West Virginia High Court Soundly Rejects Trial Bar’s Theory of Innovator Liability
On May 11, 2018, the West Virginia Supreme Court issued its long-awaited opinion in the case of McNair v. Johnson
Judicial Hellholes, Points of LightATRA Disappointed in Massachusetts Supreme Court’s Decision to Adopt Expansive Theory of “Innovator Liability”
On March 16, 2018, in a very disappointing decision, the Massachusetts Supreme Court adopted an expansive theory of civil liability
Judicial HellholesAlabama Lawmakers Slap Down State’s High Court on ‘Innovator Liability’
Among many others, the Wall Street Journal today heralded Alabama lawmakers’ slap-down earlier this week of recent state supreme court decisions that embraced the both ridiculous and dangerous legal theory peddled by the plaintiffs’ bar as “innovator liability”
Judicial Hellholes, Points of LightWall Street Journal Adds to Criticism of Alabama High Court’s ‘Innovator Liability’ Decision
Urging justices of Alabama’s Supreme Court to reconsider their January decision that absurdly held a brand-name drug maker liable for the allegedly negative side effects of a generic drug made by a competitor, the Wall Street Journal today adds to the criticism of Wyeth v. Weeks
Judicial HellholesFirst Outrageous State Supreme Court Ruling of 2013
It only took eleven days for a state supreme court to issue the first outrageous liability-expanding ruling of 2013. The ruling abandons a core principle of law– that manufacturers are liable only for injuries caused by their own products, not the products of others — and replaces it with, what is known in strict legal terms as, the “someone has to pay” approach.
Judicial Hellholes