Legal Update
29 November 2010
|
Mayer Brown Legal Update
The New York Court of Appeals—the state’s highest court—has held, by a 4-3 vote, that a New York statute that tolls the statute of limitations for claims alleging personal injuries caused by the “latent” effects of exposure to a product or other substance may apply even if the effects manifested themselves only “a few hours” after exposure. The court further held that the limitations period commences when the “relevant technical, scientific or medical community” generally accepts a “‘probable causal relationship between the substance and plaintiff’s injury.’” Giordano v. Market Am., Inc., 2010 WL 4642451 (N.Y. Nov. 18, 2010).
|
Legal Update
12 November 2010
|
Mayer Brown Legal Update
The Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA), 21 U.S.C. 301 et seq., sets out a complex regulatory framework for the labeling and approval of drugs. A name-brand manufacturer seeking to market a new drug must submit an application to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) that contains, among other things, proposed labeling for the drug.
|
|
|
Mayer Brown Newsletter
A large corporation is served with a complaint accusing it of participating in a price-fixing conspiracy. Multiple discovery requests follow seeking electronically stored information (ESI). In-house counsel speaks with the company’s IT department to estimate the scale of the review and is disturbed by the sheer number of files to be reviewed. How can a meaningful review be accomplished in a reasonable time frame in a cost-effective way?
|
Legal Update
25 January 2010
|
Mayer Brown Legal Update
The US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has held that a consumer’s state law “failure to warn” claims against a generic-drug manufacturer are not impliedly preempted by federal law. The Fifth Circuit’s decision in Demahy v. Actavis, Inc., follows on the heels of the Eighth Circuit’s decision last month in Mensing v. Wyeth, Inc., reaching the same conclusion. (For more information about Mensing, see Mayer Brown’s Client Alert “Eighth Circuit Holds ‘Failure To Warn’ Claims Against Generic Manufacturers Not Preempted by Federal Law.”)
|
|
|
The German Federal Supreme Court (Bundesgerichtshof, BGH) recently issued a ruling which attracted quite some attention in the German business community. It relates to the product safety obligations of manufacturers under German tort law. The judgment is of significant practical importance for manufacturers of potentially dangerous products. It provides further clarification whether a manufacturer is obligated to replace, to refit and/or to repair dangerous products free of charge under the German law of tort. Whereas the Court does not completely rule out such an obligation, it is unlikely that such obligation arises in practice.
|
Legal Update
31 August 2009
|
Mayer Brown Legal Update
Scenario: A series of privileged communications between in-house counsel and the board of directors was unintentionally produced to the opposing side during the pre-deposition discovery period in a federal action. During the deposition of one of the board members, the opposing side submits the set of privileged documents as an exhibit. There is no agreement or court order on file in the case dealing with the inadvertent production of privileged documents.
|
News Release
4 August 2009
|
Mayer Brown, a leading global law firm, announced today that 178 of its lawyers are listed in the 2010 edition of “Best Lawyers in America.”
|
Legal Update
30 June 2009
|
Mayer Brown Legal Update
A company is sued by a class of investors. The investors issue a discovery request for a large number of data files that are only tangentially related to their claim.
|
News Release
12 June 2009
|
Mayer Brown LLP, a leading global law firm, announced today that 124 of its attorneys are ranked in the 2009 edition of Chambers USA: America’s Leading Lawyers for Business, including 32 who achieved top-band ranking or higher in 26 national and/or state categories.
|
|
|
Interview with Michael Olsen discusses the firm's Mass Torts & Product Liability practice.
|
|
|
Mayer Brown Newsletter
A multinational corporation is a defendant in a products liability action in a US federal court. During discovery, the plaintiffs request production of relevant emails from employees of an overseas affiliate of the defendant who are stationed in the Netherlands, France and Germany.
|
|
|
Mayer Brown Legal Update
The US Supreme Court’s opinion in Ashcroft v. Iqbal, No. 07-1015 (May 18, 2009), significantly increases the factual detail required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a) in order to state a claim. Iqbal makes clear that the Court’s 2007 decision in Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2009), tightened federal pleading standards considerably and that it requires a plaintiff to affirmatively plead specific facts that plausibly establish the defendant’s liability in order to survive a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).
|