Source: https://www.cozen.com/practices/litigation/products-liability
Timestamp: 2019-04-20 19:09:07+00:00

Document:
Products manufacturers know that even the most vigilant, safety-conscious companies must be prepared to respond to serious products liability claims. Compared to other torts, the evidentiary burden for plaintiffs is relatively low and the exposure for defendants can be extraordinarily high.
Cozen O’Connor has been defending Fortune 500 companies in significant products liability matters for more than three decades. The firm represents global designers, manufacturers and distributors of consumer safety products; food, beverage and herbal supplements; medical devices; pharmaceuticals; aviation and transportation; oil and gas; industrial and other types of products.
Many firms litigate, but few actually try products cases. Cozen O’Connor attorneys are trial lawyers, first and foremost. Indeed, more members of our team have first-chaired product liability trials than at any comparably sized firm. Our lawyers take cases to verdict—and win.
We defend single action matters, class actions, mass torts and multidistrict litigation. We also respond to congressional, regulatory and criminal investigations. Our products liability attorneys appear before state and federal courts, arbitration panels and federal agencies, including the Consumer Product Safety Commission and the Food and Drug Administration.
Cozen O’Connor serves as ongoing national counsel to competitive products manufacturers. Our attorneys build institutional and brand knowledge, create efficient protocols for fielding claims, minimize overall liability, conserve in-house resources and guide manufacturers through product recalls and withdrawals.
Our attorneys provide sophisticated compliance advice on federal and state regulatory requirements, conduct risk audits and review product labeling, advertising, marketing and manuals. As needed, we monitor the development of underlying liabilities and preemptively develop responses to threatened or filed claims.
Food Contamination & Recall. Our attorneys routinely handle high-stakes food products liability claims and provide food-industry crisis management services. We help clients respond decisively at the first sign of trouble and defend clients in major food recall cases.
Safety Products. Cozen O’Connor is a leading advocate for the smoke alarm industry, serving as the national coordinating counsel and national trial firm for an international alarm products manufacturer. Our attorneys have successfully tried numerous cases to verdict in state and federal courts throughout the United States, often achieving wins for the defense on all counts.
Aviation. Our firm is known for its successful representation of aviation clients in a range of matters, including products liability, wrongful death and survival actions, personal injury, warranty claims and product recalls, and property damage. Because aviation litigation frequently involves multiple filings in multiple jurisdictions, Cozen O’Connor has a strong network of aviation attorneys in offices across the country and around the world.
Medical and Life Sciences. Cozen O’Connor’s attorneys combine sophisticated products liability experience with deep knowledge of the health care sector and cutting-edge medical technology. We are positioned to defend developers, designers, suppliers, manufacturers, and users of medical and life sciences products, particularly against claims of personal injury or wrongful death.
Additional Focus Industries. Cozen O’Connor also has extensive experience serving clients with exposures in the areas of sports equipment, automotive and off-road vehicles, construction equipment and building products, toxic torts and chemicals, firearms, and manufacturing equipment.
Cozen O’Connor’s team includes more than forty lawyers who have distinguished themselves in the field of products liability. Our attorneys are named fellows of the American College of Trial Lawyers and the International Academy of Trial Lawyers, and are ranked by Chambers and Partners. In addition to being recognized by independent legal observers as among the nation’s “most influential” trial attorneys who are regularly involved in “significant verdicts,” our lawyers are also known for their intellectual gravitas. They serve on national boards and lecture frequently on products liability and tort defense.
While the design, manufacture, sale, and promotion of many products is now a global endeavor, the majority of U.S. products liability laws are determined by individual states and vary widely across the country. Top law firms, therefore, must be able to operate effectively on the international, national, and state level. Our attorneys have played lead roles in some of the most sprawling multi-jurisdictional products liability litigations to date, including in defense of asbestos, tobacco, and diet systems companies. With offices abroad and lawyers licensed across the United States, Cozen O’Connor has the capacity to respond to products liability matters wherever they arise.
John Sullivan, a member of the firm's Commercial Litigation Department, authored the blog, "The Canary in the Coal Mine Isn’t Looking So Good Anymore" for the Drug & Device Law blog.
