Today’s decision strays from the field of prescription drug/device law, but we take this detour because Aybar v. Aybar, 2021 N.Y. LEXIS 2134 (N.Y. Ct. App. Oct. 7, 2021) is an important jurisdictional decision – one with over 100 years of legal precedent to sort out.
Plaintiffs were involved in an automobile accident in
We aren’t going to beat around the bush today – the facts of Paulsen v. Abbott Laboratories, 2021 WL 4439408 (N.D. Ill. Sept. 28, 2021) are straightforward and so too will we be. This case is largely about the chronology, so here it is:
It’s football season! That means beautiful fall weather, tailgating, pots of chili, rooting your favorite team to victory, and wallowing in their losses. It’s Army v. Navy and Ohio State v. Michigan. It’s Packers v. Bears and Steelers v. Ravens. If you are a true fan of the game, it doesn’t matter that in a
We looked back over the blog and it’s been over one year since we posted on snap removal. Last spring and summer, we reported on new pre-service removals almost monthly. So, we decided to poke around a bit and see if there was anything going on outside the drug and device law space. We found
Sometimes our weekly searches for what is going on in the drug and device world lead as outside the traditional products liability context that is our bread and butter. Occasionally that can be refreshing – a break from preemption and causation and TwIqbal. It’s also interesting to see how things like off-label use come
After getting off to a rocky start a few years ago on preemption, cases in the Birmingham hip MDL are falling like dominoes. And just like last week’s case, the decision in Sedgwick v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 157412 (D. Md. Aug. 19, 2021) falls apart at the summary
This blog is no stranger to the In re Smith & Nephew Birmingham HIP Resurfacing (BBR) HIP Implant Products Liability Litigation, MDL 2775, pending in the District of Maryland. Nor have we hidden our disregard for several of its decisions, going back to its preemption ruling on defendant’s motion to dismiss which made our
If you are one of our readers who fall into the over 50 demographic, we are going to assume that in your head you read the title of today’s post in John Houseman’s voice and you tagged it with “they earned it.” That’s because you were alive in the early 1980s when if you wanted
Talk to any realtor and they’ll tell you location is the key to any home search. And normally when we rail against litigation tourists, location is pretty key to us too. Plaintiffs can’t forum shop for “judicial hellholes” that have no relation to them or to the defendant. So, you’ve probably heard us say plaintiffs
What happens when a plaintiff from Kentucky sues a New York company in Massachusetts? The case gets tossed for lack of personal jurisdiction. That is exactly what happened in Kingston v. Angiodynamics, Inc., 2021 WL 3022320 (D. Mass. Jul. 16, 2021). It is what should have happened in Hammons v. Ethicon, Inc., 240