Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
In pharmaceutical and medical device litigation, the failure-to-warn claim continues to be among the most common causes of action. With respect to pharmaceutical products, the relative ease of asserting this claim stands in stark contrast to the difficulty of proving either a manufacturing or design defect. With respect to medical devices, the failure-to-warn claim remains prevalent despite the preemption afforded by Riegel v. Medtronic, 552 U.S. 312 (2008), particularly when the claim is premised on or combined with allegations involving the actions or statements of sales representatives. While not conceptually complex, failure-to-warn claims involving pharmaceutical and medical devices raise specific issues that can be challenging. One of the most critical issues relates to causation and its intersection with the learned intermediary doctrine. This article examines some of the key factors involved in proving causation in a failure-to-warn case and discusses recent case law in this area.
Background
In a typical product liability action (i.e., not a failure-to-warn), the element of causation is fairly straightforward. While terminology may vary, the basic question is: Did the pharmaceutical product or medical device cause the alleged injury or outcome at issue? This question is also present in failure-to-warn claims, though it is only half of the causation issue. The more complex causation question, and the subject of this article, is whether the alleged failure-to-warn, in contrast to the underlying drug or device, caused the plaintiff's injury or outcome. This question requires different proof.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Defining commercial real estate asset class is essentially a property explaining how it identifies — not necessarily what its original intention was or what others think it ought to be. This article discusses, from a general issue-spot and contextual analysis perspective, how lawyers ought to think about specialized leasing formats and the regulatory backdrops that may inform what the documentation needs to contain for compliance purposes.
As courts and discovery experts debate whether hyperlinked content should be treated the same as traditional attachments, legal practitioners are grappling with the technical and legal complexities of collecting, analyzing and reviewing these documents in real-world cases.
How to Convey Your Merits In a Way That Earns Trust, Clients and Distinctions Just as no two individuals have the exact same face, no two lawyers practice in their respective fields or serve clients in the exact same way. Think of this as a "Unique Value Proposition." Internal consideration about what you uniquely bring to your clients, colleagues, firm and industry can provide untold benefits for your law practice.
The ever-evolving digital marketing landscape, coupled with the industry-wide adoption of programmatic advertising, poses a significant threat to the effectiveness and integrity of digital advertising campaigns. This article explores various risks to digital advertising from pixel stuffing and ad stacking to domain spoofing and bots. It will also explore what should be done to ensure ad fraud protection and improve effectiveness.
This article offers practical insights and best practices to navigate the path from roadmap to rainmaking, ensuring your business development efforts are not just sporadic bursts of activity, but an integrated part of your daily success.