John Sullivan, a member in the firm's Commercial Litigation Practice, authored, "MDL Court in the Testosterone Replacement Therapy Litigation Throws Out Another Large Jury Verdict," for the Drug & Device Law Blog.
John Sullivan, a member in the firm's Commercial Litigation Practice, authored, "Personal Jurisdiction through Alter Ego Fails in Illinois" for the Drug and Device Law Blog.
Amy Alderfer, a member of Cozen O'Connor's Commercial Litigation Department, published, "Glyphosate’s Prop 65 Listing May Affect Everyone in the Supply Chain," in the Daily Journal.
David Shimikin, a member of the firm's Commercial Litigation Department, published "California Consumers and Food Manufactures Await Key Government Rules on Food Labeling," in the California Minority Counsel Program Diversity Matters Newsletter.
Avin S. Singh discusses the growing issue for those in the chain of distribution of the contents of a product’s label and whether it provides for an adequate warning of the side effects associated with consumption of marijuana.
Amy Alderfer and Jillian Thornton Flax, both members of Cozen O'Connor's Products Liability practice, discuss a road map for a successful product inspection in Law360.
John Sullivan discusses the Louisiana Supreme Court case Hoffman v. 21st Century North Am. Ins. Co., in which the plaintiff attempted to expand the collateral source rule to allow recovery of medical costs that were never actually billed.
John Sullivan discusses In re Mentor Corp. ObTape Transobturator Sling Prods. Liability Litigation, in which the court relied solely on a review conducted by plaintiff’s experts of sample ObTape devices (other than the one implanted in plaintiff) when denying the manufacturer’s motion for summary judgment.
John Sullivan discusses Carlton v. Boston Scientific Corp., in which the court granted Boston Scientific summary judgment.
John Sullivan discusses Boston Scientific Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation and how the 510(k) clearance of a medical device is not only insufficient to support preemption, but it’s not probative enough to be discussed at trial.
John Sullivan discusses the recent Cymbalta litigation in which the plaintiffs tried and failed to create an MDL.
John Sullivan discusses Pacira Pharmaceuticals’ recent First Amendment challenge on their non-opioid pain drug, EXPAREL, in the wake of Amarin’s preliminary injunction win.
John Sullivan discusses Amarin’s successful motion for a preliminary injunction in its First Amendment challenge to the FDA’s regulation of off-label marketing and discusses what this means for the FDA.
Shelby Riney, of Cozen O'Connor's Commercial Litigation department, published, "Strategies for in-house counsel to maximize coordination of multidisciplinary products liability litigation."
John Sullivan discusses Becker v. Smith & Nephew, a hip implant case pending in federal court in New Jersey.
John Sullivan discusses the second Risperdal trial, Cirba v. Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., in which the trial judge denied the plaintiff’s post-trial motion for a new trial.
John Sullivan discusses the completed briefing on Amarin's motion for preliminary injunction and the courts preparation to hear oral arguments from the FDA and Amarin.
Leigh Ann Benson discusses the need for food and beverage manufacturers to be aware of FDA action, which typically reflects consumers’ interests, that has a direct relationship to class action litigation.
John Sullivan discusses the ongoing First Amendment case between Amarin Pharma, Inc. and the FDA.
John Sullivan discusses Otis-Wisher v. Medtronic Inc., in which the Second Circuit offered its thoughts on the viability of parallel violation claims based on allegedly misleading off-label promotion.
John Sullivan discusses Mayfield v. London Women's Care, PLLC, in which a patient, who had revision surgery and other complications, sued the out-of-state manufacturers and named her local doctor and his clinic as malpractice defendants.
John Sullivan discusses the ruling in Dwyer v. Boston Scientific Corp., in which a man died from head injuries suffered during a fall after the failure of his implanted defibrillator.
John Sullivan discusses City of Chicago v. Purdue Pharma L.P., which deals with an effort by the city of Chicago to recover payments it made to drug companies on opioid prescriptions for city employees (and retirees) covered by HMO, PPO and worker's compensation plans.
John Sullivan discusses Amarin Pharma, Inc. v. FDA, in which Amarin seeks a declaration that the FDA's off-label regulations, as applied by the FDA, violate the First Amendment and the Due Process clause of the Fifth Amendment.
