Who We Are

Our Lawyers

Meet the lawyers who will be working on your case. With more than 50 years of collective experience, we have much to offer you, including awards, accolades and nominations that cannot be matched.

Our Lawyers

Case Results

Mondelli v. Kendel Homes Corp.

With regard to the Mondellis' appeal, we conclude that the district court abused its discretion in excluding the testimony of Drs. Pour and King. This exclusion of evidence was prejudicial error. The district court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to allow joinder of the claims of the Mondelli family.

In The News

Our Lawyers
in the Media

At Domina Law Group we are fortunate to work on fascinating and compelling legal problems and lawsuits that change laws and affect our country – Media across the US and across the borders agree. Read stories and watch videos of our cases and with our lawyers.

Attorney Referrals

Our firm has a reputation as leaders in complex litigation.

Get the best result possible by partnering with us.

Our legal skills have been utilized in some of the most specialized and complicated cases. These cases were often referred to us by other professionals in the field. We honor and respect lawyers and other professionals who choose to refer complex cases to our law firm.

We have paid millions in fees to our co-counsel. Call us.

Contact Us

Contact Us Today

Send Your Message

Trial is legal surgery, the narrowest specialty, and it requires unique skills. Our clients want our service and hope they never need it again- like surgery.

United States Supreme Court Expands Preemption Doctrine; Limits State Law Claims

1. The United States Supreme Court’s mid-February 2008 decision in Riegel v. Medtronic, impacts efforts by lawyers to find relief for injured clients suffering from the adverse consequences of defective, or misdesigned, medical devices. Riegel v. Medtronic, number 06-179, decided February 20, 2008, decided a case brought by Mr. and Mrs. Riegel against Medtronic after one of its catheters ruptured in Mr. Riegel’s coronary artery during heart surgery. They alleged the device was not properly labeled under New York law.

2. The Supreme Court concluded that the Medical Device Amendments of 1976, 21 USC § 360, preempts common law claims challenging the safety or effectiveness of medical devices marketed in a form that received pre-market approval from the FDA. The court concluded that the federal government established requirements applicable to Medtronic’s catheter within § 360k(a)(1)’s meaning. Pre-market approval, according to the court imposes “specific requirements applicable to a particular device”. This pervasive federal scheme of regulation and approval preempts state law claims.

3. 21 CFR § 808(1)(d)(1) contains a provision noting that the Medical Devices Act’s preemption does not extend to “[s]tate or local requirements of general applicability [whose] purpose … relates either to other products in addition to devices … or to unfair trade practices in which the requirements are not limited to devices”. But this regulatory provision did not impact the court’s decision.

4. Preemption Doctrine cases recognizing the supercession of a federal law, and its preemption of state law claims, expands federal government regulation and control.

Domina Law Group pc llo is a firm of trial lawyers. We specialize in complex litigation on a national basis. Our lawyers are ethical, aggressive, and committed to providing spirit and vitality to the judicial system and our client’s legal rights.

Categories: News

How Can We Help You?

Tell us about your case.

Send Your Message