Mass Torts vs. Class Actions: A Tale of Two Strategies
Tips and Strategies for Successful Mass Tort Management
NGE On Demand: Insurance Issues in Bankruptcy with Jason Frye
IP|Trend: Discovering Source Code
When the COVID-19 lawsuits arrive in the U.S. courts – as they surely will – one major category will be cases following the asbestos national litigation model, a successful tort claim based on a claimaint’s alleged exposure...more
Companies facing mass tort and product liability claims ranging from asbestos to pharmaceuticals have undoubtedly been monitoring developments related to personal jurisdiction in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark...more
Following the Supreme Court’s landmark personal-jurisdiction decision in Bristol-Myers Squibb, federal district courts have continued to disagree about whether to apply the court’s holding to cases involving nationwide class...more
On June 19, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision that has the potential to reshape the way class actions are litigated in courts throughout the country. In Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California,...more
On March 6, the Missouri Supreme Court declined to review the intermediate appellate court’s decision in Fox v. Johnson & Johnson, which vacated a $72 million talc verdict awarded in St. Louis City Court. ...more
In June 2017, we wrote about the Supreme Court’s decision in Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court, 137 S. Ct. 1773 (2017) and how it would likely affect attempts by plaintiffs to pursue multi-state or nationwide class...more
Following recent precedent from the U.S. Supreme Court, the Illinois Supreme Court limited the circumstances in which a non-resident corporate defendant can be subject to suit in Illinois on claims with no connection to the...more
In its two recent 8–1 decisions, BNSF Railway Co. v. Tyrrell and Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California, the U.S. Supreme Court doubled down on its 2014 landmark personal jurisdiction ruling in Daimler AG v....more
Last month, the U.S. Supreme Court held that due process restricts a state court’s power to exercise “general” (i.e. all-purpose) jurisdiction to hear any and all claims against a defendant. General jurisdiction exists only...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: In Bristol-Myers Squibb Company v. Superior Court of California, et al., No. 16-466 (U.S. June 19, 2017), the U.S. Supreme Court articulated the narrow circumstances under which specific jurisdiction will...more
Nation’s highest court reverses California Supreme Court decision that extended the jurisdictional reach of state courts. In the 2016 case Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court (Anderson), the California Supreme Court...more
In a decisive 8-1 vote, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected a theory of specific jurisdiction that would allow a state court to assert specific jurisdiction over the claims of out-of-state plaintiffs whose claims were not...more
The U.S. Supreme Court recently tightened the reins when it comes to state courts’ exercise of case-based, specific personal jurisdiction over out-of-state companies. In Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of...more
This past Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court drastically changed the landscape of mass tort litigation. In Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California, the Court found that the State of California did not have...more
On June 19, 2017, the Supreme Court reinforced its narrow application of specific jurisdiction in mass tort proceedings in an 8-1 decision in Bristol-Myers Squibb Company v. Superior Court of California. In the class action...more
The U.S. Supreme Court reversed a closely-watched California Supreme Court ruling on Monday, finding that California state courts did not have specific jurisdiction to hear the claims of nonresident plaintiffs in a class...more
On June 19, the United States Supreme reaffirmed some basic principles of personal jurisdiction in Bristol-Meyers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California, 528 U.S. __ (2017). In a bloody-good 8-1 decision (with only...more
On June 19th, the Supreme Court issued a decision that could have important consequences for multi-state class actions. In Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court, the Court addressed the question whether a California...more
As anticipated, the just-released U.S. Supreme Court decision in Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court, No. 16-466, 2017 WL 2621322 (U.S. June 19, 2017), establishes an important limitation in the law of personal...more
On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court placed new limits on where lawsuits may be filed. In Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California, No. 16–466 (June 19, 2017), the justices, in an eight – one decision,...more
The Supreme Court addressed the scope of so-called “specific personal jurisdiction,” on Monday, as applied to major corporations, strengthening defendants’ potential arguments at the motion to dismiss stage. Bristol-Myers...more
On June 19, 2017, in Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California, the Supreme Court held, by a vote of 8 to 1, that California courts lack specific jurisdiction to entertain a nonresident’s claims that are...more
Following on the heels of BNSF Railway Company v. Tyrrell last month, the Supreme Court, by an 8-1 margin in Bristol-Myers Squibb v. Superior Court of California, has reaffirmed the jurisdictional holding of its 2014 Daimler...more
In a decision handed down Tuesday, February 28, the Missouri Supreme Court limited circumstances in which out-of-state corporate defendants will be subject to personal jurisdiction, rejecting two novel theories of specific...more