ProdBlog_HealthFood-Store_3-16New York State Attorney General’s Investigation Has Sparked a Coalition of State Attorneys General Against Herbal Supplement Manufacturers: What does this mean for the industry as a whole in terms of product liability exposure?

The recent announcement by New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman concerning his investigation into mislabeled supplements has put the industry front and center in the media. According to Schneiderman, mislabeled supplements can be a danger to people who take certain medications or who have serious food allergies.
Continue Reading What’s Really in Your Supplements?

ventilator-operating-room136369331TSI am writing to report about a recent dismissal of a manufacturing defect claim made against a medical device manufacturer in the USDC for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. This decision is favorable to our clients that are involved in defending medical devices. We believe this case may dissuade plaintiffs from filing cases against medical device manufacturers in Pennsylvania in the future, at least in federal court.

It has been a long-standing principle in Pennsylvania that the doctrine of strict products liability does not apply in cases involving prescription drugs. This principle was recently affirmed by the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania in the case of Lance v. Wyeth, 15 A3d 434 (PA 2014), which was decided earlier this year. As was stated in Lance, for policy reasons strict products liability claims are barred against manufacturers of prescription drugs under Pennsylvania law. However, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania has yet to rule whether this ban also applied to prescription medical devices. Before the decision in Lance was made earlier this year, the federal courts in Pennsylvania had ruled that manufacturing defect claims were permissible in cases involving prescription medical devices.

Continue Reading Does Pennsylvania Permit Manufacturing Defect Claims Involving Medical Devices?

Assorted Pills_SS_46658200Plaintiff’s expert is excluded for relying on a “novel” methodology to support opinion that antidepressant drug causes birth defects. 

On June 27, 2014, in In Re: ZoloftU.S. District Judge Cynthia Rufe of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania issued an opinion excluding an expert in a case that bears a striking resemblance to the facts of Daubert v. Merrell Dow. We think Judge Rufe’s decision in Zoloft will serve as useful precedent to the defense bar and their clients in future pharmaceutical product liability litigation.

Continue Reading Daubert Déjà Vu