Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Medical device products liability litigation and medical malpractice litigation have intersected for as long as physicians have been prescribing and implanting medical devices, but that overlap continues to increase and become even more intricate as medical devices become more sophisticated and more widely utilized by physicians and the public, and as plaintiffs increasingly seek to keep their cases in state court by including local diversity-destroying defendants in suits.
In order to avoid unfavorable precedent on federal preemption of state law claims based upon FDA-approved Class III medical devices, and to nullify the impact of the learned intermediary defense by having both manufacturer and intermediary present in the case, plaintiffs increasingly seek to join both medical provider and manufacturer in one suit. Such suits will contain both product liability claims against the medical device manufacturer and medical malpractice claims against diversity-destroying physicians and hospitals. As a result, physicians and device manufacturers, more frequently than ever, are finding themselves as uncomfortable and unwilling bedfellows in litigation involving a prescription medical device. Because the interests of medical providers and manufacturers may often seem at odds, certain strategic considerations should govern both parties' planning for the litigation in order to avoid common pitfalls. Many of these same situations will also arise in cases in which both pharmaceutical manufacturers and medical providers are defendants.
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
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.
Active reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.