Products Liability/Mass Torts Winner—Kline & Specter
Kline & Specter had several victories last year in two major products liability/mass tort litigations docketed in the Philadelphia courts.
June 20, 2018 at 03:55 PM
2 minute read
Kline & Specter had several victories last year in two major products liability/mass tort litigations docketed in the Philadelphia courts. These involved Risperdal, the antipsychotic drug found to be linked to gynecomastia, and vaginal mesh, a product that is surgically implanted to treat organ prolapse and urinary incontinence and that has been alleged to be defective, eroding and causing severe pain in some patients. In one vaginal mesh case, the firm won a $57.1 million verdict, including $50 million in punitive damages, against defendant Ethicon, a Johnson & Johnson subsidiary. The firm also won a $20 million verdict against Ethicon, which included $17.5 million in punitives. The firm also fought and won a battle to keep 120 vaginal mesh cases filed by out-of-state clients in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas, defeating Ethicon's bid for removal under the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark decision in Bristol-Myers Squibb v. Superior Court of California. In addition, Kline & Specter successfully argued to the state Superior Court to allow for punitive damages against Janssen Pharmaceuticals, the division of Johnson & Johnson that makes Risperdal. Following arguments last year, the court held in January of this year that, when it comes to the question of whether they should be allowed to seek punitive damages at trial, plaintiffs could seek to have the law of their home state apply to their case. Shanin Specter, Kline & Specter Shanin Specter What were some of the firm's most satisfying successes in mass torts and products liability litigation in 2017, and why? The U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Bristol-Myers Squibb v. Superior Court of California has been called a game-changer for mass tort litigation. How formidable an obstacle will this ruling be for plaintiffs going forward? A prospective client in crisis calls and asks why your team should be retained—what is your answer? What is the firm doing to ensure that future generations of litigators are ready to take the helm?
This content has been archived.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
© 2024 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 AllSixth Circuit: Consumer's FCRA Complaint Regarding Inaccurate Spousal Support Obligation Passes Muster
A Word on Hearsay: Using Prior Statements Under Pennsylvania and Federal Rules
7 minute readAfter the Decision in 'Ungarean,' Is the Battle of Insurance Coverage for COVID Losses in Pa. Over?
Trending Stories
- 1The Law Firm Disrupted: Playing the Talent Game to Win
- 2A&O Shearman Adopts 3-Level Lockstep Pay Model Amid Shift to All-Equity Partnership
- 3Preparing Your Law Firm for 2025: Smart Ways to Embrace AI & Other Technologies
- 4BD Settles Thousands of Bard Hernia Mesh Lawsuits
- 5A RICO Surge Is Underway: Here's How the Allstate Push Might Play Out
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