John Sullivan discusses Levitt v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., in which the Vioxx MDL court denied Merck's motion for summary judgment, instead ordering that discovery be reopened.
John Sullivan discusses Cole v. Medtronic, Inc., in which the plaintiff asked the court to remand the case back to state court because a second defendant, a hospital, was a citizen of the forum state, thus triggering the forum-defendant rule and blocking removal.
John Sullivan discusses Whitener v. Pliva, in which the claim states that the manufacturer didn't warn about risks of the drug, in this instance, off-label risks.
John Sullivan discusses Yotam v. Takeda Pharmaceuticals North America, Inc. and the uneven ground of ex parte interviews of treating doctors, an area in which plaintiffs' counsel too often seem to be handed the higher ground.
John Sullivan discusses the latest decision in Zogenix, Inc. v. Baker, in which the Commonwealth of Massachusetts has tried to regulate Zohydro ER, an extended release hydrocodone drug product that was approved by the FDA in 2013.
John Sullivan discusses collateral litigation and companies who find themselves in difficult court battles to protect confidential, business-sensitive information from public disclosure.
John Sullivan discusses Lewis v. Johnson & Johnson, in which the defendant calmly and effectively pressed their legal and factual arguments, won a partial victory before trial, continued to press its position on the law and facts at trial until it won a direct verdict, and successfully had it all upheld on appeal.
John Sullivan discusses McDowell v. Eli Lilly, in which plaintiff motioned for reconsideration, only to have the judge state the product's label contained sufficient warning and upheld judgment for the defendant.
Shelby Riney, of the firm's Commercial Litigation Department, authored, "District Court Denies Takeda's Motion for a New Trial," for the ABA Section of Litigation, Products Liability, News & Developments.
Amy Alderfer, a member of Cozen O’Connor’s Commercial Litigation Department, authored an article titled “The Times, They Are a Changin’ – The Emergence of 3D Printing.” The article provides an overview of the potential impact 3D printing may have on products liability law as an increasing number of products are able to be manufactured at home. “While it’s too early to tell how these scenarios will play out, it is important to recognize the product liability issues that will arise as 3D printing becomes more widespread and continues to infiltrate the market,” advises Amy.
The Eighth Circuit recently upheld the removal to federal court of product liability claims filed by over 100 plaintiffs in state court in St. Louis. See Atwell v. Boston Scientific Corp., 2013 (8th Cir. Nov. 18, 2013). The decision illustrates how plaintiffs’ requests to coordinate multiple cases can sometimes sweep “mass tort” cases filed in state court right into federal court as a “mass action” under the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005. This is no small shift in a litigation, and so Atwell provides a helpful background on some of the characteristics of a plaintiff coordination proposal that can trigger such CAFA removal.
Does a company expose itself to liability in California when it boasts that its products are the “safest in the business?” The answer will depend on whether courts will consider that statement to be a misleading claim or mere advertising puffery.
The Preemptive Scope of the Vaccine Act: Must Unavoidable Damages be Determined on a Case-by-Case Basis? - Life Sciences Alert! - On January 11, 2011, the Superior Court of Pennsylvania decided Wright v. Aventis Pasteur, et al., 2001 Pa. Super. 9 (2011) in which it determined as a matter of first impression that the National Childhood Vaccine Act (Vaccine Act) does not preempt any design defect claim based on state law, but rather requires case-by-case inquiry to determine whether a particular vaccine’s side effects are unavoidable.
Adverse Incident Reports: How Many Is Too Many? - Life Sciences Alert - On January 10, 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court heard argument in the matter Siracusano v. Matrixx Initiatives, Inc., 585 F.3d 1167 (9th Cir. 2009), and suggested that some major changes may be in store for pharmaceutical companies which could forever alter how they handle adverse reports.
The Difficulty in Certifying a Class Action Against Drug Companies - Life Sciences Alert! - Three cases decided over the past few months demonstrate the difficulty with certifying class actions by third-party payors (TPPs) against drug companies.
