NHTSA Releases Draft Test Procedures for Advanced Driver Assistance Systems

On November 21, 2019, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (“NHTSA”) released nine draft test procedures intended to help evaluate certain types of Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (“ADAS”). NHTSA is seeking public comment regarding the adequacy of these test procedures … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized

Share this Article:

Service Contracts Are Not Express Warranties Under the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act

In Gavaldon v. DaimlerChrysler Corp. (2004) 32 Cal. 4th 1246, the California Supreme Court found that service contracts are not express warranties under the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act and the Act did not otherwise authorize replacement or restitution as a … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized

Share this Article:

California Supreme Court Clarifies Whether Counsel is Bound by Confidentiality Provisions in Settlement Agreements

In Monster Energy Co. v. Schechter, 7 Cal.5th 781, 792 (2019) the California Supreme Court was tasked with determining “whether counsel’s signature approving a agreement as to form and content for his clients’ signature precludes, as a matter of law, … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Share this Article:

Seven Snell & Wilmer product liability attorneys recognized as leaders in Product Liability Litigation – Defendants by The Best Lawyers in America 2020

Snell & Wilmer recently announced that 143 of the firm’s attorneys were selected by their peers for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America©. Of those attorneys, seven partners were recognized in the practice area of Product Liability Litigation – … Continue reading

Posted in automotive, CPSC, FDA, litigation, medical devices, products

Share this Article:

Snell & Wilmer Attorneys Publish Article on Medical Device Servicing and Remanufacturing

Denver partner Dan Wittenberg and associate Kelly Smith recently published an article, “Clarifying the Difference Between Medical Device Servicing and Remanufacturing,” in DRI’s For the Defense. The article explores the longstanding divide in the medical device industry between device manufacturers … Continue reading

Posted in FDA, medical devices, products

Share this Article:

Collateral Source Rule Not Violated by References to Medical Insurance, Medicare and Social Security

Stokes v. Muschinske, No. B280116, 2019 WL 1513208 (Cal. Ct. App. Mar. 14, 2019) (awaiting official publication) begs the question, does reference to a plaintiff’s membership in a health care plan, like Kaiser Permanente, or Medicare eligibility violate the collateral … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized

Share this Article:

Arizona Limits Failure to Warn Claims Against Medical Device Manufacturers

On December 18, 2018, the Arizona Supreme Court issued an opinion clarifying manufacturers’ duty to warn consumers under Arizona common law. The Court held that the federal Medical Device Amendments (“MDA”) impliedly preempted Arizona common law claims in a medical … Continue reading

Posted in medical devices

Share this Article:

Product Liability Litigation Group Ranked in 2019 “Best Law Firms”

Snell & Wilmer’s Product Liability Litigation Group achieved high rankings in 2019’s “Best Law Firms” by U.S. News Media Group and Best Lawyers®. We were ranked as a metropolitan area Tier 1 firm in Phoenix, Orange County, Colorado and Utah … Continue reading

Posted in litigation, products, Trials, Uncategorized

Share this Article:

Snell & Wilmer Defends Trucking Company and Truck Driver

Snell & Wilmer attorneys recently defended Phenix Transportation West and its driver Ray Jackson in a trucking accident case. The trial lasted eight days and was tried in Maricopa County Superior Court. Kelly Wilkins tried the case with support from … Continue reading

Posted in Trials, Trucking/transportation

Share this Article:

Arizona Holds No Duty by Manufacturer in Secondary Asbestos Exposure Case

The Arizona Supreme Court recently held that a defendant that used asbestos materials in its workplace before 1970 has no duty to protect the public from secondary asbestos exposure. Arizona only recognizes a duty in a negligence claim if a … Continue reading

Posted in asbestos

Share this Article: