We Protect Your Products

Morrison & Foerster’s Product Liability and Counseling group is a one-stop shop for product manufacturers and resellers. Our clients turn to us to protect and defend not just their products, but also their brands. We are counsel of choice to industry leaders in consumer products, pharmaceuticals and medical devices, aviation, and transportation.

From Product Development to Market and Beyond

We help you navigate complex regulatory environments, partnering with you as your business grows and guiding you through all phases of your product life cycles.

We provide timely advice on regulatory compliance, product labeling, and litigation risk assessment, both pre- and post-market. Our expertise includes guiding clients through complex product recalls, counseling on insurance and indemnification issues, and advising on acquisitions involving ongoing product liability claims.

In all that we do, we aim to minimize the risk and impact of litigation involving our clients’ products. But sometimes litigation is unavoidable. And when lawsuits are filed, our trial lawyers and national coordinating counsel are by your side to advocate for the best possible outcome. Our trial lawyers have tried hundreds of cases to judges and juries, arbitrators, and administrative bodies. And if the case goes up on appeal, our award-winning appellate lawyers are ready to take on our clients’ most challenging legal issues.

No case is too big or too small. We specialize in defending large class actions, multi-party serial tort litigation, and mass tort litigation. At the same time, we leverage our breadth and depth of expertise to dispose of small cases efficiently.

We Thrive on Answering the Unanswerable

In the evolving digital age, regulators and courts have yet to grapple with many of the questions our clients face. Our team of thought leaders draws on the vast technical knowledge of Morrison & Foerster’s deep bench of industry-leading professionals to solve our clients’ most complex and novel issues. We stay on the cutting edge of legal developments that impact our clients and keep you informed and up to date through our blogs and client alerts. We leverage that intellectual agility to develop creative solutions for some of the world’s leading technology clients to help them stay ahead of regulators and plaintiffs’ attorneys.

Fitbit
Represent Fitbit in a class action alleging that a wearable device does not accurately track sleep as advertised and in two putative class actions alleging that Fitbit’s heart rate monitoring does not work as advertised.
Lethal Injection Matters
Worked with a major pharmaceutical company to stop the states of Missouri and Texas from using a significant anesthesia drug in their executions. Faced with the threat of litigation, both states chose alternative methods for lethal injection. Our work helped to prevent a catastrophic drug shortage, as the European Union, which publicly opposes executions and had previously banned the export of drugs used in lethal injections, threatened to impose export restrictions if this drug was used for executions anywhere in the United States.
Automobile Manufacturer
Represent an automobile manufacturer in putative class actions that certain safety and autonomous driving features do not perform as advertised.
Gol Airlines Flight 1907 Litigation
Represented Honeywell International Inc. in a lawsuit involving a mid-air collision between a Boeing 737-800, operated as Gol Airlines Flight 1907, and an Embraer Legacy 600, operated by ExcelAire Services, over the Amazon jungle, Brazil, on September 29, 2006. The accident resulted in the deaths of 154 passengers and crewmembers. Cases were brought in seven different districts, and we were successful in obtaining consolidation of the cases for MDL treatment in the Eastern District of New York. In late July 2008, the motion to dismiss the cases to Brazil for forum non conveniens was granted. The Brazilian carrier is settling the cases with claimants in Brazil. On appeal, the District Court's dismissal of the consolidated actions was affirmed by the Second Circuit. A four week international arbitration conducted in London under the law of England and Wales before a three member tribunal then followed to apportion liability for the accident among certain defendants. The arbitration resulted in a finding Honeywell was without fault for the accident and an award of costs against certain defendants in favor of Honeywell.
Orthopedic Implant Manufacturer
Provide broad-based support for an orthopedic implant manufacturer, including product liability counseling and serving as national product liability counsel. The product liability docket includes multiple cases in jurisdictions across the country and around the world alleging various product liability claims.
Air France 447 Investigation and Litigation
Represented Honeywell International Inc. in litigation arising from the crash of Air France 447. The crash occurred on June 1, 2009, when an Airbus A330-203 went missing over the Atlantic Ocean on a flight from Rio de Janeiro, Brazil to Paris, France. All 228 passengers and crew perished in the crash. A successful motion to dismiss for forum non conveniens before Judge Charles Breyer in the Northern District of California resulted in the dismissal of all actions in favor of a French forum.
Security Cameras
Advise a security camera manufacturer on product safety compliance and recalls, coordinating root cause investigations and representing them before the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) on voluntary recalls.
Pharmaceutical Distributor
Represent a pharmaceutical distributor in thousands of cases filed across the country, defending against plaintiffs’ allegations of injury due to exposure to a number of pharmaceutical products.
Heparin Litigation
Serving as national counsel in numerous cases filed around the United States, alleging side effects from heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (“HIT”). Our client is the largest manufacturer of heparin, a prescription injectable blood coagulant often used in hemodialysis and cardiac invasive procedures.
Alaska Airlines Flight 694 (Ginena)
Scored a defense verdict for Alaska Airlines in a case brought by a group of first-class passengers who were removed from Alaska Airlines Flight 694 on September 20, 2003. The flight was headed from Vancouver, British Columbia, to Las Vegas but diverted to Reno in order to remove the passengers. We obtained summary judgment of several claims based on the Warsaw Convention, but the remaining claims proceeded to trial. After a three-week trial, the jury of seven returned a unanimous defense verdict on all counts.
Consumer Electronics Manufacturer
Advise a major consumer electronics manufacturer on warning and labeling requirements, and risk assessment, and represented them before the CPSC in conducting a voluntary recall.
Video Game Industry
Counsel a company in the video game industry on product liability issues, including risk assessments, product development and risk minimization, and new questions of liability arising from open source code. We also assist with crisis management for product safety incidents.
In re Aredia and Zometa Litigation
Represented a major pharmaceutical company in MDL proceedings and state-consolidated cases in which more than 200 plaintiffs claimed that pamidronate, an injectable drug used in the treatment of certain cancers, causes a degenerative condition of the jaw. On January 30, 2012, we obtained dismissals from all remaining plaintiffs in the MDL. The MDL court found that plaintiffs’ claims boiled down to failure to warn claims and, therefore, were preempted under the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Mensing. In addition to MDL proceedings in the Eastern District of New York, we represented our client in New Jersey mass tort proceedings.
Cessna Caravan 208 Icing Accidents
Representing Cessna Aircraft Company as national coordinating counsel in individual personal injury and wrongful death cases pending in various jurisdictions in the United States arising from accidents involving Cessna Caravan 208 aircraft flown in alleged icing conditions.
In re Reglan/Metoclopramide Litigation
Representing a major generic pharmaceutical company in hundreds of lawsuits (comprising more than 2,000 individual claims) that have been filed in numerous jurisdictions around the United States, alleging that Reglan/metoclopramide (when prescribed off-label for psychiatric purposes) causes significant side effects and damages health. The cases are pending in mass tort proceedings in Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and California.
Chinook Helicopter Crash in Afghanistan (Getz v. Honeywell)
Obtained summary judgment based on the government contract defense for Honeywell International Inc. in litigation arising from the crash of an Army special operations Chinook in Afghanistan on February 17, 2007.  Eight people died and 14 were injured when the special operations Chinook crashed while returning from a mission pursuing a member of Al Qaeda.  In August 2011, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the decision ruling that Honeywell and the other government contractor defendants were not liable for the crash.
Cleantech Company
Worked with a solar energy client to implement a fast-track recall of its products, and negotiated a corrective action plan with the CPSC.
Cytec Industries
Serving as national coordinating counsel for Cytec in asbestos-containing product cases pending in California, Delaware, Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, New York, Maryland, Texas, and Wisconsin, as well as the multi-district proceedings in Philadelphia. The cases include personal injury and wrongful death claims by persons alleging exposure in the workplace to asbestos fibers.
Electronics Manufacturer
Helped a client develop a response plan, a public relations plan, and customer settlements in connection with reported product safety incidents.  Assisted client in determining whether incidents constituted reportable events to the CPSC and worked closely with the CPSC in responding to customers.
Eyewear Manufacturer
Advised a luxury, high-performance eyewear manufacturer on the use of warning labels and instruction manuals for its sunglasses, 3D eyewear, and Hydro Pens.
High-end Children’s Products Retailer
Advised retailer of high-end children’s products on product safety incidents, product recall and reporting issues, flammability requirements, third-party testing requirements, required General Certificate of Conformity regulations under the CPSIA, and Proposition 65 warnings.
Orange County Groundwater Litigation
Representing two companies in one of the largest groundwater contamination cases of its kind (TCE, PCE, DNAPL and perchlorate), involving a precedent-setting issue of whether a water district has the ability to create its own mini-Superfund. Obtained summary judgment for both companies. 
RCRA Contaminated Property Remediation Litigation
In one of the state’s largest RCRA cases set for trial in 2012, obtained cleanup and injunctive relief for solvent (toluene and methane) contamination on behalf of Newark Industries caused by a prior facility operator, and recovery of more than $1.1 million in attorney fees and costs.  
Video Game Developer and Publisher
Advised a client on its duties and responsibilities under the CPSIA in marketing, selling, and labeling its products.

