Search for: "Buckman v. State"
Results 241 - 260
of 345
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 May 2010, 12:46 pm
In Baron v. [read post]
20 May 2010, 12:09 pm
It's Murphy v. [read post]
6 May 2010, 4:12 pm
., Mean v. [read post]
28 Apr 2010, 3:34 am
In the ObTape Litigation, the manufacturer had moved for summary judgment on plaintiffs' claims to the extent they asserted a fraud-on-the-FDA theory, arguing that such a theory was preempted under Buckman Co. v. [read post]
20 Apr 2010, 6:04 am
Central Regional Employees Benefit Fund v. [read post]
15 Apr 2010, 9:20 am
” Buckman, 531 U.S. at 349 n. 4.The Supreme Court made clear in Buckman that this section also limits the ability of a private plaintiff to pursue claims under state law theories where such claims collide with the exclusive enforcement power of the federal government. [read post]
12 Apr 2010, 4:47 am
In Adams v. [read post]
17 Mar 2010, 7:27 am
Garcia v. [read post]
16 Mar 2010, 4:56 am
The Court also cited to a District of North Carolina case, Buckman v. [read post]
11 Mar 2010, 4:14 am
A longtime correspontent (who wishes to remain nameless - but we thank you anyway) sent along overnight a new medical device preemption win, Wheeler v. [read post]
3 Mar 2010, 12:12 pm
American Honda Motor Co., 529 U.S. 861 (2000), hadn't rippled that far yet, and 2001 was the year that Buckman Co. v. [read post]
26 Feb 2010, 3:54 am
Buckman Co. v. [read post]
25 Feb 2010, 11:18 am
That sounds almost exactly like the claim made against the defendants in the Bone Screw litigation – and which, when presented as a state-law claim, was unanimously held preempted in Buckman Co. v. [read post]
19 Feb 2010, 4:10 am
In an (unfortunately) not-for-publication opinion, the 9th Circuit affirmed a defense summary judgment in Carson v. [read post]
18 Feb 2010, 10:34 am
Because those are federal statutes, they can’t be “preempted” the way state-law claims were in Buckman Co. v. [read post]
11 Feb 2010, 9:08 am
McGuan v. [read post]
14 Jan 2010, 10:51 am
(referring to the state’s adoption of Canterbury v. [read post]
11 Jan 2010, 6:00 am
Judge Limbaugh first cited Buckman Co. v. [read post]
24 Dec 2009, 11:32 am
Blunt v. [read post]
23 Nov 2009, 5:00 am
The court properly finds that implied claim to be preempted under Buckman Co. v. [read post]
