The U.S. Ninth Circuit Court recently revived a medical device lawsuit (Bennett v. C.R. Bard)1 centered on a fact issue regarding the plaintiff’s knowledge of a product defect as the cause of his condition. The case shines...more
The legal landscape surrounding Depo-Provera, a long-acting injectable birth control, has entered a pivotal phase. With the growing number of lawsuits alleging that the drug caused serious brain tumors known as meningiomas,...more
If you have questions about filing a Depo-Provera lawsuit, you are not alone. As awareness of the link between Depo-Provera and intracranial meningioma continues to grow, we are continuing to hear from more women and family...more
Jurisdiction: Calif. Super., Los Angeles Co. - Plaintiff Jose Estrada filed suit alleging exposure to asbestos from a variety of products, including automobile parts during his employment at a tire store. Mr. Estrada was...more
On Feb. 11, 2025, the Missouri Court of Appeals for the Eastern District in Durnell v. Monsanto Co., upheld a jury verdict awarding $1.25 million in compensatory damages to plaintiff John Durnell from defendant Monsanto Co....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
For decades, women have trusted Depo-Provera, a birth control injection manufactured by Pfizer, as a convenient and effective contraceptive option. However, recent research has uncovered alarming health risks associated with...more
The United States Supreme Court first recognized products liability, including strict liability, as part of the general maritime law in East River Steamship S.S. Corp. v. Transamerica Delaval, Inc., 476 U.S. 858 (1986). The...more
The number of cases involving so-called “nuclear verdicts” — that is, verdicts with awards of $10 million or more — have risen sharply, and many of those cases concern product liability claims. For large corporations, such...more
In Pelton v Maytag, 2024 ONSC 3016 (“Pelton”) the Ontario Superior Court of Justice (the “Court”) ruled that the defendant manufacturers were not liable for failing to warn consumers that the product could fail because of a...more
Medications containing Acetaminophen are one of the most commonly used pain relievers worldwide. The chemical compound is an active ingredient in over 600 medicines. For most people, Acetaminophen is benign and can be used to...more
New Jersey Supreme Court, June 30, 2022 - In this asbestos action, decedent Willis Edenfield (“Edenfield”) commenced a failure to warn product liability action against defendant Union Carbide. The Appellate Division...more
It is axiomatic that a plaintiff must offer evidentiary support for each element of her claim in order to survive summary judgment. And a ubiquitous feature of product liability actions is the use of expert witnesses by both...more
Around the country, creative plaintiffs' lawyers have been repackaging product liability claims as public nuisance claims to avoid dismissal. Plaintiffs have used this maneuver to attempt an end-run on important product...more
In the game of “20 Questions,” one player secretly chooses an object and the other players are allowed 20 questions to identify it. In that spirit, answering the following 20 questions may identify a defense strategy that...more
Massachusetts federal and state courts issued several important product liability decisions in 2021. Nutter’s Product Liability practice group reviewed these cases and report on their significant holdings as follows...more
Although “faulty” doesn’t necessarily mean “defective” or “dangerous,” product liability law does indeed hold manufacturers and others liable for producing dangerous products that cause injury. Product liability claims in...more
A plaintiff asserting a failure to warn product liability claim based in strict liability must show the failure to warn actually caused the plaintiff’s injuries. This is an easier task for plaintiffs in states that recognize...more
Last week we wrote about the status of Arkansas’ law recognizing a post-sale duty to warn, ultimately concluding that Arkansas Courts have not recognized the existence of any such duty. This week we will explain how, despite...more
Does Arkansas law recognize a post-sale duty to warn? In a nutshell, no. While Arkansas state courts have not expressly considered the issue, all legal authority indicates that the answer is indeed “no.” To support this...more
Litigation Update - On January 30, 2020, class action, consumer protection and pharmaceutical lawyers from around the country will be in federal court in Tampa, Florida to argue before a panel of federal judges whether...more
A New Jersey federal judge recently applied Tennessee and California law in dismissing a proposed class action concerning allegedly leaky water heater sensors/valves (valves) made by Honeywell International Inc. The decision...more