Amicus Brief

Download PDF


Case Attorneys

Anastasia P. Boden


Anastasia Boden is an attorney in PLF’s Economic Liberty Project, where she challenges anti-competitive licensing laws and laws that restrict freedom of speech. Anastasia’s practice largely consists of representing entrepreneurs … ›

View profile

Deborah J. La Fetra

Senior Attorney

Debbie grew up in an economically-striving lower-middle class family and was the first to get a college degree. Watching and learning from her exceptionally hard-working father, and with the support … ›

View profile

Case Commentary

See all posts

By Deborah J. La Fetra

Unending tort liability for innovators

The California Supreme Court issued a 4-3 decision in T.H. v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation. In doing so, the Court went further than it has ever gone before in applying the tort of negligent misrepresentation.

Read more

By James S. Burling

Weekly litigation report — December 2, 2016

Right to say you are who you are

Image result for photo by fontenot peggy
Peggy Fontenot with her art

We filed this complaint on behalf of Peggy Fontenot against the State of Oklahoma The rub of Fontenot v Pruitt is that Peggy Fontenot, who is a member of the Patawomeck Indian Tribe, is not allowed to say in Oklahoma that her photographs and artwork are made by an American Indian Why not? Because the Patawomeck tribe is recognized by Virginia but not by the federal government That matters because Oklahoma will not allow someone from a non-federally

Read more

By Anastasia P. Boden

Causation, and not deep pockets, should dictate liability

Today we filed this amicus brief asking the California Supreme Court to overturn the flawed decision in TH v Novartis, which would essentially impose never-ending tort liability on brand-name drug manufacturers for injuries caused by their generic counterparts  By adopting an expansive theory of liability, the law threatens to drive up the cost of doing business—possibly deterring useful medications from coming to market

In this case, the Court of Appeal held that a brand pharmaceutical manufacturer was liable to a plaintiff that consumed a generic version of the drug—years after the generic manufacturer left the market and sold the production rights to someone else  Under the theory of

Read more