Two IVC filter cases that were directly filed into the multidistrict litigation docket involving Cook Medical Inc. have been reinstated by a federal appellate panel as they are governed by the law of their originating jurisdictions.
The plaintiffs involved in the lawsuit sued Cook.Inc for the injuries caused to them because of the company's inferior vena cava filters. The suits were filed directly in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana for observing consolidated pretrial proceedings.
A judge explained that the case highlights the importance of a written order at the outset of multidistrict litigation that discusses ground rules for the cases filed by the injured parties. The statement even highlighted that direct filing helps the judicial efficiency but can also result in complications at times by affecting the personal jurisdiction, venue and choice of law.
The choice of law rules differs for all three jurisdictions specifying the substantive law of the state. According to the court, there is a three-year statute of limitations for South Carolina, whereas Indiana has a two-year statute of limitations.
Cook requested the MDL court to consider Indiana’s choice-of-law rules for the suit, but the court eventually dismissed the two cases as untimely.
An attorney for the plaintiffs stated that earlier, Cook argued for choice of law rules from the originating jurisdictions in seven direct-filed cases in the MDL. The attorney even said that the plaintiff may tailor the litigation strategy and should not be restricted based on a retroactive change of the ground rules.
