Law Brief®: David Pfeffer and Richard Schoenstein Discuss the Legal Implications of Infrastructure Collapses
The grace period for claims that would have been viable under Florida’s 10-year statute of repose, but were no longer viable after Florida shortened the statute of repose to 7 years, is quickly approaching its expiration. On...more
New York’s Appellate Division, First Department recently issued favorable dismissals to a sporting goods retailer and manufacturer in a case alleging issues with an elastic exercise band that injured a person’s right eye in a...more
A series of recent rulings out of the Southern District of Texas in an inferior vena cava (IVC) filter case reflect how well-planned discovery can lead to a successful multipronged summary judgment motion and can effectively...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
The Court’s decision in New Riegel Local School District Board of Education, et al. v. The Buehrer Group Architecture & Engineering, Inc., et al. interprets Ohio’s Statute of Repose, which generally requires certain...more
Florida’s Statute of Limitations and Statute of Repose for construction and design defect claims are each contained in § 95.11(3)(c), Florida Statutes, which provides, in relevant part: We are frequently retained by...more
Our readers may recall that Public Act No. 15-28 was signed by the Governor back in 2015, subjecting the State of Connecticut and its political subdivisions to a statute of limitations for asserting actions and claims arising...more
Massachusetts Federal Court Holds Proof of Testing of Proposed Alternative Design Not Required in Design Defect Claim, Evidence Plaintiff Ignored Defendant’s Warnings Did Not Establish He Was Sole Proximate Cause of Injury on...more
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court Holds Failure-to-Warn Claim Against Drug Manufacturer Not Preempted Because There Was No “Clear Evidence” FDA Would Not Have Approved Plaintiffs’ Suggested Warning; Also Holds...more