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.
Committee Proposes Amendments to New Jersey Rules
The Civil Practice Rules Committee has made several recommendations for rule changes in New Jersey, which, if enacted, will affect the way lawsuits are handled in the state. Two proposed amendments in particular affect pleadings. The first proposal would benefit...
PA District Court: DPW Not Entitled to Full Amount of Lien Against Settlement Between Plaintiff and Philadelphia Housing Authority
In a memorandum opinion, the District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania held that the PA Department of Public Welfare ("DPW") was not entitled to the full amount of its lien against the settlement between a plaintiff and the Philadelphia Housing...
Superior Court Permits Contractor to Recover Post-Judgment Interest, Penalties, Attorney’s Fees and Expenses Under the Contractor and Subcontractor Payment Act
In Zimmerman v. Harrisburg Fudd I, L.P., 2009 Pa.Super. 202 (2009), the Pennsylvania Superior Court, in interpreting the Contractor and Subcontractor Payment Act (CASPA), permitted plaintiff (contractor) to recover post-judgment interest, penalties, attorney's...
Superior Court of New Jersey Affirms Decision Refusing to Allocate Proceeds Following Settlement after Non-Binding Arbitration Award
In a per curiam opinion, the Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division, affirmed the Law Division decision refusing to allocate proceeds following a settlement after a decision from a non-binding arbitration award which specifically allocated funds for medical...
Court Rejects Oral Modification to Written Agreement of Sale
In The Herrick Group & Associates, LLC v. K.J.T., L.P., Civil Action No. 07-CV-00628, U.S. Magistrate Judge Timothy R. Rice held that defendant (seller) did not prove the existence of an oral agreement to modify a written agreement of sale with plaintiff...
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.