Court: Superior Court of California, County of Alameda - On June 15, 2023, plaintiffs Alvarino and Dianna J. DaSilva first filed an asbestos action in the Alameda County, Calif., Superior Court, alleging that Alvarino DaSilva...more
The U.S. Ninth Circuit Court recently revived a medical device lawsuit (Bennett v. C.R. Bard)1 centered on a fact issue regarding the plaintiff’s knowledge of a product defect as the cause of his condition. The case shines...more
Jurisdiction: Calif. Super., Los Angeles Co. - Plaintiff Jose Estrada filed suit alleging exposure to asbestos from a variety of products, including automobile parts during his employment at a tire store. Mr. Estrada was...more
The New Year rings in with a likely wave of new enforcement actions under California’s Proposition 65 targeting Bisphenol-S (BPS), a popular substitute chemical for Bisphenol-A (BPA) which itself has been targeted by...more
Life insurers operating in California can breathe a little easier this morning. Since 2021, life insurers have been facing a wave of class action lawsuits and potentially crushing liability based on alleged violations of...more
Federal preemption can be a very powerful defense. For example, claims concerning Class III medical devices requiring pre-market approval are generally preempted by the Medical Device Amendments of 1976, 21 U.S.C. § 360c, et...more
The California Attorney General’s Office has turned its focus to PFAS, filing litigation that is likely to be one of the larger of the hundreds of PFAS-related lawsuits currently pending throughout the country. On November...more
A California state appeals court affirmed a bong maker’s win in a suit alleging it violated California’s Proposition 65 (Prop. 65) by failing to warn consumers that its products expose them to marijuana smoke that could cause...more
Last week, we highlighted a wave of litigation targeting underwear manufacturers. This week, litigation activity is now focusing on outerwear. On April 25, 2022, the same firm behind several of the underwear complaints...more
Earlier this year, the California Court of Appeals in Mize v. Mentor Worldwide LLC, 51 Cal.App.5th 850 (2020), reversed a trial court’s dismissal of failure to warn and other claims against a medical device manufacturer,...more
Applying basic scientific principles to exclude an expert’s unfounded and unsupported opinions, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California has granted summary judgment to the maker of the antipsychotic...more