Follow POL on Twitter - Plaintiffs' lawyers make fictional allegation;
- Friendly New York Times reporters who work in conjunction with plaintiffs' lawyers report fictional allegation as fact, ignoring the underlying facts;
- Plaintiffs' lawyers use bootstrapped New York Times article to argue against sensible preemption policies that would benefit consumers but would hurt lawyers.
The circle of life (Ortho Evra edition)
Related Entries:
- Greg Conko: Can brand makers be sued for generic drug injuries?
- Romney and self-deporting
- Another lawless jackpot award over propofol in Nevada
- Douglas v. Independent Living Center of Southern California
- Rehearing sought in Mensing
- Around the web, June 5
- Somin on federalism and tort reform
- Martin Act abuses
- "Abnormal Use" interview
- Lasker on preemption
- Around the web, March 28
- Teva and Baxter appeal $505 million Nevada propofol verdict
- Breaking: unanimous vote against preemption in Williamson v. Mazda
- Tort reform and federalism
- Regulatory creep in action
 |
| Isaac Gorodetski Project Manager, Center for Legal Policy at the Manhattan Institute igorodetski@manhattan-institute.org |
 |
| Bridget Carroll Press Officer, Manhattan Institute bcarroll@manhattan-institute.org |
