We are all familiar with the phrase—the rules are the rules. Meaning, rules should be enforced consistently, regardless of personal circumstances. Essentially the opposite of—rules are made to be broken. Meaning, exceptions to the rules abound. The law is full of both the former (strict adherence rules) and the latter (loose
Consumer Fraud Case Against “Non-Drowsy” Cough Syrup Sleepwalks Past Preemption
Rush To File No Excuse for False Injury Allegations
So learned some plaintiffs in In re: Hair Relaxer Marketing Sales Practices and Products Liability Litigation, MDL 3060, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 206474 (N.D. Ill. Nov. 13, 2024). While not a drug or device case, the problem it exhibits is common to many mass torts. Plaintiffs’ counsels’ solicitations produce a rush to file complaints
Taxotere MDL Dismisses Cases for Failure to Respond Timely to Suggestions of Death
Just about three months ago, we blogged about Rule 25 dismissals in the Bair Hugger MDL, and today we bring you more of the same from Taxotere. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25 provides that “[i]f a party dies . . . the court may order substitution of the proper party.” Rule 25 goes
Minimal Level of Exposure Critical to General Causation
In re Deepwater Horizon Belo Cases, — F.4th –, 2024 WL 4522690 (11th Cir. Oct. 18, 2024), is not a drug or device case. It is the Eleventh Circuit’s review of the Northern District of Florida’s exclusion of the plaintiffs’ general causation experts in a toxic tort exposure case arising from the
District of South Carolina Rejects Plaintiff’s “Better Late Than Never” Argument on Expert Reports
Ironically, today’s post is running a little late—because life’s not perfect and sometimes despite the best of intentions, you need a bit more time. But, if you are going to ask for more time to meet a court ordered deadline to submit evidence that is critical to your case, you better ask in advance and
Fraud on the FDA Not an Exception to Noerr-Pennington Antitrust Immunity
We don’t usually weigh in on commercial disputes like antitrust cases. But In re Merck Mumps Vaccine Antitrust Litigation, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 25271 (3rd Cir. Oct. 7, 2024), is a 2-1 appellate decision that dismisses Sherman Act violation claims by favorably resolving allegations of fraud on the FDA. We do like to
Reining in “Any and All” Discovery
Anyone who knows this blogger is well aware this is a topic near and dear to her heart. For years, plaintiffs railed against defendants making “boilerplate” objections to discovery requests. So much so that the issue was addressed by the 2015 Amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. While Rule 33 for interrogatories already
Discovery is a Two-Way Street; Even for Governmental Plaintiffs
So learned plaintiff in United States ex rel. Plaintiff v. Novo Nordisk, Inc., 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 174825 (W.D. Wash. Sept. 26, 2024), when the court granted defendant’s two motions to compel obviously relevant documents and information.
Plaintiff relator and intervening plaintiff, the State of Washington, assert False Claims Act (“FCA”) claims against the
E.D.N.Y. Finds Fraudulent Joinder of Sales Representative with No Connection to Plaintiff
Plaintiffs naming local sales representatives—or doctors, or pharmacies, or distributors, or retailers—as defendants to try to destroy diversity and avoid federal court is nothing new. Unfortunately, defendants bear a “heavy burden” proving fraudulently joinder. In fact, our last post on the topic was in February 2023, demonstrating that successes on this issue are few