Louisiana Medical and Biotechnology Legal Defense Firm

Our lawyers have many years of first-hand experience handling difficult, high-exposure litigation in the biotech sector, especially in the class action defense of pharmaceutical companies, medical device manufacturers and their insurers.  The Keogh Cox approach is to plan for exit strategies in every case from the very beginning, including constantly looking for removal to Louisiana’s federal courts, or motions for summary judgment. We defend private and public life science corporations headquartered throughout the U.S. on tort liability occurrences and litigation in Louisiana, often as approved panel counsel.  Our biotech team includes a lawyer who is also a Registered Nurse with a Certificate in Corporate Healthcare Compliance, an advantage whether we are helping with a home health, physical therapy, surgical malpractice, defective pharmaceutical or medical device claim from an injured patient or a contractual non-compete dispute involving a former hospital employee. We are experienced in preemption issues as well as coordination with state and federal statutes and authorities.  Our biotech lawyers also offer counsel to drug company clients dealing with warnings and labeling issues.


Recent Experience Highlights

Client Story:  Dismissal Obtained Due to Plaintiff’s Inability to Prove Causation Between the Alleged Damages and Alleged Failure to Warn.

Where we started:  The plaintiff, a dentist, alleged a manufacturer of dental blades was liable to him for injuries he caused to his patient while using an incorrect blade.  The dentist brought his claims against the manufacturer under the Louisiana Products Liability Act. Our roadmap:  Through discovery, it was established that the dentist, a sophisticated user of the dental blades, failed to use the correct blade on his patient, resulting in the injury.  The dental blades shipped to the dentist included instructions for use, and the physician admitted that he did not read the instructions prior to using the blades. For this reason, it was urged that the dentist could not prove a causal connection between what he claimed was an inadequate warning or failure to warn, and the alleged damage. Resolution:  Keogh Cox prevailed on a summary judgment because the plaintiff could not show a causal connection between the claimed inadequate warnings or failure to warn, and the damages.  It was also established that a defect in the blade did not exist.

Client Story:  Case Dismissed Against a Medical Device Manufacturer for Lack of Evidence.

Where we started:  A plaintiff filed suit against a number of physicians and the manufacturer of a medical device used during a back procedure. The plaintiff alleged that the physicians deviated from the applicable standard of care, and claimed that the device was defective and unreasonably dangerous – resulting in severe, life altering damages.  Her claims against the device manufacturer were filed under the Louisiana Products Liability Act. Our roadmap:  Due to the severity of the plaintiff’s purported injuries, approximately 55 depositions were taken of various parties and fact witnesses.  Throughout discovery, we obtained evidence confirming that our client’s medical device was neither defective nor unreasonably dangerous. Resolution:  At the close of discovery, and pursuant to the court’s scheduling order, we filed a summary judgment on behalf of the device manufacturer.  The court agreed that the evidence did not show that the device was defective or unreasonably dangerous. A dismissal was granted in favor of Keogh Cox’s client.

Client Story:  A Device used During a Gastrointestinal Procedure was not Defective or Unreasonably Dangerous.

Where we started:  A plaintiff filed suit against a number of physicians and the manufacturer of a medical device used during a gastrointestinal procedure. The plaintiff alleged that the physicians deviated from the applicable standard of care and that the device was defective and unreasonably dangerous.  The claims were filed under the Louisiana Products Liability Act. Our roadmap:  At the outset of the litigation, documents were obtained that proved the device was tested immediately following the subject procedure and found to be in proper working order.  Defects were not discovered at the time of the testing.  Additionally, evidence established that the equipment was state of the art. The plaintiff was unable to show an alternative design that would have averted the potential injury, and other causes for the alleged injury could not be ruled out. Resolution:  Keogh Cox filed summary judgment on behalf of the device manufacturer, resulting in a dismissal of the claims.


More Details about Biotechnology, Medical Technology and Life Sciences

Our practice is defense oriented, handling all types and sizes of life science claims in Louisiana’s state and federal and state courts.  We help clients facing problems involving injuries, insurance, medical devices and pharmaceuticals, including:

  • Tort liability against manufacturers
  • Federal preemption
  • FDA regulations