News & Analysis as of

Supreme Court of the United States › Design Defects

The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary... more +
The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary with only a limited number of cases granted review each term.  The Court is comprised of one chief justice and eight associate justices, who are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate to hold lifetime positions. less -
Snell & Wilmer

The Washington Supreme Court Renders a Significant Decision on Application of the Spearin Doctrine for Washington Projects

Snell & Wilmer on

In September 2021, the Washington Supreme Court issued its decision in Lake Hills Investments, LLC v. Rushforth Construction Co., Inc., 198 Wash.2d 209 (2021). This case is significant because it establishes a comparative...more

Bracewell LLP

The New Rules: Liability Limitations for Construction Design Defects in Texas

Bracewell LLP on

Through Senate Bill 219, now codified in Chapter 59 of the Texas Business & Commerce Code, the Texas legislature has reallocated the risks for construction design defect liability in Texas by joining a majority of...more

Butler Snow LLP

Supreme Court’s Grant of Certiorari Could Signal Change in Scope of Review for Remand Orders to State Courts

Butler Snow LLP on

The removal of a state court action to federal court is often conceptualized in the context of 28 U.S.C. § 1441, where, but for the plaintiff’s choice of venue, the matter could have been filed in federal court pursuant to...more

Spilman Thomas & Battle, PLLC

Product Lines - Toxic Torts and Products Liability Insights: Issue 1, 2020

Spilman Thomas & Battle, PLLC on

Welcome to our first Product Lines issue of 2020. Product Lines is our quarterly e-newsletter that focuses on toxic torts and product liability issues. For this edition, we are reporting on several important and timely...more

Foley Hoag LLP

Product Liability Update: August 2017

Foley Hoag LLP on

United States Supreme Court Holds Due Process Forbids Exercising Specific Jurisdiction Over Nonresident Plaintiffs’ Claims Against Nonresident Defendant Where Claims Did Not Arise From Defendant’s Contacts with Forum,...more

Pierce Atwood LLP

Justice Thomas’ Concurring Opinion in Microsoft Corp. v. Baker: A Useful Reminder

Pierce Atwood LLP on

On June 12th, the Supreme Court issued its unsurprising decision in Microsoft Corp. v. Baker, addressing a relatively recent twist concerning the appealability of orders denying class certification. The case resulted in...more

Franczek P.C.

A Review of the Supreme Court’s 2016-2017 Term

Franczek P.C. on

This year’s Supreme Court term may be more memorable for the intrigue and political drama taking place outside the Court than the import of the decisions the Court issued. On April 10, 2017, Judge Neil Gorsuch of the Tenth...more

Moore & Van Allen PLLC

SCOTUS Squashes Class Action Plaintiff Attempt to Obtain Review of Class Certification

Moore & Van Allen PLLC on

The reality of class action litigation is that what is supposed to be the court’s preliminary decision of whether to certify a case as a class action is often the end of the litigation. In many cases, plaintiffs will not...more

Robinson+Cole Massachusetts Appellate Blog

Supreme Court Closes The Door On A Tactic Used By Plaintiffs To Appeal Denials of Class Certification

Robinson+Cole Massachusetts Appellate Blog on

The Supreme Court recently decided a case involving an Xbox 360, although the issue before them had nothing in particular to do with the video game system itself. It got me wondering, however, how many justices would you...more

Kilpatrick

Supreme Court Rejects Creative Dismissal Strategy To Engineer Appellate Review Of Order Denying Class Certification

Kilpatrick on

Takeaway: The United States Supreme Court has rejected a tactic used by the plaintiffs’ bar to obtain appellate court review of an order denying class certification despite a settlement of the named plaintiffs’ claims....more

Carlton Fields

Game Over – SCOTUS Holds a Voluntary Dismissal With Prejudice Is Not a Viable Means to Appeal a Denial of Class Certification

Carlton Fields on

A group of plaintiffs hoped to hit the reset button on the Ninth Circuit’s denial of their Rule 23(f) petition to appeal from an order striking class allegations in their case against Microsoft, the maker of the popular Xbox...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP - Class Dismissed

Supreme Court Slams the Back Door Around Rule 23(f) in Microsoft v. Baker

Morrison & Foerster LLP - Class Dismissed on

Introduction. On June 12, 2017, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Microsoft Corp. v. Baker et al., a closely watched case in the class action world, and one on which we previously reported here. Baker presented the...more

