Subro Sense Podcast - Unpacking Product Claims Against Amazon
FCPA Compliance and Ethics Report-Episode 145-SEC Enforcement of the FCPA, Part II
FCPA Compliance and Ethics Report-Episode 138, Tribute to Mr. Spock and Strict Liability for Internal Controls Under the FCPA
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit recently upheld multiple misdemeanor convictions for two former medical device company executives under the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FDCA). While the former executives...more
On September 1, 2021, the South Carolina Court of Appeals affirmed the circuit court’s verdict and additur in favor of Plaintiffs in the matter of Beverly Dale Jolly and Brenda Rice Jolly v. Gen. Elec. Co., et al. Fisher...more
On July 8, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia upheld a lower court’s ruling dismissing a complaint from Federal Express Corporation (FedEx) and holding it liable for violating the Export Control...more
In a recent summary order in an appeal from a bankruptcy court, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit reaffirmed that mere receipt of a fraudulent transfer is not always sufficient to render the recipient...more
Foley Hoag LLP publishes this quarterly Update primarily concerning developments in product liability and related law from federal and state courts applicable to Massachusetts, but also featuring selected developments for New...more
A Pennsylvania federal court has again asked that the state’s Supreme Court clarify whether, and to what extent, medical device manufacturers are immune from strict liability claims by virtue of the “unavoidably unsafe...more
A California Court of Appeal has held that Amazon may be strictly liable for injuries to customers who bought products from third-party sellers offered on Amazon’s website. (See discussion of Bolger decision...) In Kisha...more
Strict products liability cases have been the subject of much fluctuation in the Pennsylvania courts over the last few years. Utilizing hope created by the courts in recent strict liability cases, defendants have tried to...more
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit recently re-affirmed its position that manufacturers of products advertised in unsolicited fax messages do not face strict liability under the TCPA’s junk-fax provision. To...more
On October 23, 2020, the Supreme Court of Texas ruled on Northland Industries Inc. v. Kouba, a case arising from a fatal treadmill incident. The Court held that the purchaser of the treadmill’s manufacturer did not assume...more
In a decision that may impact future e-commerce, the California Court of Appeal held in Bolger v. Amazon.com, LLC that under California law, Amazon could be strictly liable for an allegedly defective battery manufactured by a...more
Many states, finding that the purpose of the strict liability doctrine is to protect otherwise defenseless victims from defective products, hold that principles of comparative negligence do not apply to strict liability...more
On September 21, the FCC’s Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau issued a declaratory ruling clarifying that businesses advertised via fax should not face “sender liability” for unsolicited faxes sent without prior...more
In Schueler v. Ad Art, No. 75688-COA, 2020 Nev. App. LEXIS 6, the Court of Appeals of Nevada recently considered whether a custom-made sign constituted a “product” for purposes of the doctrine of strict products liability....more
In Taggart v. Lorenzen, 139 S. Ct. 1795 (June 3, 2019), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a bankruptcy court may hold a creditor in civil contempt for attempting to collect on a debt that has been discharged in bankruptcy "if...more
On May 18, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit decided in Benoit, et al. v. Saint-Gobain Performance Plastics Corp., et al., No. 17-3941-cv(L), slip op., __ F.3d ___ (2d Cir. 2020), that, under New York law, the...more
Two courts recently answered “yes,” finding that environmental claims brought against reorganized debtors by government entities were discharged under confirmed Chapter 11 plans of reorganization. In In re Exide Techs., 613...more
Since the California Supreme Court’s 2019 Oroville decision, which narrowed inverse condemnation liability for public agencies, several court decisions have followed suit. ...more
Plaintiff sued a wood chipper manufacturer alleging products liability and failure to warn claims under both strict liability and negligence. The manufacturer filed timely, strategic motions resulting in dismissal of the...more
This past summer, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals issued a seminal opinion in Oberdorf v. Amazon.com, Inc., which held Amazon could be liable as a seller for products sold by third parties on its website. The issue however...more
This edition of Employment Flash looks at recent NLRB activity, including its issuance of a decision suggesting two members would be willing to reconsider a precedent regarding surveillance of employees’ union activity. We...more
In a products liability lawsuit against the manufacturer and seller, a plaintiff asserted claims of strict products liability, breach of warranty, negligence, gross negligence, and consumer fraud. One defendant filed a...more
Historically, many jurisdictions have held that Amazon was not a “Seller” when considering products sold on its website by third-party vendors. Recently, a U.S. Court of Appeals held for the first time that Amazon was a...more
On June 3, 2019, Justice Breyer delivered a unanimous opinion of the Supreme Court conclusively establishing the standard courts must apply to hold a creditor in civil contempt for violation of a bankruptcy discharge order....more
Since the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania decided Tincher v. Omega Flex, Inc., 104 A.3d 328 (Pa. 2014), parties proceeding in product liability cases in Pennsylvania often disagree about jury instructions. In Davis v....more