Linda is one of the nation’s most experienced appellate attorneys in class-action, multidistrict, and mass-tort litigation involving drugs, medical devices, and dietary supplements in both state and federal courts. For more than twenty years, she has been a member of the national defense counsel team at Ulmer representing clients in mass tort litigation nationwide involving products such as propoxyphene, isotretinoin, metoclopramide, fen/phen, ephedra, ADHD medications, hormone replacement therapy products, oral contraceptives, and antidepressants. Her work in the tens of thousands of lawsuits has avoided trials by obtaining dismissals or orders granting judgment as a matter of law in the vast majority of those lawsuits. She has handled numerous appeals spawned by those dismissals in state and federal appellate courts nationwide.
She was the key contributor in developing, and painstakingly supporting, the constitutional argument that the federal law governing generic pharmaceutical products precludes state-law claims against manufacturers of those products premised on product warnings and design. After advancing that constitutional argument in state and federal trial and appellate courts for over a decade, she ultimately secured review of that important, and ground-breaking, issue by the United States Supreme Court. In PLIVA v. Mensing and Mutual Pharmaceutical Company v. Bartlett, the United States Supreme Court agreed that federal law precludes state-law inadequate warning and defective design claims involving generic pharmaceutical products. Those rulings have spawned new legal theories and Linda’s extensive trial- and appellate-level work throughout the country litigating those challenges to the preemption rulings in Mensing and Bartlett continues to shape the landscape of litigation involving the pharmaceuticals industry.
Linda also counsels a range of clients regarding administrative and federal regulatory compliance matters, including Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval for marketing products and compliance with manufacturing, marketing, and advertising regulations. Clients rely on Linda’s intimate knowledge of complex FDA regulations and the legislative history of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) to navigate potential regulatory pitfalls and maintain positions of strength in highly competitive industries.
Order of the Coif; Articles Editor, Law Review (1988-89); Law Review (1987-88); American Jurisprudence Award – Professional Responsibility; John R. Sayler Prize – Commercial Paper; College of Law Merit Scholarship (1986-87 and 1987-88); Dudley V. Sutphin Scholarship
State of Ohio
U.S. Supreme Court
U.S. Court of Appeals, First Circuit
U.S. Court of Appeals, Second Circuit
U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit
U.S. Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit
U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit
U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit
U.S. Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit
U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
U.S. Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit
U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Ohio
U.S. District Court, Western District of Tennessee