The Lance opinion from the Pennsylvania Supreme Court breaks new, negative ground for defendants in drug cases. The Drug and Device blog as usual has a cogent post on the substantive change. The point for note today is that the key states and rulings can and sometimes do reshape tort litigation. #Drugs

Manufacturers increasingly need to think about "cradle to grave" expenses for products. A new example arises from drugs. Some people link drugs in water to various diseases. Therefore, some want better disposal of unused drugs – some of the facts are outlined in a brief article from Harvard online. Now, in a next step, a federal judge this week upheld a statute requiring drug manufacturers to bear the expense of "take back" programs intended to replace sloppy disposal. The op

The Drug and Device blog has an interesting post today on rulings on some unusual motions in limine in a drug case. The issues include a ruling on emails among members of an advisory panel, and whether they are admissions of the company. #Drugs

Thalidomide claims are back in the popular press after a newly announced settlement in a class action case pending in Australia; the case was filed by Australia’s Peter Gordon. The claims are significant for several reasons, including the fact that they involve new claims involving old drugs, and modern science can now further explain such injuries. The case apparently involves a new settlement for several million dollars, as described in an article from the Washington Post

The post is here. Well worth reading. #Drugs #Torts

For those interested in “mass tort” issues, well worth reading is today’s National Law Journal article regarding the recent wave of manufacturing defect product liability claims arising from drugs manufactured in China. The interesting points discussed include whether or how federal preemption principles will apply, and some aspects of claiming against Chinese entities. Not mentioned in the article are other interesting issues. For example, down the line, these suits could pr