Latest Publications

Share:

Causation Conundrums: Implications of Georgia Supreme Court’s Interpretation of Statute of Repose in Long-Term Product Use Cases

When does the statute of repose clock start ticking on a product liability claim involving long-term repeat use of many individually purchased units of a product? According to the Georgia Supreme Court’s decision in Burroughs...more

Close, But Not Quite: Eastern District of North Carolina Excludes Experts Whose General Expertise Does Not Enable Specific...

Even “[a] supremely qualified expert cannot waltz into the courtroom and render opinions” unless those opinions pass muster under Federal Rule of Evidence 702. Clark v. Takata Corp., 192 F.3d 750, 759 n.5 (7th Cir. 1999). As...more

Nothing Shocking Here – Eleventh Circuit Affirms Defense Win in Electroconvulsive Therapy Case

When a case involves electroconvulsive therapy (ECT), one might think it originated out of the Twilight Zone. Despite the misrepresentation of such therapies in popular media, modern ECT serves as a valuable option for...more

Standing on Shaky Ground: Product Recalls Alone Do Not Constitute an Injury in Fact

Cynics have long said that no good deed goes unpunished. Such can be the case with voluntary product recalls, which often engender litigation even by plaintiffs who have suffered no real injury and merely see an opportunity...more

ChatGPT As Your New Testifying Expert Under Proposed Federal Rule of Evidence 707? Maybe Not.

Artificial intelligence is taking the world by storm, and the legal community is no exception. Tools that can reduce the time and cost of litigation have long been in high demand by both clients and counsel. But the tool must...more

Clearing the Weeds: The Ninth Circuit Confirms that There is Not (And Never Has Been) a Presumption of Admissibility in Its Case...

The judge overseeing the In re Roundup Products Liability Litigation MDL once remarked that “When you [consider] Ninth Circuit law, you come away with a pretty strong feeling that the Ninth Circuit is more tolerant of shaky...more

Defining the Limits of Lay Testimony in Complicated Products Cases

“So when is a question too complicated for the jury?” That is the question the Third Circuit sought to answer recently in Slatowski v. Sig Sauer, Inc., ___ F. 4th ___, 2025 WL 2178533 (3d Cir. 2025), reversing a district...more

Message Received – Delaware Follows Federal Rule of Evidence 702

The Delaware Superior Court took the mass tort world by surprise with its May 31, 2024, refusal to exclude the plaintiffs’ experts’ causation opinions in the Zantac litigation, breaking with the federal MDL court’s prior...more

Double Take: Fifth Circuit’s Dual BELO Rulings Show Both General and Specific Causation Are Essential

We previously blogged about a decision in the In re Deepwater Horizon BELO litigation – Ruffin v. BP Exploration & Production, Inc. – in which the Fifth Circuit affirmed summary judgment for defendants in an alleged chemical...more

Florida Courts of Appeal Scrutinizing Punitive Damages Claims

It is not uncommon for a product liability plaintiff to base a claim for punitive damages on little more than the same allegations that undergird a strict liability or negligence claim, while adding that the defendant knew...more

Defective Logic: Why Recall Evidence Falls Short in Court

In product liability litigation, plaintiffs often treat a product recall as though it is conclusive proof that the product is defective or that its warnings are inadequate. Some plaintiffs even cite clearly inapplicable...more

Fifth Circuit Clouds Threshold Dose Analysis in Ruffin v. BP

Plaintiffs in toxic tort cases must prove both general and specific causation, generally through the testimony of experts. Experts must establish that a specific chemical exposure can (and did) cause the specific injury at...more

Sixth Circuit Applies FRE 702 to Class Certification Experts and Highlights Commonality and Predominance Issues for Products That...

Class certification decisions under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure mark a critical stage in any putative class action lawsuit. Rule 23(a) requires plaintiffs to prove, among other things, that “there are...more

To Depose or Not to Depose: When Challenging Opposing Nonretained Experts Becomes Challenging

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2) requires parties to disclose the opinions of experts who may present evidence at trial. If the disclosures are inadequate, Rule 37(c) requires exclusion of the opinions “unless the...more

Plaintiff’s Half-Baked Attempt to Prove Defect and Causation With Photographs of Moldy Bread Shows the Knead for Expert Testimony

A picture may be worth a thousand words, but that doesn’t make the camera an expert witness. Product liability actions usually require expert testimony to prove defect and causation. Pictures, like other documents, can be...more

Same Song, Different Verse — Causation Experts for Second Group of Bellwether Plaintiffs Excluded for Same Reason as First Group’s...

Multidistrict litigation is meant to “promote the just and efficient conduct” of actions “involving one or more common questions of fact” by transferring those actions to a single district court “for coordinated or...more

Fifth Circuit Asks the Right Questions, Affirms Summary Judgment on Plaintiffs’ Herbicide Claims as Untimely and Lacking...

As Nobel laureate Richard Feynman once observed, “[w]isdom is knowing when to ask the right questions.” A related proposition is that wise jurists know how to identify and focus on the right questions. Motion practice can...more

In re Taxotere (Docetaxel) MDL Court Rejects Plaintiffs’ Argument that Lone Pine Order is Unfair

We think Lone Pine orders are pretty fair. Lone Pine orders are case management orders that require plaintiffs in multidistrict litigation (MDL) to produce specific evidence without which the plaintiffs cannot make a prima...more

Can a Treating Physician’s Medical Testimony Be “Lay Opinion”? Divided Sixth Circuit Panel Disagrees on Where to Draw the Line

Federal Rules of Evidence 701 and 702 govern the admissibility of lay and expert opinion testimony, respectively, in federal courts. Rule 701(c) helps paint the line between the two, providing that an opinion “based on...more

Yes, Michigan Applies the Learned Intermediary Doctrine

For decades, both state and federal courts in Michigan have routinely applied the learned intermediary doctrine in products liability cases involving prescription medical products. Under the doctrine, a manufacturer’s duty to...more

Third Circuit Affirms Lone Pine Order and Ensuing Dismissals in In re Zostavax MDL

In March 2022, the In re Zostavax MDL court entered a Lone Pine order requiring plaintiffs who claimed to have developed shingles as a result of using the Zostavax vaccine to produce certain test results supporting causation....more

Ayotte v. National Basketball Association: Plaintiff Can’t Hide the Ball on Communications Between Counsel and Non-Retained...

Picture a deposition of a plaintiff’s treating physician. Early in the deposition, defense counsel asks the usual questions about the physician’s communications with the plaintiff’s counsel. But the plaintiff’s counsel,...more

Plaintiffs’ Second Bite at the General Causation Apple Fares No Better Than the First in Acetaminophen MDL

In December 2023, back when the ink was still drying on the amendments to Federal Rule of Evidence 702, the Southern District of New York excluded all five general causation experts proffered by plaintiffs in the In re...more

Georgia Court of Appeals Confirms “First Sale” as Used in Statute of Repose Refers to Sale of First Unit of Repeatedly Purchased...

Georgia’s product liability statute of repose requires actions to be commenced within 10 years of “the date of the first sale for use or consumption” of the product at issue. OCGA § 51-1-11(b)(2) (emphasis added). While the...more

Peer Review Can’t Save “Junk Science” from FRE 702 Judicial Gatekeeping – In re: Roundup Court Excludes Expert Whose Opinions Had...

When tasked with assessing the admissibility of expert testimony under Federal Rule of Evidence 702, courts often cite the so-called Daubert factors as criteria that guide the inquiry. Among those factors is “whether the...more

66 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 3

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide