OUTSTANDING SERVICE, DEEP EXPERTISE, HIGH EFFICIENCY
Butler Snow’s drug & device litigation team approaches each case with a strategic view toward presenting a compelling defense to the jury—developing case themes early, weaving them throughout discovery and motions practice, and ultimately presenting a cohesive and persuasive defense at trial if the case is not resolved earlier. Our goal is to bring innovative, cost-effective results to our clients’ most complex and challenging matters.
Our success is based on becoming an integral part of our client’s team. By using our deep industry knowledge and decades of hands-on experience, we work together with our clients to find creative solutions, while keeping an eye on value and effective resolutions.
Our drug & device litigation team has taken leading roles in pharmaceutical and medical device litigation involving a wide range of products, including:
- Pharmaceuticals: Acne medications, anti-biotics, anti-inflammatory medications, anti-psychotic medications, birth control, blood thinners, cholesterol medications, colitis medications, diabetes medications, diet drugs, heartburn medications, hormone replacement therapies, hypertension medications, osteoporosis medications, over-the-counter pain relievers, treatment for male pattern baldness, and vaccines.
- Medical devices: pelvic and hernia mesh, mammary implants, pain pumps, hip replacements, dialyzers, mechanical heart valves, and IUDs.
We have a proven reputation for success in the following specific areas:
- Mass tort and MDL management: We are regularly called upon to lead mass torts and multidistrict litigations (MDLs), deftly managing thousands of cases, dozens of other law firms and hundreds of lawyers.
- Motions and appeals: We have vast experience at every point in the lifecycle of the litigation process, often obtaining rulings that that significantly impact the course of the overall litigation. We have secured key victories for our clients ending litigation well before the trial stage, and we are also experienced in litigating issues on appeal to uphold key defense verdicts or obtain reversals of adverse rulings and verdicts.
- Science counsel: We are skilled at effectively identifying and interpreting all relevant scientific literature and expert witness testimony, as well as limiting, excluding and cross-examining opposing experts and developing and presenting expert testimony at trial.
- Trials: We have multiple team members who are Fellows of the American College of Trial Lawyers and International Academy of Trial Lawyers. Our team also includes the President of the Trial Lawyers of America, the President-Elect of the American Board of Trial Advocates, and faculty of the International Association of Defense Counsel’s Trial Academy and American Board of Trial Advocates’ Masters in Trial Program. We are regularly called upon to lead trial teams in some of the most challenging jurisdictions nationwide.
- Attorneys General actions: In addition to product liability litigation, the pharmaceutical and medical device industries are increasingly facing legal actions initiated by attorneys general, whether that involves investigations or litigation. We have significant experience with these types of actions.
- Risk management and counseling: The best defense is a good offense, and our team is skilled at working with our clients to prevent litigation before it happens. In the event of recalls or adverse events, we work with our clients to develop strategies to interface with regulatory agencies and limit risk.
In recognition of our successes, the firm and many of our individual team members have earned specific recognition in drug and device litigation from the legal profession and from our peers. We are consistently recognized by Chambers USA, The Legal 500 US, The Best Lawyers in America, Who’s Who Legal, and Super Lawyers, to name a few.
DELIVERING VALUE—ALTERNATIVE FEE ARRANGEMENTS
Butler Snow is a leader in providing creative fee arrangements for our clients. Approximately 80% of our drug and device litigation work is currently handled under alternative fee arrangements. Alternative fee structures give our clients more certainty and allow them to budget more accurately, which fosters a collaborative working relationship between our firm and our clients.
We are able to build these mutually beneficial fee solutions because our deep industry experience allows us to fully understand the scope of the work and what will likely be necessary to successfully defend the matter. We also have our own pricing experts who provide invaluable analysis and work with our clients and their pricing and procurement teams to develop and manage alternative fee arrangements. Additionally, the structure of our firm contributes to our ability to price more effectively. We work in a collaborative manner, which means we build teams based on your needs, not our billing system.
Across the firm, our mission is to put the appropriate person on the appropriate task regardless of firm hierarchies—and to always put our client first.
SUPPORTING OUR NEXT GENERATION RISING STARS AND CELEBRATING DIVERSITY
While our veteran attorneys have exceptional experience and demonstrated success records, they also have an obligation to build the next generation’s skills and talents. Our collaborative work environment helps create an atmosphere where veteran attorneys can take time to informally and formally mentor young attorneys.
We develop the next generation of Butler Snow stars through inclusion. Our young attorneys are often included as members of the trial team and in key hearings, depositions and strategy meetings. We offer them opportunities to work directly with our clients, and we encourage them to develop personal areas of expertise and to become thought leaders within those areas.
We routinely send our associates to the annual IADC Trial Academy, where they gain invaluable experience through a mock-trial experience. We also developed our own courtroom in our Ridgeland office, where our associates participate in mock trials and are critiqued and coached by senior attorneys.
As a result, we have a deep bench of experienced young attorneys. This benefits our clients and our firm because we are able to staff client matters with just the right combination of expertise to produce effective results at the right value.
While inclusion benefits our young attorneys, our belief in inclusion reaches well beyond training opportunities. Butler Snow’s diversity efforts are rooted in our belief that diversity and inclusion help drive innovation and creativity. We encourage and embrace new ideas and creative solutions, which require a diverse, inclusive work environment. We are also active participants in diversity-related events and organizations at a national and international level.
Supporting inclusion and fostering diversity is our responsibility—to our firm, to our clients and to our communities—and we take that responsibility seriously.
RISK MANAGEMENT AND COUNSELING
While we regularly try complex cases across the country, we also provide proactive counseling and risk-management assessments aimed at sidestepping litigation. We help clients evaluate their decision-making process and help develop product documentation and other collateral materials.
When trouble is already on the horizon, such as a product recall, we advise our clients on ways to stay ahead of the curve so that we are on the frontline before the first lawsuit is filed. We help counsel clients on their best course of action, and we help work with the FDA, physicians and distributors, or other stakeholders to mitigate or minimize issues as early as possible.
Through our years of trial experience, we have seen the often-expensive results of bad documentation, late reactions and other missteps. We know what has worked and what hasn’t worked, and we make every effort to help our clients avoid a mishandled a situation.
ATTORNEYS GENERAL ACTIONS
Increasingly, the life sciences industry is facing legal actions initiated by attorneys general, whether that involves investigations and/or litigation. Butler Snow’s litigation group has significant experience with these types of actions, which can come at a high cost in both time and money for major corporations or industry sectors.
These actions can be driven by work from outside private firms working in concert with attorneys general. Plaintiffs’ firms, generally working on contingency, hire numerous expert witnesses and produce a myriad of documents, which must all be carefully reviewed. Our attorneys have both the governmental and industry backgrounds to review the facts versus the claims and to lead a counterattack that fits the challenge.
RECENT RECOGNITION
Chambers USA
- Ranked for nationwide Product Liability & Mass Torts: The Elite (2024)
- “Butler Snow has a strong, cohesive team approach and is responsive to the issues at hand. They work to understand clients’ business strengths and weaknesses and bring an approach to resolve the issues.” Chambers USA commentary (2024)
- “The firm is fantastic at handling complex litigations in multiple jurisdictions.” Chambers USA commentary (2024)
- “Butler Snow has a strong reputation for its knowledge of the life sciences sector, where it regularly acts for a number of leading entities in complex product liability claims . . . Substantial experience handling major multidistrict litigation and widely regarded as one of the leading litigation firms in the Southeast, while making significant inroads elsewhere in the country.” Chambers USA commentary (2024)
- “They do a phenomenal job.” Chambers USA commentary (2023)
- “We love working with Butler Snow for their very detailed and practical answers.” Chambers USA commentary (2022)
- “One client says: ‘They take an interest in the company and strive to find the best avenues to provide support and guidance. Furthermore, they dig into the product and the company they are representing, creatively exploring options and alternatives that might not be standard.’” Chambers USA commentary (2021)
- “I have a lot of confidence in them,” states a source. “Working with them is a wonderful experience.” Chambers USA commentary (2020).
- “[S]trategy is done thoughtfully, and because of their experience, they translate that into getting across the finish line.” Chambers USA commentary (2020).
