Revenue” Never Actually Received
Today’s guest post, by Reed Smith’sPaul Melniczak and Erin Apsokardu, is a little different. It’s not about product liability, but rather about a state tax issue with the potential for saving drug companies substantial sums. Since a dollar is a dollar, whether it is saved from bogus product
The Supreme Court recently issued a unanimous decision resolving a circuit split on an important question of federal subject matter jurisdiction: Whether a district court’s erroneous dismissal of a nondiverse party before final judgment can cure a jurisdictional defect that existed when a case was removed to federal court. You might think this is a
To all in-house counsel working in the pharmaceutical, medical device, biotech, and digital health industries: if you can use a few CLE hours, we invite you to attend Reed Smith’s annual Virtual Health Care Week, taking place from March 16 through March 19, 2026.
This four-day all-remote event will explore recent developments, challenges, and opportunities
Since the beginning of the Blog, we have shilled for only one product: Bexis’ “Drug and Medical Device Product Liability Deskbook” (published by Law.com and updated twice annually). While Bexis is continuing the blog in 2026 (after he turned 70), he is not continuing to update this treatise. Frankly, it’s a lot of
Here in the United States, Lawyers for Civil Justice (LCJ) encourages lawyers to Ask About TPLF, also known as third party litigation funding.
LCJ and others are advocating for an addition to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure that would require litigants to disclose the involvement of litigation funders in cases, just like
December 9, 2026? What is that about?
Well, December 9, 2026 is the deadline for each member nation within the European Union to have incorporated the EU’s new Product Liability Directive (“PLD”) into their own national laws. In key markets like Germany, that work is well underway.
Not every EU member state will meet
This is a defense blog. Are we biased? Yes, we are. We come by that bias honestly, via temperament, principle, and client loyalty. We are happy to report on defense wins. If we report at all on plaintiff wins, it will be grudgingly and typically accompanied by heaping helpings of regrets and criticisms.
Have we
As 2025 came to an end, we presented our loyal readers with our annual review of our ten worst decisions of the past year and our ten best decisions of the past year.
Now, in the new year, as we do each year, we’re pleased to announce that four (we hope) of your bloggers –
As we’ve discussed before, Florida’s offer of judgment statute has real teeth. Under the Florida statute (Fla. Stat. § 768.79), a defendant can recover its costs and attorney’s fees if the other side rejects the offer and ultimately recovers 25% less than the amount of the offer. The risk of paying the defendant’s attorney’s fees ought to be a meaningful deterrent to meritless claims.
In today’s decision, Jacob v. Mentor Worldwide LLP, 2025 WL 3134227 (M.D. Fla. Nov. 7, 2025) (rep. & rec.), the defendant made an offer of judgment under the Florida statute. But that didn’t deter the pro se plaintiff from pursuing her claim that a ruptured breast implant caused her to develop lupus-like symptoms. As we blogged about here, following a lengthy and tumultuous procedural history, the defendant ultimately prevailed on summary judgment. Prior to moving for summary judgment, the defendant made an offer of judgment of $3,500, which was the amount of its limited warranty for implant ruptures. After obtaining summary judgment, the defendant moved for its costs and attorney’s fees. Continue Reading Chomp Chomp – Taking a Bite with Florida’s Offer of Judgment Statute
This post is from the non-Dechert and non-RS side of the Blog.
Depending on the time, issue, and players, the supposed epithets of “judicial activism” or “activist judge” can be thrown in just about every juridical direction. If we were to try to parse out the most common reason for the use of these terms