Product Liability Update

Product Liability Update

April 1, 2014

Foley Hoag's Product Liability Update is a quarterly update concerning developments in product liability and related law of interest to product manufacturers and sellers. If you find this update useful, please encourage your colleagues and contacts to also register with us on our Web site. As always, you can access all of our publications at www.foleyhoag.com

Included in this Issue:

  • United States Supreme Court Holds Due Process Forbids California’s Exercise of General Jurisdiction Over German Manufacturer in Suit by Argentinian Plaintiffs Involving Argentinian Subsidiary Because Even if California Sales and Facilities of American Subsidiary Were Imputed to Manufacturer It Was Still Not “At Home” in California

  • United States Supreme Court Holds Class Action Fairness Act Does Not Allow Federal Court Removal of State Attorney General Suit Asserting Restitution Claim on Behalf of Numerous Unnamed Citizens Because Statute’s “Mass Action” Definition Requires Presence of 100 or More Actual Named Plaintiffs

  • First Circuit Holds Other Incidents of Escalator Entrapment Involving Defendant’s Shoe, and Defendant’s Re-Design of Shoe Following Foreign Regulatory Report on Incidents, Insufficient to Support Inference That Design Presented Greater Entrapment Risk than Other Shoes

  • Massachusetts Federal Court Holds Conjectural Threat of Future Injury in Event of Lightning Strike Insufficient to Confer Article III Standing, and No Recovery in Tort for Purely Economic Harm Absent Violation of Governmental Standards

  • Massachusetts Superior Court Holds Claims for Intentional and Negligent Misrepresentations or Omissions Regarding Drug’s Risks Need Not Identify Which of Multiple Defendants Made Which Misrepresentations or Manner in Which Patient or Her Physician Relied on Same

  • Massachusetts Federal Court Holds Statute of Limitations for Claims Against Entity in Bankruptcy Proceedings Tolled Only Until 30 Days After Confirmation of Reorganization Plan, Which Constituted Notice of Expiration of Automatic Stay Against Claims

Excerpt:

United States Supreme Court Holds Due Process Forbids California’s Exercise of General Jurisdiction Over German Manufacturer in Suit by Argentinian Plaintiffs Involving Argentinian Subsidiary Because Even if California Sales and Facilities of American Subsidiary Were Imputed to Manufacturer It Was Still Not “At Home” in California

In Daimler AG v. Bauman, et al., 134 S. Ct. 746 (Jan. 14, 2014), twenty-two Argentinian citizens sued a German car manufacturer in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, alleging defendant’s Argentinian subsidiary collaborated with state security forces during the country’s 1976-83 “Dirty War” to kidnap, torture and kill plaintiffs or relatives employed by the subsidiary. Plaintiffs asserted claims under the federal Alien Tort Statute and Torture Victim Protection Act, as well as California and Argentina common law, and sought to hold defendant vicariously liable for its subsidiary’s conduct.

Download the Foley Hoag April 2014 Product Liability Update (.pdf)