- “’They offer national coordinating as well as trial expertise and are skilled in taking difficult situations, managing a team and directing toward resolution,’ report impressed sources.” Chambers USA commentary (2019)
- “Clients highlight the firm’s ‘very, very good trial lawyers,’ and note that they are ‘very collaborative with other firms.’” Chambers USA commentary (2019)
- “Interviewees comment the team’s advocacy capabilities, stating: ‘They work very hard training people to try cases, and they try a ton as well.’” Chambers USA commentary (2019)
The Legal 500 US
- Ranked for nationwide Product Liability, Mass Tort and Class Action: Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices – Defense (2024)
- “Butler Snow LLP has an ‘excellent’ record acting for pharmaceutical and medical device companies utilizing a deep bench of subject matter experts and trial lawyers. Recognized for its collaborative approach, the team works particularly well with others in a “virtual law firm” setting, with lawyers in the team who are well-versed in handling work throughout the litigation life-cycle, from discovery through to settlement negotiation.” The Legal 500 US commentary (2024)
- “With its roots in the Deep South but now increasingly national in scope, Butler Snow LLP continues to gain excellent traction in the market on behalf of medical device and pharma companies. The team works well with other law firms and has gained a strong reputation approach in the context of “virtual law firms” in the defense of mass tort litigation.” The Legal 500 US commentary (2023)
- “Drawing upon significant resources, primarily from offices spread across the firm’s Southeastern heartland, Butler Snow LLP provides ‘exceptional’ service to clients engaged in pharmaceutical and medical device litigation.” The Legal 500 US commentary (2022)
- “The team at Butler Snow LLP is regularly sought out by pharmaceutical and medical device companies to take on lead roles in complex product liability litigation . . . .” The Legal 500 US commentary (2021)
- “Butler Snow LLP has notable experience acting as national, regional and local counsel for pharmaceutical and medical device companies across the country. . . In addition, the practice has expertise in defending mass tort and multi-district litigation involving pelvic mesh and hernia mesh-related claims.” The Legal 500 US commentary (2020)
- “[T]he ‘highly competent and skilled’ group at Butler Snow LLP has outstanding trial expertise and is entrusted by high-profile clients…” The Legal 500 US commentary (2019)
LMG Life Sciences
- Ranked for nationwide Product Liability (2023)
- Product Liability Firm of the Year – USA (2019)
- Shortlisted for Product Liability Firm of the Year – USA (2017)
Benchmark Litigation
- Ranked for Product Liability and Recall (2024)
- Product Liability Group of the Year (2018)
- Shortlisted for Product Liability Group of the Year (2017, 2019 and 2020)
Highlights
MDL and Mass Tort Management
- Chemical exposure and groundwater contamination litigation: National Coordinating Counsel
- Medical hearing device product liability litigation: National Coordinating Counsel
- Pelvic mesh product liability litigation: National Coordinating Counsel, MDL Lead Counsel and Lead Trial Counsel in one of the largest litigations in history
- Hernia mesh product liability litigation: MDL Lead Counsel and Lead Trial Counsel
- Intrauterine device product liability litigation: National Counsel
- Cryolipolysis device product liability litigation: National Counsel
- Propecia® product liability litigation: National Counsel, National Science Counsel and National Trial Counsel
- Tylenol® product liability litigation: National Counsel and MDL Liaison Counsel
- Fosamax® product liability litigation: Lead New Jersey Counsel and Trial Counsel
Trials
- Dandy v. Ethicon, Inc. and Johnson & Johnson, Case No. 3:20-cv-431, United States District Court for the District of New Jersey: Pelvic mesh product liability case, defense verdict, May 2023. (Butler Snow serves as national coordinating counsel in the pelvic mesh litigation and provided trial support for this case.) “NJ Jury Sides With J&J Unit In Pelvic Mesh Injury Suit,” Law360, May 2, 2023
- Benestad v. Ethicon Inc., Case No. 0:20-cv-60496, United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida: Pelvic mesh product liability case; defense verdict, March 2023 (Trial Support). “J&J And Ethicon Score Pelvic Mesh Trial Win In Fla.,” Law360, March 16, 2023
- Hudspeth v. Ethicon, Inc., Case No. 3:23-cv-00529, United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida: Pelvic mesh product liability case; defense verdict, January 2023 (Trial Support).
- Snowden v. Ethicon, Inc. and Johnson & Johnson, Case No. CC-19-05461-D, Dallas County, Texas Court of Law No. 4: Pelvic mesh product liability case; defense verdict, 2022. “CVN’s Top 10 Most Impressive Defense Verdicts of 2022,” CVN, January 12, 2023.
