Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 319: Spotlight on Torts (Part 3 – Strict and Vicarious Liability)
Jury Selection Strategy in Product Liability Litigation – IMS Insights Podcast Episode 64
Insurance for the Cannabis Industry: Risks & Challenges
Safety-ism & Jury Trials – IMS Insights Podcast Episode 61
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 131: Listen and Learn -- Strict Products Liability
Court: Superior Court of Pennsylvania - In this asbestos appeal, appellant Sandra Pendergrass — the administratrix of the estate of decedent, Vernetta Merie Coe — appealed the Court of Common Pleas of Erie County Civil...more
On Feb. 11, 2025, the Missouri Court of Appeals for the Eastern District in Durnell v. Monsanto Co., upheld a jury verdict awarding $1.25 million in compensatory damages to plaintiff John Durnell from defendant Monsanto Co....more
The Tennessee Supreme Court recently issued an important decision making clear that in a breach of contract dispute, the aggrieved party may recover more in damages than the parties’ contract permits, such as punitive,...more
Foley Hoag LLP publishes this quarterly Update primarily concerning developments in product liability and related law from federal and state courts applicable to Massachusetts, but also featuring selected developments for New...more
In Safeco Insurance Company of Indiana as Subrogee of Ramona Smith v. Blue Sky Innovation Group, Inc., et al, No. 22A-CT-1924, 2023 Ind. App. LEXIS 157, the Court of Appeals of Indiana (Appellate Court) reversed a trial court...more
Key Takeaway: In Superior Oil Company, Inc. v. Labno-Fritchley, 207 N.E.3d 456 (Ind. Ct. App. 2023), the Indiana Court of Appeals reversed a trial court’s denial of summary judgment in a product liability case. The court...more
MASSACHUSETTS - Massachusetts Federal Court Holds State Law Claims Alleging Misleading “Rapid Release” Labeling Of OTC Acetaminophen Tablets Preempted By Federal Food, Drug, And Cosmetic Act, As Tablets’ Dissolution Rate...more
Murphy v. Columbus McKinnon Corp., 2022 WI 109 (Dec. 28, 2022), gave the Wisconsin Supreme Court its first opportunity to interpret Wis. Stat. § 895.047, part of the Wisconsin Legislature’s 2011 product liability statute....more
Does Arkansas law recognize a post-sale duty to warn? No. It has long been the conventional wisdom that Arkansas law does not recognize a post-sale duty to warn in the products liability context. However, this understanding...more
When are punitive damages awarded? Under Arkansas law, a statute affixes the standard for awarding punitive damages, and the key element is a showing of express or implied malice. Under this rule, punitive damages are...more
The United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit published two opinions last month in companion class actions alleging defects with off-road vehicles. With its decisions, the court held that purchaser plaintiffs must...more
In Griffin v. Ste. Michelle Wine Estates Ltd., No. 47703, 2021 Ida. LEXIS 127, the Supreme Court of Idaho considered whether an Italian wine bottle manufacturer’s contacts with Idaho were sufficient under the Due Process...more
Pennsylvania recognizes the malfunction theory in product liability cases. This theory allows a plaintiff to circumstantially prove that a product is defective by showing evidence of a malfunction and eliminating abnormal use...more
It has been almost seven years since Tincher v. Omega Flex Inc. was decided by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. The Tincher court left much unanswered but called on Pennsylvania’s lower courts, the legal academy and the bar to...more
Strict products liability cases have been the subject of much fluctuation in the Pennsylvania courts over the last few years. Utilizing hope created by the courts in recent strict liability cases, defendants have tried to...more
Whether Amazon can be held strictly liable for products sold by third parties through its website is a question courts often face. In Loomis v. Amazon.com, LLC, No. 297995, 2021 Cal. App. LEXIS 347 (Apr. 26, 2021), the Court...more
In a negligence and failure-to-warn case brought against a product distributor, the plaintiff was relying on their expert witness as the sole means to prove that the product at issue came from the defendant. However, the...more
The statute of limitations on asbestos claims was recently reevaluated by the Minnesota Supreme Court. In Palmer v. Walker Jamal Company, the court reinforces that the clock begins when the plaintiff learns they have an...more