Evidence of other similar acts can be devastatingly effective. It’s easier for us to believe somebody did something wrong on a specific occasion if we hear they have a prior history of doing the same thing. Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) addresses this issue, and it is one that comes up in both civil and
We write in a state of annoyed frustration (so different from our normal sunshiny sweetness – lol). We have a bat mitzvah to attend next weekend – dear friend’s daughter. And we knew exactly what to wear to the evening festivities: a great dress with a skirt is slightly poufed, because it has a bit
This post is from the non-Reed Smith side of the blog.
We don’t usually report on securities-law cases, but today we do. That is because the well-reasoned decision in question, In re Allergan PLC Securities Litigation, 2022 WL 17584155 (S.D.N.Y. 2022), has major implications for the parallel Textured Breast Implant MDL now pending in
The defendants in Mixson v. C.R. Bard, Inc., ___ F. Supp.3d ___, (N.D. Fla. Sept. 16, 2022) (“Mixson I”), and Mixson v. C.R. Bard, Inc., 2022 WL 7581737 (N.D. Fla. Sept. 23, 2022) (“Mixson II”), by no means won everything, but what they won was more important than what they didn’t, so we’re OK with the results.
Continue Reading Mixson Somewhat Mixed, But We’ll Take It
For a decision that affirmed not just a verdict, but an award of punitive damages, against a device manufacturer, Nicholson v. Biomet, Inc., 46 F.4th 757 (8th Cir. 2022), is not as bad as it could have been. That’s because most of the decision was about evidentiary rulings that the court found to be “harmless” error, and one might even have some benefit for our clients in the long run.
Still, Nicholson was pretty darn depressing.
Continue Reading Nicholson – Not So Harmless
This post is from the non-Dechert side of the blog.
Before we get to today’s case, we fondly tip our hat to the Westminster Kennel Club Dog Show, held (and televised) last week. Regular readers know how much we love this annual event and also may recall that our “heart breed” is the Standard Poodle.
Federal Rule of Evidence 407, dealing with the inadmissibility of subsequent remedial measures, isn’t all that complicated – as Federal Rules go. It’s only 73 words long:
When measures are taken that would have made an earlier injury or harm less likely to occur, evidence of the subsequent measures is not admissible to prove:
- negligence;
Counsel defending depositions have a decision to make – whether, after opponent’s the direct examination of the witness is complete, whether to “cross-examine” a witness aligned with our own client. Usually, the answer will be “no,” because such questioning usually offers no advantages and could well undermine the witness (who may lose focus under friendly
This post is from the non-Dechert side of the blog.
We previously discussed some favorable motion in limine rulings in the hernia (not pelvic) mesh case, Africano v. Atrium Medical Corp., 2021 WL 4477867 (N.D. Ill. Sept. 30, 2021). They were a welcome change from the appalling MDL choice of law rulings against
This post is from the non-Dechert side of the blog
Not long ago, one of our co-bloggers fielded some correspondence that, distilled from its abundant rhetoric, seemed to criticize a blog post for its defense-leaning bias. Given this, we hasten to reiterate, before we begin today’s post, that this is a defense blog. We are