South Carolina Governor Rallies Support for Key Legal Reform Package
Following Press Conference, S.B. 244 Set for Senate Floor Debate and Vote
Eike v. Allergan
(7th Cir., filed October 18, 2016): Arguing that the plaintiffs’ speculative claim that they might have paid less for a medication if defendants had packaged it more efficiently does not describe a cognizable injury in fact, and therefore, they lack standing. Accepting plaintiffs’ theory would invite abusive class-action litigation. If plaintiffs’ novel standing theory were accepted, it would encourage lawyers to bring class-action suits over any business practice that could be portrayed as inefficient, based on conjecture that greater efficiency might have translated into savings for customers.
The Court ruled in favor of ATRA’s position on March 6, 2017. The Court reversed the grant of class certification and ordered the case to be dismissed for lack of standing.
Latest News
View all news
ATRA Urges Gov. Youngkin to Veto HB 2351, Protect Right to Appeal in Virginia
Proposed Appeal Bond Cap Hike Threatens Fairness and Business Climate, ATRA Says
Trial Lawyer Advertising Soars to $2.5 Billion, Outpacing Pizza Restaurant Ads in Key Markets
New Report from the American Tort Reform Association Exposes Dangers of Aggressive Legal Services Advertising
Georgia Senate Acts to Restore Fairness in Civil Justice System
ATRA Applauds Passage of S.B. 68 to Address Phantom Damages, Jury Anchoring, Seat Belt Evidence Admissibility
ATRA Praises Lawmakers in ‘Judicial Hellhole®’ South Carolina for Pursuit of Tort Reform
Legislation Addresses Unfair Fault Allocation, Provides Juries with More Relevant Information
Maryland’s ‘Lawsuit Inferno’ Lawmakers Aim to Repeal Damage Limits, Increasing Costs for Residents
Marylanders’ Annual $1,731 ‘Tort Tax’ May Increase with Proposed Changes in Annapolis