MEDICAL DEVICE, MASS TORT AND PHARMACEUTICAL LITIGATION
For virtually a decade, O’Brien & Ryan, LLP served as liaison counsel between Pennsylvania plastic and reconstructive surgeons in the national silicone breast implant litigation and the courts. We were one of the most active firms in the Pennsylvania consolidated breast implant litigation, working for the defense of plastic surgeons involved in those mass tort lawsuits. We represented healthcare provider defendants in over two hundred cases. Of those cases, we successfully tried to verdict two breast implant cases, including the first in the state.
Additionally, attorneys of the firm have served as counsel for physicians in the pedicle screw litigation and pharmaceutical litigation cases including Fen-Phen, Rezulin, Baycol, Celexa and Vioxx. In these capacities, we have accumulated experience not only in medical device and pharmaceutical litigation, but in the particulars of mass tort litigation. Our firm has worked with the courts to develop systems for becoming proficient in case management and discovery including obtaining, organizing and utilizing massive numbers of manufacturer documents and manufacturer employee depositions produced through the course of consolidated and multi-district litigation, in both hard copy and electronic form.
Contact:
Marshall L. Schwartz
(610) 834-6294
(610) 834-1749 Fax
Click to Email
O'Brien & Ryan News
No Results Found
The page you requested could not be found. Try refining your search, or use the navigation above to locate the post.
District Court Considers Whether Expert Testimony in Med Mal Action Should Be Precluded on Basis of Federal Rule
United States District Court Judge William H. Yohn, Jr. recently had the opportunity to consider whether expert testimony in a medical malpractice action should be precluded on the basis of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 702 and Daubert v. Merrell Dow...
PA Superior Court finds Communication Between Attorney and Expert Witness is Not Discoverable Unless it Forms Basis of Expert’s Opinion
In Barrick v. Holy Spirit Hospital, Sodexho Management, Inc., et al., Carl Barrick was injured on the property of Defendant, Holy Spirit Hospital, when a chair he was sitting on in the hospital cafeteria collapsed on March 29, 2006. Barrick filed suit against...
Appellate Division of New Jersey Superior Court Reexamines Entire Controversy Doctrine in Legal Malpractice Case
In Sklodowsky v. Lushis, the Appellate Division of the Superior Court of New Jersey recently had the opportunity to reexamine the application of the entire controversy doctrine to legal malpractice actions. John F. Lushis, Jr., Esquire represented Paul G....
Superior Court Grants Petition for En Banc Re-Argument in Attorney Work-Product Privilege Matter
In a three-judge panel’s decision filed on September 16, 2010, the Superior Court in Barrick v. Holy Spirit Hospital of the Sisters of Christian Charity, et al. affirmed the trial court’s order of October 16, 2009, which granted the discovery and production of...
Montgomery County Judge Finds No Conflict of Interest Regarding Defense of an Insured Between Insurance Company and its Hired Attorney
In the court’s opinion of August 6, 2010, Judge Kent H. Albright refused to recognize a conflict of interest existing between Defendant-insurance company and its appointed attorney when Defendant invoked a reservation-of-rights clause to potentially limit the coverage...
No Results Found
The page you requested could not be found. Try refining your search, or use the navigation above to locate the post.
Join Our Newsletter
Join our quarterly newsletter list for legal updates and firm news. Just enter your email below.