When a 380,000 lb. diesel-powered blasthole production drill used in mining operations tips over and kills the operator, civil litigation and strong regulatory responses are near certainties.  This is the factual background of Driscoll v. Standard Hardware and Atlas Copco Drilling Solutions v. United Taconite, decided this week by Judges Toussaint, Hudson, and Willis (retired appellate judge serving by appointment pursuant to Minn.  Const.  Art…. Continue reading →

We celebrate Canada Day (July 1) and our nation’s Independence Day under the ominous shadow of state government shutdown this year.   Courts will remain open.  Other state workers and many who depend on state services are not so lucky. Unrelated to the shutdown, as part of the ordinary course and upgrade/update of the system, the Minnesota Judicial system wants you to know: IMPORTANT NOTICE Appellate Courts will begin transmitting all not… Continue reading →

The interesting fact pattern that gives rise to the problem in this case is what are the duties of a generic drug manufacturer if, after a drug’s initial federal approval (and approval (and then mandated use) of a specific warning label), new information comes to light about potentially harmful side effects?  Can a claim be brought against the manufacturer under state law for failure to warn? Gloria Mensing took a medicine, MCP, a gene… Continue reading →

…s of the drug, an antibiotic. Levaquin included a warning but sometime after Schedin’s incident, the warning was changed and made more prominent (made into a “black box” warning in 2008).  Subsequent warning label changes would be a classic “subsequent remedial measure” inadmissible at trial if it were not for the fact that the label change was mandated by the FDA, U.S. District Court Judge John R. Tunheim has held. … Continue reading →

…. Court of Appeals Circuit Judge James B. Loken might answer the question, “Emphatically not.”  His colleague, U.S. Court of Appeals Circuit Judge Michael J. Melloy might answer otherwise?  The third member of the appellate panel, U.S. Court of Appeals Sr. Circuit Judge Myron H. Bright might tip the scale? The case arises in the context of the annexation of Elkhorn, Nebraska by Omaha which, apparently, has caused something of a local … Continue reading →

Nearly two years ago, Medtronic and its outside patent litigation counsel, McDermott Will & Emery, were slammed by U.S. District Court Judge Richard Matsch (D. Colo.) with a attorneys’ fees sanction exceeding $4 million (covered here). Recently, that decision was reversed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.  Interestingly, the appellate court placed emphasis in part on the inconsistency, on the one hand, of the trial … Continue reading →

Not that long ago, counsel for Medtronic stood before an Eighth Circuit appellate panel (Judges Loken, Melloy, Shepherd) to defend the judgment in its favor by U.S. District Court Judge Richard Kyle, Sr. (D. Minn.), which Minnesota Litigator covered here.  That was an appeal in the multi-district products liability cases against Medtronic. On May 12 in St. Paul, plaintiffs of a different sort have another go against Medtronic and an adverse judg… Continue reading →

[UPDATE :  This week the Minnesota Supreme Court denied the petition for review of the Murrin v. Mosher appellate court decision, a case orginally discussed below on Minnesota Litigator back in March, 2010.] Minnesota Litigator aspires to provide a one-stop source for news and developments in Minnesota state and federal courts, whether about particular cases, noteworthy events for bench & bar, or current issues likely to have an effect on th… Continue reading →

…ue is precluded.”  It might seem counter-intuitive that, when a judge has ruled against you, you need to ask the judge to change her mind and rule in your favor but that is the rule and the second request is your key to appellate review. … Continue reading →