Here is a brief and happy follow up to our stupid expert tricks redux post. That post by Bexis involved a purported talc plaintiff-side expert who authored what could charitably be called a “junk science” medical article (now two such articles) on cosmetic talc causation of mesothelioma. This “research” (we grin as we write that
Remember the case we told you about last week where the court shutdown plaintiff’s attempt to use non-mutual offensive collateral estoppel? Well, that wasn’t that plaintiff’s only loss that week. In a companion decision, the court also rejected plaintiff’s attempt to use Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 43(a)’s remote trial testimony rule to skirt the
For as long as we have been representing drug and device companies in product liability litigation, the plaintiffs have accused our clients of “buying the science.” Sometimes, this has allegedly been by funding studies or offering support to outside researchers such as free product or access to administrative support. Sometimes, this has allegedly been by
We have become accustomed to doing things remotely these days. Depositions, court appearances, mediations, conferences, celebrations and family gatherings of all kinds. The variety of activities that we now do by videoconference pales only by comparison to the speed with which we adapted to this new normal. We will refrain from opining on whether we
In updating our post-Bauman personal jurisdiction cheat sheet, we recently came across an interesting application of Daimler AG v. Bauman, 134 S. Ct. 746 (2014) – lack of general personal jurisdiction requiring that a third-party subpoena, issued in the context of a discovery in aid of execution on a judgment, be quashed.