2,673 results found

Not every litigation presents the potential for an international mass tort. A drug or medical device company may have a problem with a particular manufacturing lot that can be isolated to a particular market.

On August 28, 2013, California’s Office of Administrative Law approved the Department of Toxic Substances Control’s landmark Safer Consumer Products Regulations.

In the past week, the FDA granted an EUA for the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine for use in children 5–11 years of age.

PCA was a supplier of peanut ingredients to international food and beverage companies, grossing approximately $30 million per year.

Recent food recalls involved undeclared ingredients, potential microbial contamination, and misbranding, among others.

Federal authorities have brought felony charges against former Peanut Corporation of America officials for their role with the fatal 2009 Salmonella outbreak that sickened over 700 and killed 9.

On Friday, July 29, the President signed into law a bill amending the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946, to insert a provision requiring disclosure of bioengineered foods.

It’s been a very good few weeks in the California appellate courts for asbestos defendants and perhaps the beginning of a broader trend towards leveling the playing field in the unrelenting asbestos litigation that continues to overwhelm California courts.

On December 3, 2009 Unilever U.S. Inc. conducted a nationwide voluntary recall of all canned Slim-Fast ready-to-drink products due to the possibility of contamination by a microorganism.

This week, we proudly present Sean Suber, who is a rising partner and long-time member of Winston's class action group.

A federal court in Wisconsin recently denied a haircare product dealer's motion for summary judgment on its Wisconsin Fair Dealership Law (WFDL) and breach of contract claims...

The United States District Court for the District of New Jersey's dismissal of several claims in Cohen v. Subaru Corporation exemplifies the utility of the economic loss rule and puffery arguments...

Just over a year ago, I authored a Product Liability Advocate blog entry and a Law360 article explaining appropriate methods for asserting objections under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 34, as amended on December 1, 2015

A recent New York federal court opinion illustrates the difficulty in establishing predominance where the primary injury alleged is overpayment for a defective product based on misrepresentation or concealment of the defect

On September 24, 2015, the Kentucky Supreme Court vacated a $2.5 million punitive damage verdict in an automotive product liability case, Nissan Motors v. Maddox.

State court litigants have witnessed their share of discovery abuses, where opposing parties indiscriminately (and sometimes improperly) serve subpoenas on federal agencies in the hopes of finding information, or just causing trouble.

Recent court decisions demonstrate how the reasonable consumer standard can defeat omission-based mislabeling claims at early litigation stages, while new developments in AI liability and regulatory enforcement reshape the landscape for product manufacturers and technology companies. From chatbot liability to PFAS regulations and Supreme Court preemption rulings, these cases offer critical insights for managing emerging risks in consumer protection, environmental compliance, and mass tort litigation.

The United States Supreme Court has decided to wade into a battle between POM Wonderful LLC and Coca-Cola Co. over whether Coke’s labeling of its Minute Maid pomegranate-blueberry juice blend violates the Lanham Act’s prohibition against false advertising.