We don't normally comment on verdicts, whether they favor
our side or the plaintiffs, because the bare fact of a verdict
doesn't give us much to analyze, and analysis is what this blog
is about. But we make an exception for the bizarre verdict handed
down last week in the first bellwether trial in the Bard
IVC Filter MDL.
We've seen the verdict form, and the plaintiffs submitted
four theories of liability to the jury: (1) strict liability design
defect; (2) strict liability failure to warn; (3) negligent design;
and (4) negligent failure to warn. According to the 360 story (unfortunately behind a paywall to
non-subscribers), the jury found that the defendant's IVC
filter wasn't defectively or negligently designed, and –
more importantly for our purposes – also held that there was
no strict liability warning defect (the case was under Georgia law,
and Georgia is a Restatement §402A state).
