We’ve never done a cross-post before with any other Reed Smith (or any other firm’s) blogs, but the recent decision, Louisiana v. FDA, ___ F.4th ___, 2026 WL 1194924 (5th Cir. May 1, 2026), justifies this unprecedented action. Essentially, the Fifth Circuit, ordered a nationwide injunction against the FDA’s 2003 REMS amendments that authorized
Bexis knows to throw us the cases that are a bit off center. We gleefully gobble up the criminal cases, forfeiture cases, and other weird ones that are not exactly in the heartland of product liability litigation. We like those cases because they prompt us to think differently, to look at legal disputes with eyes
Each of these cases is significant enough to merit its own post, but since they came down within a week of each other, we’re discussing both of them here. They are: Gahl v. Aurora Health Care, Inc. ___ N.W.2d ___, 2023 Wisc. LEXIS 137 (Wis. May 2, 2023), and M.T. v. Walmart Stores, Inc., ___ P.3d ___, 2023 WL 3135662 (Kan. App. April 28, 2023).
Continue Reading Two New Appellate COVID-Related Developments
Attempting to stay up on every filing in every medication abortion case could be a full-time job these days. We have one of those already, so we tend to stick to court rulings. The filings in the Fifth Circuit on the AHM appeal are something of an exception. In addition to party briefs, the
We’re happy to report on a couple of favorable decisions involving some of the COVID-19-related issues that the Blog has been covering. We have one each on ivermectin injunctions, Shoemaker v. UPMC, ___ A.3d ___, 2022 WL 4372772 (Pa. Super. Sept. 22, 2022), and vaccine mandates, Children’s Health Defense, Inc. v. Rutgers, 2022 WL 4377515 (D.N.J. Sept. 22, 2022).
Continue Reading Two Recent COVID-19 Wins
Don’t stop us if you’ve heard this before, because we know you have. Plaintiffs cannot compel hospitals to treat Covid-19 patients with ivermectin.
A Florida appellate court recently joined courts in Delaware (we wrote about the Delaware case here), Michigan (here), New York (here), and Texas (here) in
Today’s somewhat unusual guest post is by Reed Smith‘s Matt Loughran. It concern’s the Supreme Court’s 6-3 decision to permit the government to continue enforcement of its requirement that healthcare workers (at least those in facilities that accept Medicare/Medicaid, which is most of them) be vaccinated to avoid infecting themselves and their patients
Some of our posts about challenges to Covid-19 vaccines or treatments might have been a bit … strident. It is hard to be otherwise when the cases involve such high stakes and so little merit.
But this time we will try to take our cue from the court in Frey v. Trinity Health-Michigan, 2021
We take a break from assembling Halloween costumes for the Drug and Device Law Little Rescue dogs – a UPS worker, complete with cardboard parcel, and Batwoman – for another great decision involving a plaintiff’s opposition to a vaccine mandate. A number of recent blogposts have reported unsuccessful efforts by anti-vaxxers to enlist judicial support