We heard the other day from attorneys involved in the MDL direct filing, choice-of-law case that we wrote about a couple of weeks ago, Looper v. Cook Inc. Engaging in this kind of dialogue is one of the joys of blogging, even when our friends and colleagues write to tell us we got
This Is Why You Should Think Twice About MDL Direct Filing
We have long thought that “direct filing” procedures in multidistrict litigation were a solution in search of a problem. We also think direct filing procedures in MDLs pose significant waiver risks without a corresponding upside. Alas, our inclinations were confirmed recently when the Seventh Circuit ruled that a mass tort defendant’s acquiescence to complaints filed
Supreme Court Declines To Enjoin Maine’s Vaccine Mandate, But Check Out The Dissent
We told you that if anti-vaxxers found a sympathetic court in their quest to declare government vaccine mandates unconstitutional, we would let you know. Well, we did not think it would be so soon. And we surely did not think that the sympathetic court would be the United States Supreme Court.
Don’t get the wrong
We Repeat—Yes, The Government Can Require Vaccines
We observed in a recent post that the constitutionality of government vaccine requirements really should not be controversial, and after reporting recently on yet another case upholding such requirements, we expressed our hope that we would not be writing much further on them.
Well, here we are, writing again on government vaccine requirements—as we did
Prescription Drugs and Class Actions Do Not Mix
Some things were never meant to go together. Oil and water. Ice cream and ketchup. Harry Potter and Lord Voldemort (although fans of the books will quickly point out that Boy Who Lived was actually linked inextricably to his arch enemy). Picnics and honey bees. Elected officials and the power to borrow money. You get
The Reverse Sham Affidavit Rule? It’s A Thing
A recent order in the Xarelto MDL caught our attention because it is an example of something we see more and more: A plaintiff in multidistrict litigation who neither accepts a settlement program worked out in the MDL nor is prepared to proceed with his or her claims once the chance to settle has passed.
The Vaccine Saga – Two More Courts Uphold University Vaccine Policies
When we first wrote on public universities requiring COVID-19 vaccines, we wondered why there was any controversy. The government has been requiring vaccines in public schools for decades, and the constitutionality of government vaccine requirements has been settled for more than 100 years. Courts have agreed—including the Seventh Circuit, as we reported here.
But
Eight Circuit Abdicates Gatekeeper Role For Expert Opinions
We posted just the other day about widespread judicial reluctance to follow the expert admissibility standards imposed by Federal Rule of Evidence 702. We called out the Eighth Circuit as a prime example of that problem, and we discussed the committee-approved amendments to Rule 702 that are intended to reinforce the need for expert opinions
Yes, the Government Can Still Require Vaccination
We reported two weeks ago on the poorly conceived and ill-fated attempt by students to enjoin a public university from mandating COVID-19 vaccines. There simply is no fundamental right under the Constitution to refuse vaccination, which has been firmly established for more than 100 years. Now the Seventh Circuit has agreed.
Let’s be candid about
Yes, The Government Can Require Vaccination
The last time we wrote about vaccines, we received a lot of emails. Vaccines are a hot-button issue for some, although we firmly believe they should not be. Vaccines have prevented disease in millions and millions of people and are among the most important public health developments of all time.
When we wrote that