Shook Hardy Bacon Menu

Experience

Success fosters insight; insight informs success. Our representative matters look beyond the immediate solution to the next challenge facing your business and industry.

Of course, past outcomes afford no guarantee of future results. Every case is different and must be judged on its own merits. 

Filter By:
Type:
Select Type
Experience | Fire Protection and Alarms

Shook Wins Another Judgment for ADT in Unfair Competition Suit

July 16, 2019
Experience

Shook Obtains Summary Judgment Win in $200 Million Patent Case

July 13, 2019
Experience | Automotive

Appeals Court Dismisses Suit Against Toyota, Holding Unfair or Deceptive Act Claims Must be Material

May 23, 2019
Experience

State Court Says Plaintiff Can't Pursue Misrepresentation Claim If Product Properly Labeled

Shook obtained dismissal of a misrepresentation complaint against the manufacturer of a household consumer goods product when a state court found that the product was properly labeled on the back, “just not on the front where Plaintiff expected [it] to be.” The plaintiff alleged that she bought the product in the belief that it would perform in a certain manner and that manufacturers and retailers of the product failed to warn consumers that it did not.

But the plaintiff’s problem, the court said, was that to allege misrepresentation, she must claim the defendants “said something that was not true.” In both her pleadings and at oral argument, the court said, the plaintiff admitted there had been no false misrepresentations about the product, what it was intended to do, or its effectiveness. “She cannot pursue a viable claim against the Defendants,” the court said, “because her assumption was wrong and she did not read the label.”

Partner Lindsey Heinz and Associate Melissa Plunkett represented the product manufacturer.


Experience | Pharmaceutical and Medical Device

Summary Judgment Granted in Failure-to-Warn Case

A state court granted summary judgment to a pharmaceutical manufacturer in consolidated proceedings, ruling that an alleged failure to warn was not the proximate cause of the plaintiff’s purported injury. The day before the ruling, the same court granted the same manufacturer's motion to quash and dismissed more than 140 out-of-state plaintiffs, finding they could not establish jurisdiction in the state.

Experience | Pharmaceutical and Medical Device

$28 Million Verdict Tossed in Drug Failure-to-Warn Case

Deposed the key witness—the prescribing physician—in a drug failure-to-warn case, leading the court to toss out a $28 million jury verdict against the pharmaceutical manufacturer based on the learned intermediary doctrine.