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 13

Time-barred Vaccine Act claimant could be entitled to attorney’s fees
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • April 26 2012

A deeply divided Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, sitting en banc, has determined that a National Childhood Vaccine Injury Compensation Act (Vaccine Act) claimant, whose petition was filed beyond the applicable statute of limitations, may be able to recover attorney’s fees under a provision allowing an award when “the petition was brought in good faith and there was a reasonable basis for the claim for which the petition was brought.”


Federal Circuit ruling on tolling under vaccine injury compensation fund stands
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • April 26 2012

The U.S. Supreme Court has denied a request to review the Federal Circuit’s determination that the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Compensation Act’s statute of limitations cannot be tolled by the discovery rule.


Federal court allows product claims to proceed against maker of baby sling
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • February 9 2012

A federal court in Washington has denied the defendants’ motion for summary judgment in a product defect suit, finding that the case involved disputed facts as to when the plaintiffs knew or should have known through due diligence that the death of their 3-month-old daughter might have been caused by a baby sling; the court ruled that it would be up to the factfinder to determine if the three-year statute of limitations barred the suit.


Hong Kong manufacturer fails to stay coffee-maker defect proceedings
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • September 29 2011

A federal court in Ohio has refused to stay proceedings against the Hong Kong-based manufacturer of a coffee-maker that allegedly caused a house fire in 2009, ruling that the company’s filing of an appeal from the court’s denial in part of its motion to dismiss did not divest the court of jurisdiction and that the company failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances to warrant interlocutory appeal and thus warrant a permissive stay of the proceedings.


En banc federal circuit interprets Vaccine Act’s statute of limitations in MS case
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • August 25 2011

Affirming the dismissal of a federal vaccine injury compensation program claim filed by a physician who purportedly developed multiple sclerosis (MS) after receiving Hepatitis-B vaccinations, the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, sitting en banc, has revised its interpretation and application of the law’s statute of limitations in a divided ruling.


Federal court disallows third-party insurance claims for environmental costs; Iqbal and Twombly implicated
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • April 28 2011

A federal court in California has ruled that an insurance company cannot recover payments made to a policyholder for environmental response costs as a matter of federal law, except in certain limited circumstances.


Sanitizer manufacturers warned about product effectiveness claims
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • April 28 2011

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has issued warning letters to four companies that make sanitizing products, including first aid gels, mouth wash, antiseptic skin protectants, and hand cleaners and wipes, indicating that the companies' claims render their products "new drugs" under the Food, Drug, and Cosmetics Act, thus requiring that they be approved before marketing, and further are misbranded.


Proceedings against domestic aircraft manufacturers for crash in Cameroon dismissed
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • October 14 2010

A federal court in Illinois has dismissed, on inconvenient forum grounds, claims filed by the families of passengers and crew killed in a 2007 aircraft accident in Cameroon.


Claims against knife maker filed too late
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • September 16 2010

The First Circuit Court of Appeals has affirmed a district court ruling that overturned a verdict in a personal injury action against the company that made the industrial paper-cutting knife that allegedly caused the plaintiff's injury.


A judicially created “average law” may not be the answer
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • August 19 2010

The paper doesn't explain the practical realities of how, for example, one averages differing states' conceptions of reliance in consumer fraud cases or different statutes of limitation or different unjust enrichment laws or different scienter requirements.