- Richards v. Ethicon, Inc. and Johnson & Johnson, Case No. 5:21-CV-00092-RSW, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas: Pelvic mesh product liability case; defense verdict, 2022. See “J&J Ethicon Unit Prevails In 2 Pelvic Mesh Trials,” Law360, October 13, 2022.
- Jarrett v. Ethicon, Inc. and Johnson & Johnson, Case No. 4:20-cv-01517-BRW, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas: Pelvic mesh product liability case; defense verdict, 2022.
- Freeman v. Ethicon, Inc., Case No. 2:20-cv-10661-CBM-SKA, United States District Court for the Central District of California: Pelvic mesh product liability case; defense verdict, 2022.
- Burris v. Ethicon, Inc. and Johnson & Johnson, Case No. 3:20-cv-01450-JRK, United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio: Pelvic mesh product liability case; defense verdict, 2022 (Trial Support).
- Shostrom v. Ethicon, Inc. and Johnson & Johnson; Case No. 1:20-cv-01933-WJM-STV, United States District Court for the District of Colorado: Pelvic mesh product liability case; defense verdict, 2022 (Appellate Trial Counsel and Trial Support). “Johnson and Johnson Wins Third Ethicon Pelvic Mesh Trial This Year,” Law.com, July 6, 2022.
- Knoth v. Apollo Endoscopy US, Inc., Case No. 5:18-CV-00049-DCB-MTP, United States District Court of the Southern District of Mississippi: Medical device product liability case; defense verdict, 2022.
- McBroom v. Ethicon, Inc., Case No. 2:20-cv-02127, United States District Court for the District of Arizona: Pelvic mesh product liability case; defense verdict, 2022.
- Shears v. Ethicon, Inc., Case No. 1:20-cv-00264, United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia: Pelvic mesh product liability case; defense verdict, 2022.
- Salinero et al. v. Johnson & Johnson, Case No. 1:18-cv-23643, United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida: Pelvic mesh product liability case; defense verdict, 2020. “Jury Absolves Ethicon in Pelvic Mesh Suit,” Law360, January 21, 2020; “J&J Escapes Fla. Pelvic Mesh Suit Also Aimed At Subsidiary,” Law360, September 20, 2019
- The People of the State of California v. Johnson & Johnson, Case No. 37-2016-00017229-CU-MC-CTL, Superior Court of California, County of San Diego Central: Trial counsel in a first-of-its-kind eight-week bench trial in an attorney general action involving pelvic mesh. We were also retained in 2019 as lead trial counsel in a Washington state attorney general action related to pelvic mesh that resolved shortly before trial. “4 Key Moments From J&J’s Mesh Marketing Battle With Calif.,” Law360, October 2, 2019; “Breaking Down J&J and California’s $1B Pelvic Mesh Trial,” Law360, July 12, 2019
- Krolikowski v. Ethicon, Inc., Case No. 140102704, Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania: Pelvic mesh product liability case; defense verdict, 2019. “J&J Dodges Pelvic Mesh Claims In Philadelphia Trial,” Law360, April 17, 2019
- Gallam v. Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Case No. HHD-CV-16-6067874-S, Connecticut Superior Court, Judicial District of Hartford: Second bellwether Pradaxa® product liability trial; defense verdict, 2018. AmLaw Litigation Daily’s “Litigators of the Week: A Compassionate—But Effective—Product Liability Defense,” May 11, 2018
- Adkins v. Ethicon, Inc., Case No. 130700919, Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania: Pelvic mesh product liability case; defense verdict, 2017. “Philly Jury Clears J&J in Latest Pelvic Mesh Case,” Law360, June 9, 2017
- Cavness v. Kowalczyk, Case No. DC-14-04220, District Court for the 95th Judicial District, Dallas County, Texas: Pelvic mesh product liability case; defense verdict, 2015. CVN named this verdict one of its 2015 “Top Defense Verdicts.”
- Jackson v. McNeil Consumer Healthcare, Case No. ATL-L-880-13, Superior Court of New Jersey, Atlantic County: First bellwether case in the New Jersey Tylenol® liver damage litigation; defense verdict, 2015. CVN named this one of its “2015 “Top Defense Verdicts.”