Morgan Lewis

Supreme Court: Dismissal Tactic to Appeal Class Certification Denial Is Invalid

Morgan Lewis on

In a much-anticipated decision, the US Supreme Court held in an 8-0 vote that plaintiffs cannot confer upon themselves a right to appeal class action denials simply by dismissing actions following the denial of class...more

Robinson+Cole Class Actions Insider

Supreme Court Closes The Door On A Tactic Used By Plaintiffs To Appeal Denials of Class Certification

Robinson+Cole Class Actions Insider on

The Supreme Court recently decided a case involving an Xbox 360, although the issue before them had nothing in particular to do with the video game system itself. It got me wondering, however, how many justices would you...more

McGuireWoods LLP

Supreme Court Says No to Appellate Gamesmanship

McGuireWoods LLP on

Washington, DC-based litigator James Freije brings us an analysis of the Supreme Court’s latest class certification decision. Resolving a current split amongst multiple federal circuits, the United States Supreme Court...more

Fenwick & West LLP

Supreme Court Rejects Plaintiffs' Tactic for Appealing Class Certification Denials

Fenwick & West LLP on

The U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous 8-0 opinion in Microsoft Corp. v. Baker, reversing the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and holding that federal courts lack jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 to hear the...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

U.S. Supreme Court Rules That Plaintiffs’ Voluntary Dismissal Does Not Transform A Decision Denying Class Certification Into An...

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

Seyfarth Synopsis: In Microsoft Corp. v. Baker, No. 15-457 (U.S. June 12, 2017), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on a procedural issue that is of importance in any class action in terms of when and in what circumstances a...more

Ballard Spahr LLP

Third Circuit Clarifies Article III Standing for Absent Class Members, Impact of Comcast

Ballard Spahr LLP on

In a case of first impression in the Third Circuit, the Court of Appeals held that unnamed, putative class members are not required to establish standing under Article III of the U.S. Constitution. Rather, the Court held that...more

Foley Hoag LLP

Product Liability Update - July 2013

Foley Hoag LLP on

Included in this Issue: ..United States Supreme Court Reverses First Circuit and Holds Federal Food Drug & Cosmetic Act Preempts Design Defect Claims against Generic Pharmaceutical Manufacturers ..United States...more

BakerHostetler

Sixth Circuit Reaffirms Certification of Defective Washing Machine Class on Remand From Supreme Court

BakerHostetler on

In a closely watched decision after remand by the Supreme Court, on July 18, 2013, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld for a second time the class certification order in In re Whirlpool Front-Loading Washer Prods. Liab....more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

A Short-Lived Victory for Generic Drug Manufacturers?

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP on

On June 24, 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its decision in Mutual Pharmaceutical Co. Inc. v. Bartlett, 570 U.S. ____ (2013), finding that design-defect claims against generic drug companies are pre-empted where...more

Cozen O'Connor

Pre-Emption of State-Law Design-Defect Claim Against Generic Drug Company

Cozen O'Connor on

On June 24, 2013, in a 5-4 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court in Mutual Pharmaceutical Co., Inc. v. Bartlett held that state-law design-defect claims based on the inadequacy of a generic drug’s labeled warnings are pre-empted...more

Baker Donelson

U.S. Supreme Court Bartlett Decision in Favor of Generic Drug Manufacturers

Baker Donelson on

In a 5-4 decision, the United States Supreme Court held that state law design defect claims against manufacturers of generic pharmaceuticals are preempted by federal law when the claim hinges on the adequacy of the drug's...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP

Mutual v. Bartlett Further Shields Generic Drug Manufacturers from Liability

Morrison & Foerster LLP on

Yesterday, the Supreme Court issued its ruling in the much-anticipated Mutual Pharms. Co. v. Bartlett, No. 12-142 (on appeal from the First Circuit Bartlett v. Mutual Pharms. Co., 678 F.3d 30 (1st Cir. 2012)). As we...more

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

"Supreme Court’s Bartlett Decision Reaffirms Broad Scope of Generic Drug Preemption"

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP on

In a significant victory for generic drug companies, the Supreme Court today issued its decision in Mutual Pharmaceutical Co. v. Bartlett, reversing the decision of the First Circuit, which had affirmed a multimillion dollar...more

29 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2
Next »

"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:
Sign up Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide