Follow Us
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The big product-liability news at the Connecticut Supreme Court in 2016 was undoubtedly Izzarelli v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco, a decision that refined Connecticut's standards for design-defect product-liability claims. But the decision may turn out to be even more notable for what it portends.
The big product-liability news at the Connecticut Supreme Court in 2016 was undoubtedly Izzarelli v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco, 321 Conn. 172 (2016), a decision that refined Connecticut’s standards for design-defect product-liability claims. Izzarelli clarified a number of lingering ambiguities arising from the court’s last big design-defect case, the 1997 decision in Potter v. Chicago Pneumatic Tool, 241 Conn. 199. But as important as Izzarelli is in its own right, the decision may turn out to be even more notable for what it portends. In a concurrence, two justices in Izzarelli called for a fundamental reworking of the standards governing Connecticut design-defect cases. And a new case looming on the court’s docket — Bifolck v. Philip Morris — directly presents the question whether to adopt the Izzarelli concurrence’s approach.
*May exclude premium content
Defeating Certification of “No-Injury” Consumer Protection Class Actions
By Steven P. Benenson
In the past several years, plaintiffs’ firms have threatened or brought class actions against different companies under New Jersey’s Truth-in-Consumer Contract Warranty and Notice Act (TCCWNA). Here's what you need to know.
Maximizing Future Medical Damages in Paralysis Cases
By Mitch Warnock
When you take a catastrophic injury case involving paralysis, it is important to have a thorough understanding of the problems and pitfalls. In this article, the author explores, from personal experience, the different types of future expenses the client can expect to incur.
Genetic Labeling: Legal Uncertainty for Pharma Product Liability
By Shannon E. McClure and Whitney Mayer
The FDA’s recent approval of 23andMe’s direct-to-consumer genetic test to identify genes associated with 10 common diseases and disorders could result in a widespread expansion of patients armed with individualized health information. This expansion of genetic information in the hands of consumers potentially impacts regulatory and litigation issues for pharmaceutical companies.
By ljnstaff
Discussion of major rulings out of Texas and California.
Copyright © ALM Global, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
