News & Analysis as of

Preemption Jury Trial

Payne & Fears

Key California Employment Law Cases: January 2020

Payne & Fears on

Ridgeway v. Wal-Mart, Inc., 946 F.3d 1066 (9th Cir. 2020) - The employer must pay minimum wages to employees for time spent on mandated layovers where the employer’s policy imposes constraints on employees’ movements...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Third Circuit Clarifies Next Steps in Fosamax Decision

On remand from the U.S. Supreme Court, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has in turn remanded the case to the district court to determine whether state law claims are preempted by federal law in the 500+...more

Spilman Thomas & Battle, PLLC

Product Lines - Toxic Torts and Products Liability Insights: Issue 3, 2019

Welcome to the third 2019 issue of Product Lines – our quarterly e-newsletter that focuses on toxic torts and products liability issues.... In This Edition: - Vitamin E Found in Cannabis-Containing Vape Products Linked...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Worth the Wait? Some Semi-Mature Thoughts on Albrecht

For some long-awaited events, a little time and distance can add a measure of clarity. Not always – many still are processing the Game of Thrones finale, with no end in sight. But over the past few weeks pharmaceutical...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP - Class Dismissed

Supreme Court Decides Prescription Drug Preemption Case in Favor of Drug Manufacturer

The United States Supreme Court finally clarified its 11-year-old “clear evidence” standard for pharmaceutical preemption.  In its much-anticipated opinion delivered by Justice Breyer, the Court unanimously reversed the Third...more

Morgan Lewis

Supreme Court Clarifies Judges Must Decide Impossibility Pre-Emption

Morgan Lewis on

The US Supreme Court held on May 20 that a judge, not a jury, must decide the question of whether federal law prohibited drug manufacturers from adding warnings to the drug label that would satisfy state law. To succeed on a...more

Hogan Lovells

U.S. Supreme Court rules judges must decide whether preemption applies, and clarifies when it does

Hogan Lovells on

Opinion highlights importance of a "clear" record at FDA - On 20 May the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled that federal preemption questions arising under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) are for a...more

McDermott Will & Emery

US Supreme Court Refines Impossibility Preemption Doctrine, Changes Litigation Dynamics

McDermott Will & Emery on

Following confusion from a 2009 decision, the US Supreme Court on May 20, 2019, decided a significant impossibility preemption case. This new decision will change the dynamics of litigation involving the impossibility...more

Jones Day

Supreme Court Sides with Merck in Unanimous Fosamax® Product-Liability Decision

Jones Day on

The Situation: Name-brand pharmaceutical manufacturers are often sued with claims that they should have strengthened the warnings on their labels, even where (as here) the Food and Drug Administration ("FDA") would not allow...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. v. Albrecht (2019)

Last week, in Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. v. Albrecht, the Supreme Court continued its explication of the balance between state law tort liability that can be imposed on drug makers and the extent to which this liability can be...more

Husch Blackwell LLP

Supreme Court Reiterates That Federal Law Preemption For Product Warnings Is A Matter For Judge, Not Jury

Husch Blackwell LLP on

On Monday, the United States Supreme Court found that a judge is better suited than a jury to decide if consumers’ tort claims are preempted by federal regulations. In the case, Merck Sharp & Dome, Corp. v. Albreecht, the...more

Troutman Pepper

Supreme Court Clarifies Scope of Implied Preemption in Prescription Drug Cases

Troutman Pepper on

On May 20, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its latest opinion on preemption in cases involving prescription medications, Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. v. Albrecht, No. 17-290 (U.S. May 20, 2019). ...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Judges to Decide Whether Manufacturers Meet “Clear Evidence” Impossibility Preemption Standard, Supreme Court Says

The U.S. Supreme Court issued its potentially most significant preemption decision in several years, Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. v. Albright, 587 U.S. ____ (2019), reversing what some had dubbed the worst drug and device...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Supreme Court Decides Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. v. Albrecht

On May 20, 2019, the Supreme Court of the United States decided Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. v. Albrecht, No. 17-290, holding that the judge, not the jury, must decide whether state-law failure-to-warn claims are preempted by...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Labeling Preemption Questions are for the Court, not the Jury, Holds U.S. Supreme Court in Fosamax Decision That Clarifies the...

