To read more about the items below, click the link above for a PDF of the newsletter.
Tort claims seeking to hold oil and gas companies responsible for climate change must fail because plaintiffs cannot possibly show “proximate cause.” (City of Oakland v. BP p.l.c.)
The federal Clean Water Act does not reach discharges into groundwater; such discharges are already adequately regulated under a variety of federal and state laws. (County of Maui v. Hawaii Wildlife Fund)
Trial judges should exclude “expert” testimony that addresses only the aggregate effect of pesticides and fails to address which specific product(s) allegedly injured the plaintiff. (Walsh v. BASF Corp.)
The U.S. Supreme Court limits the right to remove cases from state to federal court, ruling that the Class Action Fairness Act does not allow removal by third-party counterclaim defendants. (Home Depot U.S.A., Inc. v. Jackson)
The U.S. Supreme Court holds that whether “clear evidence” exists that FDA considered and rejected a drug manufacturer’s request to alter its label to warn of specific risks is a question for the trial judge, not the jury. (Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. v. Albrecht)
Although the Clayton Act limits lawsuits to individuals who directly purchased products from a defendant alleged to have violated federal antitrust laws, the U.S. Supreme Court permits consumers to sue companies that played no role in setting a product’s price. (Apple, Inc. v. Pepper)
The U.S. Supreme Court adopts an expansive reading of the limitations period for False Claims Act lawsuits, holding that “relators” (private parties filing suit in the name of the United States) are permitted to sue up to ten years after the cause of action arises. (United States ex rel. Hunt v. Cochise Consultancy, Inc.)