins on What Matters Most
Today, the Tenth Circuit affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded the post-Levine branded drug preemption decision in Cerveny v. Aventis, Inc., No. 16-4050 (10th Cir. May 2, 2017). You can read our discussion of the district court opinion in Cerveny here.
While any decision with a description of “affirmed in
The Other Supreme Court 4/25 Personal Jurisdiction Argument
Last week, the United States Supreme Court also heard argument in the “other” litigation tourist personal jurisdiction case pending before it – BNSF Railway Co. v. Tyrell, No. 16-405 (U.S. argued April 25, 2017) (“BNSF”) (link to transcript). While BNSF mostly concerned statutory issues under the Federal Employees Liability