A judge, and not the jury, is the better-positioned and appropriate decisionmaker to determine whether a failure-to-warn claim is federally preempted, the U.S. Supreme Court held on Monday, May 20, 2019. The Court also...more

Proskauer - Advertising Law

No Use Crying Over Spilled (Almond) Milk: Ninth Circuit Upholds Dismissal of Almond Milk Labeling Suit

On December 20, 2018, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the dismissal without leave to amend of a putative class action complaint against Blue Diamond Growers, which alleged that the term “almond milk” on Blue Diamond’s beverages...more

Butler Snow LLP

Pro Te: Solutio Vol. 11 No. 1 – A Reflection on the First Ten Years

Butler Snow LLP on

It’s hard to believe a decade has passed since we delivered our first edition of Pro Te: Solutio to your door. Those years have brought enormous changes in the world and in our industry. Innovation has driven everything we...more

Allen Matkins

Directors Fail To Escape Liability For Approving Dividend

Allen Matkins on

I last wrote about FDIC v. Ching, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 92687 (E.D. Cal. July 8, 2014) in July of 2014. That post concerned Judge Kimberly J. Mueller's ruling that California's statutory restrictions on distributions to...more

K&L Gates LLP

Kindred Nursing Centers L.P. v. Clark: The Supreme Court Reemphasizes That Arbitration Agreements Must Be Placed on Equal Footing...

K&L Gates LLP on

On May 15, 2017, the Supreme Court of the United States reaffirmed that the Federal Arbitration Act (the “FAA”) preempts state laws placing agreements to arbitrate on weaker footing than other types of contracts. In Kindred...more

Mintz - Arbitration, Mediation, ADR...

State Supreme Courts Continue to Try to Chip Away at FAA Preemption; The United States Supreme Court Is Not Amused

The Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”), 9 U.S.C. § 1, et seq., does not contain an express preemption provision, nor was it intended to be the exclusive codified arbitration law in all circumstances. However, the United States...more

Carlton Fields

Supreme Court Holds Federal Arbitration Act Preemption Applies To Contract Formation Rules

Carlton Fields on

Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected the Kentucky Supreme Court’s use of a clear-statement rule to require that powers of attorney specifically authorize a representative to enter into an arbitration agreement, finding...more

Littler

Supreme Court Emphatically Defends Arbitration Agreements from State Interference

Littler on

On May 15, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court reiterated the principle that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) requires states to treat arbitration agreements just as they treat other types of contracts. In Kindred Nursing Centers...more

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP

No Pre-Emption Exemption - The U.S. Supreme Court and the Kentucky Supreme Court are not kindred spirits with respect to state law...

The U.S. Supreme Court and the Kentucky Supreme Court are not kindred spirits with respect to state law restrictions on arbitration agreements....more

Benesch

Supreme Court Reinforces the Primacy of the Federal Arbitration Act, Even Over a “Divine God-Given Right”

Benesch on

Kentucky law speaks of the right to jury trial in theological terms. The Kentucky Constitution provides that “[t]he ancient mode of trial by jury shall be held sacred, and the right thereof remain inviolate, subject to such...more

Cozen O'Connor

POM Wonderful LLC v. Coca Cola Co.: legal battle nearly over, but industry litigation landscape forever changed…

Cozen O'Connor on

On March 18, 2016, Pom Wonderful LLC made closing arguments in its trial against Coca-Cola for the alleged misleading marketing of a pomegranate-blueberry juice which contained only trace amounts of either pomegranate or...more

25 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"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