Since Fridley-based Medtronic recalled its defective Sprint Fidelis defibrillator leads in October, the company has been bracing for a wave of litigation. It already lost one battle in that arena when a Toronto court ruled that patients in Canada who had the leads installed could join a class action against the company.
Now, though no similar class has been established in the United States, numerous law firms are aggressively pursuing potential plaintiffs in lawsuits against Medtronic. Several have set up websites wooing potential clients, and Houston, Tex.-based firm Pulaski & Middleman has even brought its campaign into Medtronic’s back yard.
Pulaski has begun running TV commercials locally that make seductive statements (although not promises, of course) about what patients with Sprint Fidelis leads stand to gain if they have the firm in their corner. The commercials are loud and persistent, flashing the firm’s phone number repeatedly on the screen and all but screaming the phrase free money at viewers. Attorneys who prefer to practice in quiet dignity are excused for cringing when these ads come on.
Medtronic argued last month before the U.S. Supreme Court that it should be shielded against state product liability lawsuits, arguing that since the FDA approved its medical devices, that should pre-empt patients from bringing suit. Experts believe the decision could be crucial for patients-rights cases in the future.
Showing posts with label class actions. Show all posts
Showing posts with label class actions. Show all posts
Wednesday, January 9, 2008
Tuesday, September 4, 2007
Richard Hagstrom lightens Microsoft's wallet

-- $75 million in legal fees and costs (over and above the $179.95 for class members);
-- Cash to individuals and vouchers to government and business claimants;
-- $1 million to the Iowa Department of Education to administer the funds;
-- $1 million to Iowa Legal Aid for a program to reduce domestic violence; and
-- Two cy pres funds for the Iowa public schools for computers and software.
The settlement resembles the 2004 settlement Hagstrom negotiated in Minnesota, for which he was named a Minnesota Lawyer Attorney of the Year.
In that case, Microsoft agreed to provide Minnesota consumers and businesses with $174.5 million in vouchers for technology purchases from any manufacturer. Unclaimed vouchers were donated to Minnesota schools. In addition, Hagstrom negotiated cash payments of $2.5 million to the Minnesota Legal Aid Society and $2.5 million in cash and the same amount in technology vouchers to the University of Minnesota.
That case was the first state suit against Microsoft to go to trial, as well as the first “indirect purchaser” class action — that is a suit on behalf of consumers who did not purchase goods directly from the manufacturer being sued — certified in Minnesota.
Monday, May 28, 2007
U.S. Supreme Court not smiling on class actions
I hope everyone had a happy and safe Memorial Day Weekend! In case you missed it on your way to the lake on Friday, I am providing a link to an interesting article that was on the Bloomberg wire. So wipe off that barbeque sauce, and check this out:
Roberts Court Deals Lawyers Setbacks in Suits Against Companies
By Greg Stohr
May 25 (Bloomberg) -- For trial lawyers, any news from the U.S. Supreme Court these days is probably bad.
The court this week threw out an antitrust lawsuit against the nation's three largest telephone companies, saying judges should be quicker to dismiss cases that would force corporations and other defendants to mount a costly defense. The decision was part of a trend that attorneys say is making it harder to successfully press class-action cases and other suits against businesses.
Trial lawyers may suffer additional setbacks in the next month as the court, under Chief Justice John Roberts, rules on two investor lawsuits that justices criticized during arguments in March.
For more, click here.
On the plus side, no anti-trial lawyer decisions came out over the long weekend ...
Roberts Court Deals Lawyers Setbacks in Suits Against Companies
By Greg Stohr
May 25 (Bloomberg) -- For trial lawyers, any news from the U.S. Supreme Court these days is probably bad.
The court this week threw out an antitrust lawsuit against the nation's three largest telephone companies, saying judges should be quicker to dismiss cases that would force corporations and other defendants to mount a costly defense. The decision was part of a trend that attorneys say is making it harder to successfully press class-action cases and other suits against businesses.
Trial lawyers may suffer additional setbacks in the next month as the court, under Chief Justice John Roberts, rules on two investor lawsuits that justices criticized during arguments in March.
For more, click here.
On the plus side, no anti-trial lawyer decisions came out over the long weekend ...
Labels:
class actions,
Trial lawyers,
U.S. Supreme Court
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)