Appellants failed to meet the definition of PPH under the settlement agreement; appellants' argument that the settlement agreement's definition should be reformed because of advances in medical diagnostic technology failed because the Third Circuit and district court lacked the opportunity to develop and properly evaluate that claim. Order of district court granting Wyeth's motion to enjoin appellants from bringing suit in state court affirmed.
February 19, 2013 at 12:00 AM
1 minute read
TORTS
Products Liability • Class Action Suit • Class Settlement • Exception • SettlementAgreement
In re Diet Drugs Prod. Liab. Litig., PICS Case No. 13-0252 (3rd Cir. Jan. 28, 2013) Jordan, C.J. (20 pages).
Presented by BigVoodoo
The Legal Intelligencer honors lawyers leaving a mark on the legal community in Pennsylvania and Delaware.
This conference aims to help insurers and litigators better manage complex claims and litigation.
Recognizing innovation in the legal technology sector for working on precedent-setting, game-changing projects and initiatives.
McCarter & English, LLP is actively seeking an associate the to join its Environment & Energy Practice Group in Philadelphia, PA. Ca...
McCarter & English, LLP is actively seeking an associate the to join its Environment & Energy Practice Group in Newark, NJ. Candida...
McCarter & English, LLP is seeking litigation attorneys for our Newark, NJ offices. Candidates must have 3-6 years of law firm experien...
