Fifth Circuit Puts an End to Texas Pharma Plaintiff’s California Dreamin’
publication | June 6, 2014Eric Lasker for Washington Legal Foundation's The Legal Pulse
Donald R. McMinn for LJN's Insurance Coverage Law Bulletin
“The quest for the next ‘solvent bystander’ in asbestos litigation: Will Texas resume the search?”
publication | October 4, 2013Partner Eric G. Lasker discusses the present state of asbestos litigation in Texas and what could loom on the horizon since the Texas Supreme Court granted review in Bostic v. Georgia-Pacific Corp.
Prescription Drug Products Liability Litigation and Punitive Damages Preemption
publication | April 10, 2013By Firm partner Eric G. Lasker for IADC's Defense Counsel Journal.
From partner Eric G. Lasker for The Federalist Society's Engage.
BPA Update and Opinions: Legislation, Regulation, Science, and Litigation Concerning Bisphenol-A
publication | August 10, 2012IADC Committee Newsletter (August 2012)
Manning the Daubert Gate: A Defense Primer in Response to Milward v. Acuity Specialty Products
publication | April 10, 2012Eric G. Lasker, Firm partner, authors article for the April 2012 Defense Counsel Journal.
Daubert Alert: The First Circuit Takes a Step Back in Milward v. Acuity Specialty Products
publication | March 1, 2012Firm partner Eric Lasker was amicus counsel for a coalition of industry associations in support of the Milward petition for writ of certiorari.
There is No Place Like Home: The Defense Against Foreign Environmental Liaiblity Claims in U.S. Court Under the Alien Tort Statute
publication | February 1, 2012Partner Eric G. Lasker authors article for International Association of Defense Counsel Toxics & Hazardous Substances Litigation Committee Newsletter.
Pliva, Inc. v. Mensing: Does It Reopen the Door for Targeted Preemption Arguments?
publication | January 1, 2012Eric Lasker for LJN's Product Liability Law & Strategy newsletter
Kapps v. Biosense Webster: Who Is Liable When a Reprocessed Medical Device Causes Injury?
publication | January 1, 2012A Washington Legal Foundation Working Paper, co-authored by Stephen A. Klein and Andrew L. Reissaus, this article discusses one of the first cases to address the application of traditional product liability theories in the context of a reprocessed medical device, in which both the original manufacturer and the reprocessor are defendants.
Tepid Guidance on a Hot Topic: New York City Bar Ethic Opinion on Litigation Financing
publication | July 22, 2011Washington Legal Foundation's Legal Backgrounder (July 22, 2011) (Kirby T. Griffis)
Cover story for The Metropolitan Corporate Counsel by Firm partner Kirby T. Griffis