Wis. Supreme Court tosses suit against Medtronic
Lawyer Blogs
The Wisconsin Supreme Court says patients cannot sue the makers of defective medical devices if they are approved for sale by federal regulators.
The court ruled against a man who had a defibrillator implanted and then removed after the manufacturer, Medtronic, Inc., warned its battery had a chance of failing.
The device had been approved for sale by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and was never recalled.
Joseph Blunt, Sr. of St. Francis filed a lawsuit against the company alleging negligence and other claims after he had surgery to remove the device.
The court says the lawsuit is barred by a federal law and by a U.S. Supreme Court decision last year that threw out a similar case against Minneapolis-based Medtronic.
Related listings
-
Lawyer fatally shot outside suburban Phila. office
Lawyer Blogs 02/12/2009A personal injury lawyer walking through a shopping center parking lot to his storefront office was shot in the back of the head Wednesday by an unknown assailant who fled in a minivan, police said. The shot that killed the lawyer was fired at point-...
-
Calif. inmate release prompts public safety debate
Lawyer Blogs 02/11/2009Without a U.S. Supreme Court reprieve, California will have to free roughly a third of its prison inmates in a few years, and how that can be done safely is still hotly debated. Corrections officials said Tuesday they are struggling with their respon...
-
Attorney general is reviewing state secret claims
Lawyer Blogs 02/10/2009Eric Holder, the new attorney general, has ordered a review of all claims of state secrets, which were used under President Bush to shield controversial anti-terrorism programs from lawsuits.The so-called state secrets privilege was invoked by the pr...
Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC
A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party
Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party
However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.