Bristol-Myers’ Supreme Court Victory Could Have Far-Reaching Ramifications In Liability Cases
The case centered around whether plaintiffs residing outside of the state who claim they were harmed by the company's blood thinner could join in a lawsuit brought by California residents. "It will extremely limit the notion that large companies can be sued by anyone, anywhere," said one lawyer.
The Associated Press:
High Court Sides With Drugmaker In Plavix Lawsuit
The Supreme Court says hundreds of out-state-residents can’t sue drugmaker Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. in California state court over adverse reactions to the blood thinner Plavix. The justices ruled 8-1 Monday that there was not a strong enough connection between the claims against the drugmaker and the company’s ties to the state. The ruling is a win for Bristol-Myers Squibb and other companies that want to avoid lawsuits in state courts seen as more favorable to plaintiffs. (6/19)
Supreme Court Ruling In Drug Case Could Have Big Implications For Product Liability
A Supreme Court decision Monday could make it harder for large groups of plaintiffs to sue corporations in state courts for damages caused by manufacturers' products. Bristol-Myers Squibb prevailed in its effort to get the Supreme Court to limit where patients can seek compensation for harm caused by drugs. But the ruling will echo beyond the pharmaceutical industry to potentially affect any liability case in which consumers allege harm caused by a deficient product, including automobiles, tobacco, food and other mass litigation like consumer claims of financial fraud by a company. It could also affect lawsuits against companies being accused of environmental wrongdoing. (Karlin-Smith, 6/19)