Waterbury Ct News

Waterbury Ct News

Waterbury Ct News

Posted on: December 09, 2011 - 5:20 am
by Admin

According to a ruling from the New Jersey Appellate Division, as long a plaintiff’s state tort injury claims against a medical device manufacturer are pled as parallel to federal requirements, those state tort claims are not preempted by federal law. See, Cornett v. Johnson & Johnson, 2010 WL 2867811 (N.J. Super. A.D. July 23, 2010).

This decision essentially paves the way for medical device litigation in the state of New Jersey; pursuit of which was only undertaken by those with the intestinal fortitude to risk a draconian and sometimes skewed application of the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Reigel vs. Medtronic wherein it was held that many state tort claims were preempted by the Medical Device Amendments (MDA) to the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FDCA). Since then, however, some lower courts, like the New Jersey Applellate Division, have defined which claims survive Reigel.

Remedies Available in New Jersey for State Claims Parallel to Federal Requirements

Although the U.S. Supreme Court stated that state court claims parallel to federal requirements under the MDA may proceed in state court, it didn’t exactly elucidate what those claims might entail. The theory plaintiff’s attorneys began to use post-Reigel consisted of pleading state-law claims that do not interfere with any federal regulatory scheme. In other words, cases against manufacturers of medical devices still proceed, but on eggshells awaiting the lower courts’ interpretation of Reigel. The results have been mixed.