Drug & Device Law

FEBRUARY 9, 2022

Not surprisingly, the Mayo Clinic had assembled a multi-disciplinary Covid-19 treatment review panel. Against the authority of the Mayo Clinic and other reputable sources, the plaintiffs relied on the testimony of a single doctor. The doctor testifying for the plaintiffs was licensed in Florida, but with no board certifications.

Doctors 64

Doctors Hospitals Testimonials Treatment 64

Drug & Device Law

DECEMBER 29, 2023

2023) (remote trial testimony cannot be compelled beyond Rule 45’s 100-mile limit on subpoenas) ( here ); Carson v. They excluded bogus expert testimony under Fed. Further, “adequacy” is an objective standard, that neither a plaintiff’s self-interested testimony nor equivocal health care provider testimony can touch.

Testimonials 105

Testimonials FDA Drugs Vaccine 105

Drug & Device Law

JANUARY 11, 2022

The drugs at issue are in class that is generally used as a second-line treatment for diabetes. At the request of the FDA, manufacturers conducted a cardiovascular outcomes study, a randomized controlled trial with multiple cardiac endpoints. Trials of other drugs in the class also failed to show an association.

Drugs 40

Drugs Trials Doctors Testimonials 40

Drug & Device Law

JUNE 6, 2022

Thus a confident learned intermediary’s testimony will defeat causation as a matter of law by stating that, notwithstanding a poor result, the treatment provided was standard of care, and even in hindsight they would not do anything different. Confident learned intermediaries stand by their medical decisions. caused anything.

Testimonials 59

Testimonials Production Pharmaceuticals Treatment 59

Drug & Device Law

FEBRUARY 21, 2022

702 expert gatekeeping decisions bearing that caption, as Martinez approaches trial (scheduled for March 21, although the plaintiff has sought a continuance). Id. “None” of her “publications has any connection to “conducting clinical trials for medical devices or post marketing surveillance for medical products.” pelvic mesh case.

Testimonials 59

Testimonials Clinical Trials Production Trials 59

Drug & Device Law

OCTOBER 20, 2022

While that may be true when it comes to trial judges and juries in certain parts of the state, the Texas Products Liability Act and much of the appellate case law applicable to product liability are pretty tight. For some reason, though, plaintiff attempted to rely on the deposition testimony of two of the treating physicians, Drs.

Testimonials 59

Testimonials Doctors Hospitals Production 59

Drug & Device Law

SEPTEMBER 9, 2022

317, 322 (1986), that summary judgment was mandated “against a party who fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to that party’s case, and on which that party will bear the burden of proof at trial.” It focused squarely on the doctor. Catrett , 477 U.S. The second was the decision below.

Doctors 59

Doctors Testimonials Production Trials 59