Firm Newsletter, Summer 2012

August 1, 2012

Articles In This Issue: 1. Yours, Mine & Ours – Who Owns Social Media Information 2. When Does a University Own Rights to an Invention? 3. Mission “Impossible”: Recovering from Generic Prescription-Drug Manufacturers in the Wake of PLIVA, Inc. v. Mensing Related Information: Firm Newsletter, Summer 2012 Read More

Pennsylvania Supreme Court Issues Landmark Decision On Admissibility Of Scientific Evidence

July 1, 2012

On May 23, 2012, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in a unanimous 53-page decision in Betz v. Pneumo Abex,[1] which reversed the 2010 en banc panel of the Superior Court that overturned an Allegheny County trial court’s ruling on a Frye[2] motion in an asbestos product liability action. At the trial court, the plaintiff alleged that Charles Simikian’s exposure to asbestos-containing friction products, such as brake linings, throughout his 44-year career as an auto mechanic caused his development of and eventual death from, mesothelioma.  The action was selected by plaintiffs among several pending asbestos-related lawsuits as a test case to consider challenges brought by defendants to the opinions and methodology supporting the plaintiffs’ theory that exposure to friction products was a proximate cause of asbestos-related disease. In a new opinion, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania in Betz v. Pneumo Abex has clarified the standards and procedure for trial judges to follow when acting as gatekeeper for novel expert testimony. The Betz case was designated by Judge Robert J. Colville and plaintiffs’ and defense counsel from a pool of similar asbestos cases pending in the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County. Two of the defendants in those cases had filed global motions to exclude expert testimony on the “single breath” theory of causation of asbestos related disease espoused by the plaintiffs’ experts. That theory, based on extrapolation, holds that the inhalation of just one asbestos fiber from an asbestos containing product, no matter what other asbestos exposure and extent of exposure the plaintiff may have had, causes asbestos related disease. The defendants argued that the theory was novel and not based on accepted scientific principles. Judge Colville instructed the parties to designate a case as a test case for the Frye challenge raised by the defendants. [A Frye challenge is the Pennsylvania state courts’ method of challenging expert testimony, as opposed to the federal courts which are governed by the U.S. Read More

The Supreme Court Speaks Again On When A State Court Can Exercise Jurisdiction Over A Foreign Defendant In A Products Liability Suit: Very Clearly In One Case And Not So Clearly In Another

September 16, 2011

Products liability cases often involve out-of-state or out-of-the-country defendants, and a recurring question in such cases is whether the defendant is subject to the jurisdiction of the court in which the case is brought. Near the end of the Supreme Court’s recently completed term, the Court issued opinions in two such cases, which were argued in tandem: Goodyear Dunlop Tires Operations, S.A. v. Brown, 131 S.Ct. 2846 (June 27, 2011) and J. McIntyre Machinery, Ltd. v. Nicastro, 2011 WL 2518811, 131 S.Ct. 2780 (June 27, 2011). The first case involved a question of general jurisdiction and was decided by a unanimous court, reversing the judgment below, in an opinion authored by Justice Ginsburg. The second case involved a question of specific jurisdiction but was decided by a split court with six Justices voting in favor of reversal and three against. Justice Kennedy authored the plurality opinion for the reversal, joined by Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Scalia and Thomas; Justice Breyer, joined by Justice Alito, filed an opinion concurring in the judgment; Justice Ginsburg, joined by Justices Sotomayor and Kagan, dissented. In both cases, the state court had ruled that jurisdiction was proper, based on a so-called “stream of commerce” theory of jurisdiction. Goodyear Dunlop Tires arose out of an accident that occurred in France, resulting in the deaths of two young soccer players from North Carolina, and involved a bus outfitted with tires manufactured by foreign subsidiaries of Goodyear USA for foreign markets. What united the Court in Goodyear Dunlop Tires was its conclusion that a North Carolina state court could not exercise general or all-purpose jurisdiction, where the petitioner-defendants, all foreign, indirect subsidiaries of a United States parent, had no ties with North Carolina other than the fact that some of their tires, but not the tires at issue, had reached North Carolina through “the stream of commerce.” Read More

Pietragallo Elects Emily J. Hicks as Partner

October 2, 2010

Pietragallo Gordon Alfano Bosick & Raspanti, LLP is pleased to announce the election of its newest partner, Emily J. Hicks, in its Pittsburgh office. Ms. Hicks is a civil litigator with an emphasis in product liability and commercial litigation. Ms. Hicks’ national experience includes all aspects of litigation, from administrative proceedings and mediation, to trials and appeals. She has defended the design, manufacture and performance of a diverse array of products made by some of the world’s largest manufacturers, including pharmaceuticals, medical devices, automobiles, tires, industrial machinery and helmets. Ms. Hicks received her J.D. from the West Virginia University School of Law, where, upon graduation she received recognition as a member of the Order of the Coif. She graduated magna cum laude from West Virginia University in 1997 with a B.A. in political science. While in law school, Ms. Hicks served as a judicial clerk for the Honorable Irene M. Keeley in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia Read More

Jason M. Reefer Joins Pietragallo as an Associate in the Product Liability Practice Group

September 5, 2010

Jason M. Reefer has joined Pietragallo Gordon Alfano Bosick & Raspanti, LLP as an associate in the Product Liability Practice Group in the firm’s Pittsburgh office. Mr. Reefer has experience in the areas of pharmaceutical product liability litigation, white collar and securities work, antitrust investigations and litigation, environmental litigation, and international contractual law issues.  He also has experience in qui tam litigation matters. Mr. Reefer received his J.D. from the University of Pennsylvania Law School, where he was senior editor of the Journal of Constitutional Law. He holds a B.A. in History from the University of Pennsylvania, where he graduated with Distinction, summa cum laude. Read More

Firm Newsletter, Summer 2010

July 26, 2010

Articles In This Issue: 1. Walking A Fine Line: An Employer’s Right To Review Its Employee’s Electronic Messages 2. Workers’ Compensation Fraud: Tilting At Fraud Mills No Longer Quixotic 3. Building On Fraud: Qui Tam Issues In The Construction Industry 4. Federal Preemption Of Failure-To-Warn Claims After Wyeth v. Levine 5. Corporate Demise And The Search For Deep Pockets: Accountant Liability And The In Pari Delicto Defense Related Information: Firm Newsletter, Summer 2010 Read More

Ryan J. King has joined the firm as an associate in the Product Liability Practice Group

February 1, 2010

Ryan J. King has joined the firm as an associate in the Product Liability Practice Group. Mr. King is a civil litigator who focuses his practice on products liability, construction and commercial litigation. He has experience in the areas of products liability, construction, insurance and employment litigation. He has successfully litigated and tried cases in both State and Federal Courts in West Virginia and Pennsylvania.  Mr. King has also participated in all aspects of litigation, from administrative proceedings to arbitrations and mediations.  In addition, Mr. King has worked as national counsel for a multi-national manufacturer of high end archery equipment. Read More