Latest News
Posted in Products Liability on April 6, 2011
“While an agency could base a decision to pre-empt on its cost-effectiveness judgment, we are satisfied that the rulemaking record at issue here discloses no such pre-emptive intent.”
Posted in Products Liability on February 22, 2011
“[T]he evidence also supports a different interpretation; that [defendant] did not share its knowledge of the dangers of asbestos with its customers or with individuals who would, predictably, be exposed to dust from its products, and that it instead sought to downplay the risk.”
Posted in Products Liability on November 22, 2010
“If knowledge of the hazardous nature of the product were a prerequisite for the test to apply, then no product would ever fail to meet the safety expectations of the reasonable consumer.”
Posted in Products Liability on September 26, 2010
“Given [plaintiff’s] showing, the burden of proof shifted to [the manufacturer] to prove that its design was not defective”
Posted in Products Liability on March 15, 2010
“The Supreme Court reiterated that state law products liability remedies “further consumer protection by motivating manufacturers to produce safe and effective drugs and to give adequate warnings.” (Wyeth v. Levine, 129 S.Ct. 1187, 1194 (2009))”
Posted in Employment Law,Products Liability,Toxic Substances on December 8, 2009
“Imposing a duty toward nonemployee persons saddles the defendant employer with a burden of uncertain but potentially very large scope.”
Posted in Products Liability on November 19, 2009
“A manufacturer is liable in strict liability for the dangerous components of its products, and for dangerous products with which its product will necessarily be used. That was appellants’ evidence… We can see no relevance to the fact that the injury was caused by the operation of its product in conjunction with a replacement part which is no different than the original.”
Posted in Products Liability on August 10, 2009
“[S]ervice on the California representative of a foreign parent …[is] valid as to the foreign parent-under California law. ”
Posted in Products Liability on December 18, 2008
“[W]e see [no] indication that the FDA itself has ever taken the position that its labeling requirements for generics would invoke federal preemption principles so as to exempt manufacturers of generic drugs from tort liability.”
Posted in Products Liability on November 19, 2008
This week top executives of the ‘Big Three’ automakers are on Capitol Hill asking Congress for $25 billion in government bailout money. Even before the recent economic crisis things were not going well for American automotive giants. Sales had been sliding along with their market share, and the downturn of the last few months has…