Back in May, we discussed the latest amendments proposed by the Advisory Committee on Civil Rules to Fed. R. Evid. 702.  These amendments, while not changing the substance of Rule 702’s standards for admission of expert testimony – helpfulness, factual basis, reliability – are intended to reinforce other aspects of the Rule.  These

We’ve heard politicians advocate importing “cheaper” prescription medical products from Canada for years.  We’ve always thought the idea was ludicrous.  As we said, a little more than two years ago:

Think about it.  California alone has a greater population than Canada.  Any large-scale importation of cheaper Canadian drugs to the United States would almost immediately

We’ve already commented about the broad scope of tort immunity conferred by the March, 2020 Notice of Declaration under the Public Readiness & Emergency Preparedness Act (“PREP Act”), 42 U.S.C. §247d-6d.  That original immunity covered all aspects of government-related or sponsored production and use of anti-COVID countermeasures.  It was, as one of our colleagues put

Not quite two months ago, the Dept. of HHS published a notice of proposed rulemaking that would make a significant change in the National Vaccine Injury Compensation program.  See 85 Fed. Reg. 43,791 (HHS July 20, 2020).  If this becomes a final rule, it could affect the prevalence of civil litigation involving vaccines.

HHS seeks

We haven’t had a word to say on the Blog about the biggest health story in the world.  That was because, until now, there wasn’t a product liability angle to it.  That’s now changed.  On March 17, 2020, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) published in the Federal Register a “notice of

Not too long ago we criticized a proposed “restatement” from the American Law Institute that sought to absolve plaintiffs who acted intentionally from having their conduct (such as stealing drugs, deliberately taking someone else’s prescription), count as comparative fault in the lawsuits such plaintiffs frequently file against our clients.  That particular proposal has been withdrawn

As we’ve gleefully chronicled, recently the tide has been running distinctly in our favor on defendants being permitted to remove cases to federal court before plaintiffs – every one of them a non-resident litigation tourist – can serve a so-called “forum defendant” – that is, a completely diverse defendant that is also a resident