Tag Archives: Manufacturing

Supreme Court Again Tightens Jurisdictional Requirements for Claims Against Out-of-State Defendants

On June 19, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court announced important constitutional limitations on state courts’ ability to exercise specific jurisdiction over nonresidents’ claims against out-of-state defendants. The Court’s nearly unanimous decision in Bristol-Myers v. Superior Court has potentially far-reaching implications for companies facing claims brought by nonresident and resident plaintiffs in states in which those companies are neither incorporated nor maintain their principal place of business.… Continue Reading

In Maui County, It’s Five O’Clock Around the Clock

The Maui County Liquor Control Commission, which regulates licenses for the importation, manufacture and sale of alcohol within Maui County, has liberalized certain County rules on the sale of alcohol: holders of liquor licenses are now generally permitted to sell alcohol to customers 24 hours per day. Retailers had previously been restricted to selling alcohol … Continue Reading

Product Recalls: Keeping Your Insurance Coverage Intact

Complex product supply chains increase the risk of errors, defects and contamination at all levels of operation and can lead to staggering expenses for food and product manufacturers facing the risks and realities of product recalls. Hunton insurance coverage attorneys comment on a recent Third Circuit decision that illustrates the importance of taking the right steps to avoid invalidating insurance coverage for product recalls.… Continue Reading

CA Supreme Court Raises Questions About Post-Daimler Bounds of Specific Jurisdiction

On August 29, 2016, in Bristol-Myers Squibb v. Superior Court, the California Supreme Court left many retailers wondering what the 2014 decision in Daimler AG v. Bauman may mean for the exercise of specific jurisdiction in cases involving nationwide courses of business conduct affecting both resident and nonresident plaintiffs. … Continue Reading

“As Seen on TV” — Insurer Must Defend Well Known Television Marketer in Data Privacy Suit

GDPRIn a June 1, 2016 decision, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals reminded retailers and product manufacturers to look to their insurance coverages when defending against consumer class actions. The Second Circuit required CNA Financial Corporation to defend E. Mishan & Sons, Inc. – best known for its “As Seen on TV” products – in two class actions alleging a conspiracy to trap customers into recurring credit card charges and that Emson sold private consumer information that it obtained through its product sales.… Continue Reading

FTC takes Aggressive Stand on Unqualified ‘Biodegradable’ Claims: Products Must Completely Break Down in 5 Years

An important Federal Trade Commission (FTC) decision was announced yesterday that trains a spotlight on claims of “biodegradability.” The FTC found that a manufacturer’s unsubstantiated claims regarding the biodegradability of plastic pellets used as product additives deceived industry and end-use customers. The case reemphasizes the FTC’s intent to enforce the FTC Act against unsupported “green” … Continue Reading

General Liability Insurers in Pennsylvania Required to Defend Product Liability Claims

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has rejected a liability insurer’s attempt to overturn a Superior Court decision holding that insurers must defend product liability claims. See Indalex v. National Union Fire Insurance Co. of Pittsburgh, Pa., No. 126 WAL 2014 (Pa. Sept. 18, 2014). The decision confirms that loss arising from a defective product may constitute … Continue Reading
LexBlog