This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.
Subscribe to the Daily Journal for access to Daily Appellate Reports, Verdicts, Judicial Profiles and more...

Corporate

Apr. 29, 2008

For Some, Pre-Emption Looks Like Tort Reform

"There's no question what the end goal is for those who would shut the courtroom doors on our clients," said Lori E. Andrus, a San Francisco plaintiffs' attorney in litigation against a birth control patch.

By Rebecca Beyer
Daily Journal Staff Writer
This article appears on Page 1

      SAN FRANCISCO - Just two days after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that federal law pre-empts certain lawsuits involving medical devices, Johnson & Johnson used the same legal reasoning to try to fend off claims involving its Ortho Evra birth control patch.
      The argument - that federal law pre-empts stat...

To continue reading, please subscribe.
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!

Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)

Already a subscriber?

Enewsletter Sign-up