JPML Maintains Narrow Focus of Mirena MDL

The orders from the March JPML panel hearing have been posted, and the JPML issued an order denying a motion by a plaintiff to centralize her case in the Mirena IUD device litigation MDL proceeding in the SDNY.  In its order, the JPML indicated that centralization into the pending MDL was denied because the potential


Damages Under The WPLA

The WPLA is broad in its provisions for recovery with some specific limitations. In general, an individual recovering under the WPLA can recover whatever damages they suffered. The Supreme Court discussed damages under the WPLA in Washington stating, “such damages include “any damages recognized by the courts of this state”. Wash. Water Power Co. v.


Understanding Defective Products in the WPLA

Definition of “Defect” It is clear that the Washington Product Liability Act (WPLA) protects people from defective products, but what exactly is a defective product? The WPLA avoids the term “defect.” Instead, the statute imposes liability for harm proximately caused by a product that is “not reasonably safe” in its construction, its design, or its


Bank Regulators’ new Strategy is Turning Directors into Managers

A recent Wall Street Journal report highlights a dramatic increase in personal communication requirements between bank directors, and the Federal Reserve as well as the Office of the Comptroller of Currency (OCC). Shifting away from ‘light-touch’ oversight, these regulators have changed their approach, meeting with boards of directors of the banks it supervises as often


Will Sprint Settlement finally Exorcize Ghosts of the Nextel Merger?

The fallout from one of the messiest mergers in American history appears to have entered its final stage on Monday, March 30th, when Sprint agreed to pay investors $131 million in a settlement dating back to the beleaguered 2005 Nextel acquisition. Lauded at the time as the creation of a telecom dynasty, technological incompatibility led


Landmark Verdict in Talc Related Asbestos Case Upheld

The $1.6M verdict in Kaenzig v. Charles B. Chrystal Co. involved a rarely reported on case of mesolthelioma caused by asbestos in cosmetic-grade talc. Typical asbestos cases involve industrial disease aspects. In fact, plaintiff’s counsel in Kaenzig wasn’t aware of any other talc-related verdicts. It’s believed that this case is the first of its kind