Chambers USA 2017
National: Product Liability and Mass Torts


Legal 500 US 2017
New York: Product Liability Litigation – Defendants (Tier 1)
Product Liability, Mass Tort, and Class Action: Aerospace and Aviation
Product Liability, Mass Tort, and Class Action: Consumer Products
Product Liability, Mass Tort, and Class Action: Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices - Defense
Product Liability, Mass Tort, and Class Action: Toxic Tort - Defense


U.S. News – Best Lawyers® Best Law Firms 2017
New York: Product Liability Litigation – Defendants (Tier 1)
San Diego: Product Liability Litigation - Defendants (Tier 1)
San Diego: Mass Tort Litigation/Class Actions - Defendants (Tier 1)
San Francisco: Personal Injury Litigation - Defendants (Tier 1)


Here is what they say about us:

(Chambers USA 2017)

“One client describes the firm as ‘very knowledgeable in all aspects of products,’ noting that its lawyers ‘can answer any question we have.’"
(Chambers USA 2017)

“They have a very deep team – any specific questions, they’ve got someone to take care of it.”
(Chambers USA 2015)

“Very good client service: their advice is prompt and to be relied upon. Their knowledge of the sector is excellent.”
(Chambers USA 2015)

“Very knowledgeable in all aspects of products,” noting that its lawyers “can answer any question we have.”
(Chambers USA 2018)


MoFo Scores Significant Appellate Victory For Businesses in Fruit, Juice, And Baby Food Litigation


MoFo named California Product Liability Department of the Year for 2013 by The Recorder.


Genetically Engineered Food


2012 Mergers + Acquisitions Annual Review

Email Disclaimer

Unsolicited e-mails and information sent to Morrison & Foerster will not be considered confidential, may be disclosed to others pursuant to our Privacy Policy, may not receive a response, and do not create an attorney-client relationship with Morrison & Foerster. If you are not already a client of Morrison & Foerster, do not include any confidential information in this message. Also, please note that our attorneys do not seek to practice law in any jurisdiction in which they are not properly authorized to do so.

©1996-2018 Morrison & Foerster LLP. All rights reserved.