Supreme Court Should Curb Abusive Forum Shopping By Plaintiffs’ Bar

Toles v. Mead Johnson & Co. is one of thousands of product liability suits involving lifesaving nutritional products that the nation’s neonatal intensive care units rely upon to care for preterm infants. The core allegation in these suits—despite federal agencies’ scientific and medical consensus to the contrary—is that the nutritional products at issue cause necrotizing […]

Supreme Court Should Curb Abusive Forum Shopping By Plaintiffs’ Bar Read More »

Monsanto Co. v. Durnell: Common Sense & Sound Science Prevail At Last!

For more than 35 years, Capital Appellate Advocacy founder Larry Ebner has argued in federal and state appellate and trial courts throughout the United States that federal law preempts personal injury suits alleging that a pesticide manufacturer failed to include a necessary health or safety warning on its U.S. EPA-regulated and approved product labeling. Larry’s federal preemption

Monsanto Co. v. Durnell: Common Sense & Sound Science Prevail At Last! Read More »

Consent-By-Registration Needs Due Process Guardrails

In a 5 to 4 decision, the Supreme Court held in Mallory v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co., 600 U.S. 122 (2023), that a Pennsylvania statute explicitly providing notice that registering to do business in that state represents consent to the state’s general “all purpose” jurisdiction does not violate due process. Mallory, however, left unanswered important constitutional

Consent-By-Registration Needs Due Process Guardrails Read More »

Supreme Court Should Hold That Federal Law Precludes Climate-Change Tort Suits

More than 60 state and local governments have filed state-law tort suits in state courts around the United States collectively seeking billions of dollars in damages and other relief from major oil and natural gas producers for the alleged local effects of global climate change. Preclusion of these proliferating climate-change tort suits is crucial not

Supreme Court Should Hold That Federal Law Precludes Climate-Change Tort Suits Read More »

ALF Amicus Briefs Urge Supreme Court To Revisit State Consent-By-Registration Statutes

Under Pennsylvania and Minnesota laws, companies that register to do business in those states are deemed to have consented to the state’s general (“all purpose”) jurisdiction. This means that an out-of-state corporation can be sued by an out-of-state plaintiff for a cause of action that has no connection to Pennsylvania or Minnesota. All states have

ALF Amicus Briefs Urge Supreme Court To Revisit State Consent-By-Registration Statutes Read More »

Monsanto Co. v. Durnell: A Supreme Court Oral Argument Preview

On April 22, 2026 ALF Executive Vice President & General Counsel Larry Ebner participated in a webinar panel previewing the Supreme Court oral argument in Monsanto Co. v. Durnell (24-1068). The question presented by the case is whether FIFRA, the federal pesticide regulatory statute, preempts state-law failure-to-warn claims based on a pesticide producer’s failure to provide a

Monsanto Co. v. Durnell: A Supreme Court Oral Argument Preview Read More »

ALF Urges Supreme Court To Review & Invalidate SEC “Gag Rule”

For more than 50 years the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has been enforcing a “Gag Rule,” 17 C.F.R. § 202.5(e), whenever a civil enforcement target enters into a judicial or administrative settlement agreement with the Commission. The Gag Rule requires settling enforcement targets to agree that they will not publicly deny any allegation in

ALF Urges Supreme Court To Review & Invalidate SEC “Gag Rule” Read More »

Supreme Court Should End Roundup Failure-To-Warn Litigation

On January 16, 2026 the Supreme Court granted certiorari in Monsanto Co. v. Durnell (24-1068) to address the question of whether the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) preempts pesticide label-related failure-to-warn claims where U.S. EPA does not require the warning at issue. The answer to this question will affect state-law personal injury claims alleging that Monsanto

Supreme Court Should End Roundup Failure-To-Warn Litigation Read More »

My FIFRA Preemption Journey

On January 16, 2026, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in Monsanto Co. v. Durnell (24-1068) to address the following question: “Whether the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act [FIFRA] preempts a label-based failure-to-warn claim where EPA has not required the warning.” The answer to this question could result in dismissal of tens of thousands of

My FIFRA Preemption Journey Read More »

ALF Urges Supreme Court To Review & Invalidate “Drug Price Negotiation Program”

On behalf of the Atlantic Legal Foundation, I have written and filed an amicus brief supporting the pending petitions for a writ of certiorari in Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Kennedy (25-749) & Bristol Myers Squibb Co. v. Kennedy (25-751). Both petitions ask the Supreme Court to hold the Inflation Reduction Act’s misleadingly named “Drug Price Negotiation Program” unconstitutional. Case

ALF Urges Supreme Court To Review & Invalidate “Drug Price Negotiation Program” Read More »

Scroll to Top