We’ve only discussed Shady Grove Orthopedic Associates, P.A. v. Allstate Insurance Co., 559 U.S. 393 (2010), a couple of times. Shady Grove, displaced – in federal court – a variety of state-law limitations on class actions because those restrictions were at odds with Fed. R. Civ. P. 23, and in federal
Readers of this blog know that we love preemption in all its forms, including preemption based in the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness (“PREP”) Act, 42 U.S.C. §247d-6d.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, a needlessly politicized public health emergency, the PREP Act provided important liability protections to health care providers, vaccine manufacturers, and others working hard
For the decades that we have been handling drug and medical device product liability cases, it has been a given that we wanted to make it clear that our clients did not provide medical care or healthcare directly to patients. For one thing, unauthorized practice of medicine would be bad. Also, when dealing with prescription
It is a truism in product liability matters that plaintiffs love state courts, whereas defense lawyers and our clients much prefer federal court. There are reasons for this. Twombly and Iqbal pleading standards are more rigorous than the pleading standards in many state courts. Federal judges often have fewer cases and more clerks than state
We reported last year on a case in which the Arizona Court of Appeals allowed FDA-approved drug warnings to define the standard of care for a physician’s informed consent. Why does that matter? Well, in most every jurisdiction, a plaintiff bringing an action for medical negligence has to produce expert opinion that the defendant breached
Personalized medicine is the wave of the future. Whether treating disease or prescribing medical devices (or both), medical practitioners are taking individualized patient characteristics into account more and more as they treat their patients. Cancer therapy can now be targeted at the genetic level, and some medical devices can now be created to match patient
Every now and then something happens that’s unique. It’s hardly unique for defense counsel to send us a case, with his/her client’s consent and invite us to blog about it – but only once in twelve years has that happened where the result was a loss. That decision was Mantgem v. Spinal Kinetics, No.
We start with a disclaimer: The following metaphorical exercise is somewhat forced, but we are doing it anyway. If you are like us, then you are a few months in on a pattern of only buying groceries every week or so, perhaps supplemented by bulk deliveries of meat or seafood that you may need to