An attorney for more than 1,200 women who say they were injured by the Mirena intrauterine device argued before a federal appeals court on Monday that their lawsuit should be revived based on Bayer’s own admissions that its device can perforate the uterus.
But the attorney for Bayer, which successfully argued for summary judgment last year after U.S. District Judge Cathy Seibel of the Southern District of New York disqualified all three of the plaintiffs’ causation experts, said the admissions, contained in internal emails, do not meet the burden of proof for causation.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
