Connect

To receive new posts automatically via e-mail, enter your address:

Delivered by FeedBurner


Tell on a Hellhole

Contribute to our project by letting us know about additional Judicial Hellholes.

Blogroll

Archives

March 22nd, 2018

ATRA Disappointed in Massachusetts Supreme Court’s Decision to Adopt Expansive Theory of “Innovator Liability”

On March 16, 2018, in a very disappointing decision, the Massachusetts Supreme Court adopted an expansive theory of civil liability known as “innovator liability.” The state joins perennial Judicial Hellhole, California, as the only other state to adopt this dangerous theory of liability. The Alabama Supreme Court adopted “innovator liability” in 2014, but the decision was quickly overturned by the legislature.

In Rafferty v. Merck, the court held that a brand-name drug manufacturer can be sued for recklessness if it intentionally failed to update the label on its drug, knowing that there is a risk of death or injury with its use, that makers of generic versions must adopt . . . → Read More: ATRA Disappointed in Massachusetts Supreme Court’s Decision to Adopt Expansive Theory of “Innovator Liability”

May 20th, 2013

Massachusetts High Court Promotes Practically Boundless ‘Consumer Protection’ Law

A recent decision by Massachusetts’ Supreme Judicial Court shows how disturbingly far consumer protection laws have been stretched and contorted beyond their intended purpose by plaintiffs’ lawyers and some courts . . . → Read More: Massachusetts High Court Promotes Practically Boundless ‘Consumer Protection’ Law