- Lewis v. Ethicon, Case No. 2:12-cv-04301, United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia: First MDL bellwether pelvic mesh product liability trial; defense verdict, 2014. “J&J Wins 1st Vaginal Mesh Bellwether Trial,” Law360, February 18, 2014
- Sessner v. Merck, Case No. ATL-L-3394-11, Superior Court of New Jersey Law Division: Atlantic County: Second New Jersey bellwether involving Fosamax®; defense verdict, 2012. “Merck Chalks Up Second Fosamax Trial Win in NJ,” Law360, April 18, 2012
- Andrews, Gaghan and Greenblatt v. Hoffmann-La Roche Inc., Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division: Atlantic County: Product liability action involving Accutane®; defense verdict, 2011. “Roche Win Upheld in ‘Twin Peaks’ Star’s Accutane Case,” Law360, August 4, 2014
- Rosenberg v. Merck & Co., Case No. ATL-L-3644-08MT, Superior Court of New Jersey Law Division: Atlantic County: New Jersey bellwether product liability case involving Fosamax®; defense verdict, 2011. “Merck Wins First State Fosamax Trial in NJ,” Law360, February 14, 2011
Motions and Appeals
- Cates v. Zeltiq Aesthetics, Inc., 73 F.4th 1342 (11th Cir. 2023) (affirming summary judgment granted in the CoolSculpting® litigation). “11th Circ. Freezes CoolSculpting User’s Product Liability Suit,” Law360, Jul. 24, 2023.
- Donalds v. Ethicon, Inc., 37 F.4th 400, 2023 WL 2446703 (4th Cir. 2023) (affirming summary judgment in a pelvic mesh case for insufficient proof of causation). “Ethicon And J&J Snag 4th Circ. Win In Pelvic Mesh Appeal,” Law360, Mar. 10, 2023.
- Bond v. Johnson & Johnson, et al., 2022 WL 4594185 (3rd Cir. 2022) (affirming summary judgment in hernia mesh case under North Carolina’s statute of repose); “NC Man’s J&J Mesh Suit Was Filed Too Late,” 3rd Circ. Rules,” Law360, Oct. 3, 2022.
- Perciballi v. Ethicon, Inc, 2022 WL 3147781 (2d Cir. 2022) (affirming summary judgment in favor of device manufacturer under New York statute of limitations); “2nd Circuit Affirms Symptoms Triggered Time Bar For Pelvic Mesh Claim,” Mealey’s Drugs & Devices, Aug. 11, 2022.
- Donaldson v. Johnson & Johnson, — F.4th –, 2022 WL 2145276 (7th Cir. 2022) (affirming summary judgment in a pelvic mesh case for insufficient proof of causation). “J&J Keeps Victory Over Defective Mesh Claims At 7th Circ.,” Law360, Jun. 15, 2022.
- Kelly v. Ethicon, Inc., No. 21-1769, 2021 WL 4998930 (8th Cir. 2021) (affirming summary judgment under Iowa statute of limitations).
- Salinero v. Johnson & Johnson, 995 F.3d 959 (11th Cir. 2021) (affirming summary judgment on failure to warn claim and rejecting exception to learned intermediary doctrine). “The Ten Best Prescription Drug/Medical Device Decisions of 2021.” Drug & Device Law Blog, Dec. 30, 2021.
- Ridings v. Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 444 F. Supp. 3d 973 (W.D. Mo. 2020) (preemption evidentiary hearing; summary judgment for defendant). “Tort Pandemic Countermeasures – The Ten Best Prescription Drug/Medical Device Decisions of 2020,” Drug and Device Law Blog, Dec. 30, 2020.
- Clabo v. Johnson & Johnson Health Care Systems Inc. et al., 982 F.3d 989, 2020 WL 7331496 (6th Cir. 2020) (affirming summary judgment on the basis of statute of repose). “J&J Prevails In Tenn. Woman’s Pelvic Mesh Suit At 6th Circ.,” Law360, Dec. 14, 2020.
- Nwatulegwu v. Boehringer Ingelheim Pharms., Inc., 668 Fed. Appx. 173, 2016 WL 4443600 (7th Cir. 2016) (affirming dismissal for failure to comply with discovery order).
- Weer v. Ethicon, Inc., 643 F. Appx. 304, 2016 WL 1359129 (4th Cir. 2016) (affirming dismissal for failure to effect service).
