WTK Connect
This blog provides updates and important insights about products liability, commercial, and consumer litigation. It aims to educate our audience on the developments in these areas as well as to provide the audience with unique perspectives from seasoned defense attorneys. ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
- California Court Rules that Jury Can Consider Action or Inaction by the FDA to Show Whether a Product is Safe or Unsafe
Feb 1, 2007
In O’Neill v. Novartis Consumer Health, Inc., decided February 27, 2007, the Second District Court of Appeal in California affirmed a defense verdict on behalf of the manufacturer of a nasal decongestant containing the ingredient phenylpropanolamine, commonly known as “PPA.”
Continue reading... - Attorneys’ Fees for Lemon Law Plaintiffs Limited After 998 Offer
Jan 1, 2007 | Topic: Warranty
In Duale v.Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC (Feb. 15, 2007), the California Third District Court of Appeal extended to cases brought under the Song Beverly Consumer Warranty Act the rule that a party cannot recover fees and costs where the party does not obtain a more favorable verdict than the offer that was made under the statutory offer to compromise under California Code of Civil Procedure § 998.
Continue reading... - Court Holds that Federal Law Preempts State Law Drug Labeling Claims
Jan 1, 2007
In the Bextra/Celebrex multidistrict litigation, pending in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, the trial judge has ruled that plaintiffs’ claims that defendant Pfizer failed to warn about the cardiovascular risks of Celebrex were preempted by the FDA’s authority to determine prescription drug labels.
Continue reading... - Michigan’s Virtual Immunity Statute for Drug Manufacturers Being Attacked by Lawmakers
Jan 1, 2007
A tort reform effort closely related to preemption is the concept of virtual immunity. This concept was first introduced in 1995 when the Michigan legislature introduced Senate Bill 344.
Continue reading... - Statute of Limitation Bars Smoker’s Economic Injury Claims
Jan 1, 2007 | Topic: Product Liability
In Grisham v. Philip Morris U.S.A., Inc., decided February 15, 2007, the California Supreme Court:
Continue reading... - U.S. Supreme Court Rejects Punitive Damages Award but Leaves Open Question of Whether Award was Unconstitutionally “Grossly Excessive”
Jan 1, 2007 | Topics: Business Litigation, Class Actions, Product Liability, Warranty
In Phillip Morris USA v. Williams, No. 05-1256 (U.S. Feb. 20, 2007), the United States Supreme Court vacated a $79.5 million punitive damage award assessed against Phillip Morris and held that the U.S. Constitution's Due Process Clause does not permit a jury to base a punitive damages award upon its desire to punish the cigarette manufacturer for harming persons who were not parties to the action.
Continue reading...