Drug & Medical Device
Our attorneys help pharmaceutical and medical device companies develop proactive and defensive positions for contending with an increasingly hostile legal environment brought on by increased regulation (particularly at the state level), unfavorable media exposure, and an uptick in liability cases. We have the resources, skills and experience necessary to prevail against drug-related claims, ranging from drug interactions, to the use or misuse of implanted/external medical devices, to off-label drug use, fraud, and FDA enforcement actions.
Lori E. Hammond
Susan J. Pope
Our attorneys have defended clients in connection with a variety of pharmaceutical and medical device products, including tetracycline (Lederle Laboratories, a division of American Cyanamide), Isavue (Squibb), Propulsid and Risperdal (Janssen Pharmaceutica), Floxin (McNeilab), heart catheters (Cordis Corp.), and mechanical and Silzone heart valves (St. Jude Medical).
Some of the cases we have managed over the years involve many of the most well-known products in the industry. The following examples are representative:
- Vioxx litigation
- PPA litigation
- Himerosol vaccine litigation
- Hormone replacement therapy litigation
- Rezulin litigation
- Diet drug litigation
- OxyContin litigation
- Orthopedic bone screw litigation
- Breast implant litigation
- Tylenol toxicity litigation
- Omniflox litigation
- DES litigation
- Shiley mechanical heart valve litigation
- Halcion litigation
Recognizing that our clients have business concerns that must be carefully factored into a successful legal strategy, we seek to learn all we can about their business and industry so that we can proactively identify all issues relevant to building a sound defense. At the earliest stages of our relationship with a client, we discuss litigation-minimization and cost-saving strategies such as alternative dispute resolution, early case analysis along with post-matter assessments to review successes, outcomes and lessons learned.
In many cases, our goal is to reverse the natural tendency of juries to put the real burden of proof on the defendant. We pride ourselves on bringing just the right expert to bear on a case’s key issues. We avoid the jack-of-all-trades professional witness. Instead, we maintain an extensive network of academics, clinicians and consultants, who can be matched to the specifics and geography of almost any case. We are consistently able to present to the jury an expert who can testify to his or her own experience and research in the relevant field.
Third Party Indemnity Claims: What Health Care Providers Need to Know
June 9, 2021 | Blogs
A recent case from the Indiana Court of Appeals highlights the parameters of Indiana’s Medical Mal...
U.S. Supreme Court Clarifies Personal Jurisdiction (Again)
March 30, 2021 | Publications
On March 25, the United States Supreme Court issued a decision in Ford Motor Co. v. Montana Eighth ...
Ford v. Montana, et al.: Specific Jurisdiction’s Next Mile Marker
October 6, 2020 | Publications
Just three years after deciding Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California, San Franci...
Webinar: Hemp FDA Regulatory Update
March 5, 2020 | Blogs
Overview Over the past year, hemp products have been springing up everywhere, both online and in r...
Reduce Your Liability Exposure and Costs Associated with Counterfeit and Knockoff Products
December 6, 2019 | Publications
If you are a manufacturer of branded products in high demand, or with a significant share of the mar...
Interstate Southwest Ltd. v. Avco Corporation, et al.
September 4, 2019 | Experience
When a number of small airplanes experienced engine crankshaft failure and crashed, engine maker Lyc...