Three Pelvic Mesh Cases Moved Out of Phila. Court
Three plaintiffs suing Boston Scientific in Philadelphia over allegedly defective pelvic mesh have agreed to litigate their cases elsewhere in light of the latest jurisdictional pronouncement from the U.S. Supreme Court.
July 24, 2017 at 03:12 PM
12 minute read
Three plaintiffs suing Boston Scientific in Philadelphia over allegedly defective pelvic mesh have agreed to litigate their cases elsewhere in light of the latest jurisdictional pronouncement from the U.S. Supreme Court.
Last month, Boston Scientific had asked the court to remove any cases pending against it in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas, citing the Supreme Court's recent game-changing decisions in Bristol-Myers Squibb v. Superior Court of California and BNSF Railway v. Tyrrell. But, according to a lead attorney in the litigation, the parties have agreed to litigate the cases in either Massachusetts, where Boston Scientific has its principal place of business, or Delaware.
“We agreed with Boston Scientific to go forward and litigate the case in a different court,” Kline & Specter attorney Shanin Specter said.
This content has been archived.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
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All
Ozempic Defendants Seek to Shave 'Tacked On' Claims From MDL Complaint
3 minute read
Lawsuit Against Major Food Brands Could Be Sign of Emerging Litigation Over Processed Foods
3 minute read
Plaintiff Argues Jury's $22M Punitive Damages Finding Undermines J&J's Talc Trial Win
4 minute read
Products Liability: The Absence of Other Similar Claims—a Defense or a Misleading Effort to Sway a Jury?
Trending Stories
- 1Ex-Kline & Specter Associate Drops Lawsuit Against the Firm
- 2Am Law 100 Lateral Partner Hiring Rose in 2024: Report
- 3The Importance of Federal Rule of Evidence 502 and Its Impact on Privilege
- 4What’s at Stake in Supreme Court Case Over Religious Charter School?
- 5People in the News—Jan. 30, 2025—Rubin Glickman, Goldberg Segalla
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
