Topic: Product Liability

JD Supra Corporate Brief: Social Media, Virtual Currencies, Patent Trolls, Generic Drugs

On this day in 1974, the Department of Justice filed its final antitrust suit against the AT&T Corporation, leading to the breakup of AT&T and its Bell System. Have a social media policy? You’ll want to add these items… (JD Supra Perspectives) Sure, Bitcoins and other virtual currencies present tantalizing investment opportunities, but look before… Read more »

FDA’s Proposed Rule on Generic Drug Labeling Could Sow Confusion and Chaos (and Lawsuits)

The FDA wants to give generic drug makers the same labeling authority as their branded peers. Attorneys Erin Bosman, James Huston, and Julie Park of Morrison & Foerster explain: [T]he U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) published a long-awaited proposed rule … in an effort to ‘create parity’ between brand-name and generic manufacturers for their… Read more »

JD Supra Corporate Brief: Trade Secrets, 337 Investigations, FMLA Requests, Pay Ratio

Yes, the JD Supra Corporate Brief via email sounds like a great idea. Where do I sign up? Trade secrets lawsuits can mean big money – even when they’re settled out of court… (Orrick) Hazardous products happen. The important thing is to be prepared before they do… (Perkins Coie) The ITC wants to make resolving… Read more »

California Proposes Major Overhaul of Consumer Product Safety Rules

On July 27, 2012, the California Department of Toxic Substances Control proposed sweeping new rules for the regulation of chemicals in consumer products in the state. The rules, known as the “Safer Consumer Products” regulations, will impose significant new burdens on companies that sell products in the Golden State, writes Amy Westervelt in Forbes: “The… Read more »

California Supreme Court Rules Against Expansion of Asbestos Liability in O’Neil v. Crane

On January 12, 2012, the California Supreme Court ruled in O’Neil v. Crane that a manufacturer may not be held liable for harm caused by another manufacturer’s product: “Recognizing plaintiffs’ claims would represent an unprecedented expansion of strict products liability. We decline to do so… The broad rule plaintiffs urge would not further the purposes of… Read more »