Over two years ago (have we really been at this so long we can say that?) we wrote a post “Docs for the Goose, Docs for the Gander,” in which we praised Weiss v. Astellas Pharma, US., Inc., 2007 WL 2137782 (E.D. Ky. June 25, 2007), for requiring an even playing field when it came to the always-contentious issue of informal defense interviews with plaintiffs’ treating physicians. In Weiss, the plaintiff’s (more…)
As we said last week, because it’s a Dechert case, we can’t comment directly on Clark v. Pfizer, Inc., 2010 WL 163583, slip op.(Pa. Super. Jan. 19, 2010). However, we were sufficiently inspired by what’s in the opinion that we thought this would be a good time to put in our two cents worth about one of the theories that theClark plaintiffs pursued: “fraud on the market.”
As defense lawyers, we want to (more…)
As we said last week, because it’s a Dechert case, we can’t comment directly on Clark v. Pfizer, Inc., 2010 WL 163583, slip op.(Pa. Super. Jan. 19, 2010). However, we were sufficiently inspired by what’s in the opinion that we thought this would be a good time to put in our two cents worth about one of the theories that theClark plaintiffs pursued: “fraud on the market.”
As defense lawyers, we want to (more…)
Caveat Emptor….
That’s the take-away that we gleen from the Transobturator Sling Products MDL, where the court recently granted in part and denied in part a motion to quash a subpoena served on a non-party former competitor (!!)of the device manufacturer that’s a defendant in that MDL.
Here’s the back story: the defendant in this MDL is Mentor Corporation. Mentor manufactured a medical device called (more…)
Last week’s decision in Carr v. Tillery, 2010 WL 92487 (7th Cir. Jan. 12, 2010), was not, strictly speaking, a product liability case. But it involves some key players in that field, and a very key location. And, truth be told, the case appeals to the voyeur within us.
The players are former partners in a plaintiff class action law firm that made a nice business out of hauling corporations (e.g., IBM, Pfizer, Xerox) into Madison (more…)
As long-time readers know, this blog was founded by a couple of guys who first got to know each other defending co-defendant manufacturers in the Orthopedic Bone Screw Mass Tort. That fact significantly colors what you read here. A lot of the issues that we harp on– off-label use, medical device preemption, fraud on the FDA, cross-jurisdictional class action tolling, broken device cases, expert testimony on issues of (FDA) law (that’s (more…)
We’ve previously written about Allergan’s First Amendment challenge to the FDA’s regulations relating to off-label promotion (here(last of four parts), here, and here), but in the grand tradition of the First Amendment, the war of words is escalating, mud is being slung, and court filings are name-dropping Trojan priests – but more on that later.
The past month has been busy, with the government filing its “Motion (more…)
Remember the old SNL Weekend Update report: “This just in, Generalissimo Francisco Franco is still dead”? In that spirit, we bring you today’s post.
In the wake of the Chinese heparin scandal, the FDA has promised stepped-up enforcement of CGMP (see one report on the FDA Law Blog, here). And where there is enforcement action, there is inevitable tag-along action by private plaintiffs. But not every violation of statute (more…)
Remember Gresham’s law? If you ever suffered through Econ 101 in college, chances are you do. That’s the proposition that “bad money drives out good.” More generally, what Gresham’s law is all about is that if there’s a choice between doing something the “good” way and doing the same thing by way of some “bad” shortcut, if the shortcut is allowed, everybody will go that way. “Good” (more…)
This just in: The Eighth Circuit has affirmed the Baycol MDL judge’s authority to enjoin the plaintiffs, after losing a class certification motion in the MDL, from running to a (presumably) friendly state-court judge to get the same class certified. Here’s a link to the opinion.
What happened is that one West Virginia law based consumer fraud (that is, economic losses only) class action was removed to federal court and became part of the (more…)