Photo of Stephen McConnell

This week we could not resist writing about a good result from an always interesting jurisdiction (Louisiana) involving one of our all-time favorite defense lawyers (Hi, Lori Cohen). 

In McGuire v. B. Braun Med. Inc., 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 184172, 2025 WL 2689205 (E.D. Louisiana Sept. 19, 2025), the district court granted the defendants’ motion to

Some litigations are gifts that keep on giving. A big chunk of DDL work product consists of commentary on a couple of mass torts. Maybe it is a version of the 80-20 rule, or how a huge percentage of crimes are committed by a relatively small group of career criminal recidivists. For a while, Aredia-Zometa

Lawyers like to grouse about their lot in life. We complain about stress and the things that most contribute to such stress: hard work and unpleasant people. But if you labor long enough in this profession, you end up running into many excellent folks. By “excellent,” we mean brilliant and generous.  We’ve long deployed a

We recently returned from our summer vacation in a small European country with a tiny but charming coastline, formidable mountains, abundant vineyards, and relentlessly friendly service.  That last bit serves as a clumsy segue into today’s case, Aguila v. RQM+LLC, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 155232 (S.D. Fla. Aug. 12, 2025), which is mostly about

Federal preemption of tort claims involving medical devices receiving premarket approval (PMA) is a powerful defense. But for some reason, there are plaintiff lawyers who think it does not apply, or barely applies, to claims for manufacturing defect. That is bad enough.  When courts buy into that misconception, it is even worse. It takes clear

Surely, you’ve heard the definition of insanity as repeating the same conduct but expecting different results. You might also have heard that Einstein said it, though that might not be right – not even relatively right. 

It is definitely not right for plaintiffs to keep filing meritless actions even after they keep receiving benchslaps.  Maybe

Keralink Intl., Inc. v. Stradis Healthcare, LLC, 2025 WL 1947764 (4th Cir. 2025), is a rare published appellate decision on common-law implied indemnity in the context of prescription medical product liability litigation.  The case involves two commercial intermediate seller parties already held liable to a buyer of the product (corneal eyewash) that had been