When we last left our story, plaintiffs had lost their fight to have Pennsylvania law apply to residents of Texas ( Atkinson I) and lost a chunk of their claims as barred by the Texas statute prohibiting failure to warn claims where a drug’s label has been approved by FDA and comment k (
Litigation Tourists Can’t Turn Back Time to Dodge BMS in California
This post is from the non-Reed Smith side of the blog.
Today’s case involves several multi-plaintiff complaints filed in California involving out-of-state plaintiffs who allege they suffered an injury from using out-of-state defendants’ prescription drug product that was distributed by a company headquartered in California. Afraid you’ve fallen through a portal that transported you back
Fifth Circuit Says No Plaintiff Fact Sheet Equals No Case
We’ve all seen the signs – No Shoes, No Shirt, No Service. Their exact origin may be unknown but these signs appear to have come to popularity in the 1960s and 1970s as a response by businesses to keep “long-haired hippies” out of stores and restaurants. Or maybe they were there before that but just
District of Massachusetts Calls Plaintiffs’ Experts on their Shenanigans
Plaintiffs’ experts do a lot of stupid things. We’ve dedicated whole posts to them – here and here, for example. Now we have another trick to add to their growing list of shenanigans – plaintiffs’ experts turn FCA relators. That’s right, two of plaintiffs’ experts from the DePuy Orthopedics hip implant litigation are trying
E-Gads – A Bad Gadolinium Preemption Case
We haven’t see too many of these. The reason for that is the gadolinium litigation is practically a textbook example of where federal law ought to preempt state-law product liability claims of all kinds—including both design defect claims and failure-to-warn claims. Just search gadolinium on the blog and you’ll find plenty of cases dismissed on
Florida Court Tosses Punitive Damages Claim Pre-Trial
It’s a case that pre- and post-dates the IVC Filters MDL– Ocasio v. C.R. Bard, Inc., 2020 WL 3288026 (M.D. Fla. Jun. 18, 2020). In fact, this case got through summary judgment and Daubert rulings in Florida before being transferred to the MDL in Arizona in 2015. Upon its return to Florida, only two
Complaints are Like Onions, They Have Layers
If, like this blogger, you had small children in the early 2000s, subconsciously you may have read today’s title with a Scottish brogue. That’s because it might recall a scene from Shrek where Mike Myers (Shrek) and Eddie Murphy (Donkey) are having a philosophical conversation about the many and varied attributes of ogres. “Ogres are
Personal Jurisdiction Win in Pennsylvania
Earlier this year we posted about the decision on defendant’s motion to dismiss in Crockett v. Luitpold Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 2020 WL 433367 (E.D. Pa. Jan. 28, 2020). We called it a “patchwork” decision, meaning we generally liked it but it wasn’t a seamless defense victory. Well, the court ruled on another defense motion just this
Not Every Label Change is a CBE Label Change
This has been an important concept in the gadolinium litigation and it delivered another preemption win in Javens v. GE Healthcare Inc., 2020 WL 2783581 (D. Del. May 29, 2020). The changes being effected (“CBE”) label change process has strict limitations on when it can be used to add or amend warnings without prior
Florida Court Tosses Punitive Damages Outta Here!
. . . .And a few other claims too. But the punitive damages decision jumped out at us as something we don’t see that often. In fact, the court in Nunez v. Coloplast Corp., — F.Supp.3d –, 2020 WL 2561364 (S.D. Fla. May 20, 2020) only had conflicting precedent to go on. But to