We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 1-10 of 362

Suit seeking regulation of anti-bacterial soap ingredients dismissed
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • February 3 2011

A federal court in New York has dismissed claims filed by the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) against the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), seeking to force the agency to regulate two anti-bacterial soap ingredients that NRDC alleges pose health risks


Eighth Circuit rules adulterated drug claims not preempted by federal law
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • February 3 2011

The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals has reinstated claims for economic injury brought against the maker of a hypertension medication, finding that allegations of adulteration and failure to comply with federal regulations were not impliedly preempted by the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act


Removal deadline fractures Fourth Circuit
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • February 17 2011

"What later-served defendants are actually losing under the Fourth Circuit approach is 'an opportunity to persuade earlier-served defendants to join a notice of removal."


Federal Circuit establishes attorney-fee standard in vaccine cases
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • February 17 2011

The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals has determined that calculating the "reasonable hourly rate" for attorneys handling claims under the federal vaccine compensation program does not require the courts to accept an enhanced rate as prima facie evidence of the "going rate" for Vaccine Act attorneys


Babysitter, infant-seat retailer and manufacturer sued in child’s death
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • February 17 2011

The administrator of the estate of a deceased infant has filed a lawsuit against the maker and seller of a purportedly defective infant seat, claiming that it caused the child's death while she was in the care of a babysitter, who was also named as a defendant


$1 million in costs and fees assessed as sanction for spoliation
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • February 17 2011

A federal magistrate judge in Maryland has determined that the plaintiffs in a case involving alleged patent and copyright violations incurred $1.05 million in reasonable costs and attorney’s fees for discovery “that would not have been undertaken but for Defendants’ spoliation, as well as the briefings and hearings regarding Plaintiff’s Motion for Sanctions.”


Illinois high court rules computer maker cannot compel arbitration
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • February 17 2011

The Supreme Court of Illinois has determined that an arbitration agreement that designated an arbitral forum which no longer accepts consumer arbitrations is not valid


South Carolina House lawmakers approve lawsuit abuse reform bill
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • February 17 2011

South Carolina's House of Representatives has passed a tort reform bill (H. 3375) intended to protect businesses from purported unfair lawsuit abuse


Court denies class certification in suit against children’s clothing maker
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • February 17 2011

A federal court in California has denied the plaintiffs' motion for class certification in litigation alleging that companies making and selling clothing for infants and children knew that the ink used on new tagless labels could cause adverse skin reactions but failed to inform the public of that risk


Seventh Circuit stops repetitive class actions over Sears steel drum dryers
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • November 11 2010

The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals has granted a Sears, Roebuck & Co. request to enjoin the filing of class actions involving its dryers with stainless steel drums and raising the same consumer fraud claims alleged in a putative class action that the Seventh Circuit refused to certify because individual issues predominated over common ones