2009 Property Insurance Directory - Global Insurance Group - We are pleased to enclose Cozen O'Connor's Global Insurance Group 2009 Property Insurance Directory, which identifies our principal property insurance lawyers in each of our offices with listings of specific areas of expertise those attorneys have in the property insurance area. I am sure you will agree that this is an impressive group of property lawyers, likely the largest in the U.S., with both breadth and depth of experience in all fields of interest in property claims.
On Jan. 30, 2009, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration announced that its criminal division and the U.S. Department of Justice were pursuing a criminal investigation of Peanut Corporation of America (PCA). This investigation comes on the heels of one of the largest food poisoning According to U.S. Center for Disease Control statistics, 654 people across 44 states have been infected with Salmonella Typhimurium from ingesting peanut-based products originating from PCA’s Blakely, Ga., facility.
Co., No. C 07-6038 PVT, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 88921 at * 4 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 20, 2008).
insurer’s denial of coverage for claims related to use of contaminated bread through application of Exclusion m, the impaired property exclusion. See Lavoi Corp. v. National Fire Ins. of Hartford, 666 S.E.2d 387, 395 (Ga. Ct.
A group of consumers sued a bottled water manufacturer because its water came from purified municipal sources and not the snow-topped mountains featured on its label. Another seeks damages because a guacamole dip doesn’t contain enough avocados. A third sues a satellite radio network for not providing entirely commercial-free programming.
Lettuce and spinach tainted with E. coli creates panic throughout the country. Raw onions contaminated with hepatitis kill four and sicken nearly 700. Salmonella-laden tomatoes make hundreds ill and raise fears of bioterrorism. While this may sound like something out of a bad horror movie, foodborne illness and the devastation it leaves behind – both in terms of human suffering and costs to our economy – should not be taken lightly.
Recipe for Disaster - BEST'S REVIEW - Propelled by globalization, outsourcing and offshoring by American companies, the global food network has morphed into a complex, complicated system - ripe for food contamination claims of epic proportions, with insurers bearing the ultimate financial burden.
stemming from illnesses and deaths nationwide.
The risks associated with getting safe food to our tables are increasing.
could have long-lasting, widespread and costly health consequences.
filed by the subcontractor’s employee. State Automobile Mut. Ins. Co. v. Habitat Constr. Co., __Ill.App.3d__, 875 N.E.2d 1159 (1st Dist. 2007).
impact of food contamination claims in our modern, industrialized society.
supply. In early 2007, the FDA promulgated guidelines pertaining to fresh cut produce.
beef have led to various recalls by manufacturers and others in the industry.
John Sullivan was quoted in Law360's recent article on the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's recent safety alert last week about the vulnerability to hacking of up to 750,000 implantable heart defibrillators.
Rich Fama discussed with Marijuana Ventures the rise of CBD products and the lack of clarity at the federal level on regulating CBD.
Jillian Thornton Flax, a member in Cozen O'Connor's Commercial Litigation Department, was quoted in Law360's recent article, "$120M State AG Deal With GM Preludes More State Actions."
Robert Bowman and Rachael Wallace comment on the recent request of an aircraft pilots association of the U.S. Supreme Court to reverse a decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit that allowed states to impose their own safety standards in place of federal law.
John Sullivan, a member of Cozen O'Connor's Commercial Litigation department, discusses this case in Law360.
Cozen O'Connor was once again recognized for our exceptional litigation skills and results; The Legal Intelligencer has named the firm the 2016 Litigation Department of the Year: General Litigation (Large Firms).
Jillian Thornton Flax, a member of Cozen O'Connor's Products Liability practice, discusses the new claims that GM is facing in Law360.
Amy Alderfer, a member of Cozen O'Connor's Products Liability practice, discusses if morcellator manufacturers will settle lawsuits related to devices after the recent Johnson & Johnson case in MDDI Online.
The Federal Railroad Administration's recent proposal requiring all trains to have a two-person operating crew has the rail industry up in arms over what it says is a sweeping, costly and redundant fail-safe that hasn't proven to enhance safety.
The rankings are based on partner headcount in the top 200 law firms in the United States. To be counted in the practice group, the partner has to spend at least 50 percent of their time on matters related to that practice.
Real-time analysis on preventing and defending product liability claims.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.