SERVICES

INDUSTRIES

ADMISSIONS

  • District of Columbia
  • Maryland
  • Supreme Court of the United States
  • U.S. District Court - District of Columbia
  • U.S. District Court - Maryland
  • United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
  • United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
  • United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
  • United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
  • United States Court of Federal Claims

MEMBERSHIPS

  • Bar Association of the District of Columbia
  • International Association of Defense Counsel

EDUCATION

  • University of Maryland School of Law, JD
  • University of Maryland, BS
Mullady@BlankRome.com
Download V-Card

Raymond G. Mullady, Jr.

Partner

Washington, DC v. +1.202.772.5828 f. +1.202.572.8414

CHAIR, PRODUCTS LIABILITY, MASS TORTS, AND INSURANCE PRACTICE GROUP

Ray Mullady, a partner in Blank Rome’s Washington, DC office, is a trial lawyer with nearly 30 years of civil litigation experience, including more than 20 jury trials.

Drawing on his extensive trial experience in a number of areas, Mr. Mullady focuses his practice on helping pharmaceutical, chemical and oil and gas companies successfully defend high-stakes litigation. For example, as a member of the Firm’s Shale Oil & Gas Development Industry Group, Mr. Mullady presently is assisting clients with issues and claims relating to hydraulic fracturing activity and other aspects of shale oil and gas drilling and production.

Mr. Mullady has received the highest possible rating from Martindale-Hubbell. Additionally, Mr. Mullady was named to the 2014 edition of SuperLawyers as a top attorney in the Washington, D.C. area for business litigation.

He is an active litigator who has tried cases to verdict in state and federal courts throughout the country and before arbitration panels, and has briefed and argued cases before numerous federal and state appellate courts.

Mr. Mullady is an active member of the International Association of Defense Counsel, where he serves on the Toxic and Hazardous Substances Litigation and Drug, Device and Biotechnology Committees.

Mr. Mullady writes and lectures frequently on liability prevention, defense strategy, and other litigation topics. Publications include:

  • “Defending Marcelllus Shale Groundwater Contamination Claims: The Case Against Class Actions and other Theories of Liability,” Defense Counsel Journal, Vol 79, No. 2, April 2012.
  • "Congressional Democrats’ Report on Hydraulic Fracturing Chemicals Provides No Evidence of Chemicals’ Potential Harm to Human Health or the Environment,” Marcellus Shale Alert, Blank Rome LLP, April 2011 (No. 4).
  • "Generic Drugs Under Attack: The Case for Supreme Court Reversal of Demahy and Mensing," Co-Author with Dior Watanabe, Rx for the Defense (Fall 2010).
  • "Qui Tams: Being Prepared for Whistleblowers," Co-Author with Christopher O'Connell, ACI's 3rd National Conference for the Drug & Device Industries, June 24-25, 2008, Philadelphia, PA.
  • "Protecting Trade Secrets and Other Intellectual Property in Drug and Medical Device Litigation," Rx for the Defense DRI (Winter 2004), Co-Author with S. Hansen and J. Pelletier.
  • "Everything You Needed and Wanted to Know About Black Box Warnings,” Drug & Medical Device Litigation, Defense Counsel Journal, Vol. 68, No. 1 January, 2001.
  • “Everything You Wanted to Know About Black Box Warnings,” Drug & Medical Device Litigation, Defense Practice Course Book, The DRI Course Book Series, April 2000.
  • “The Federal Preemptive Effect of FDA Pre-Market Approval on Product Liability Claims For Regulated Prescription Drugs and Medical Devices,” Food, Drug, Cosmetic and Medical Device Law Device Law Digest , Vol. aa, No. e, October 1994, Co-Author with J. Quigley.
  • “Sources of Toxics Liability to Private Parties, The Defense and Management of Toxics Litigation,” Government Institutes, Inc., 1990, Co-Author with R. Blue.
  • “Considerations in the Management and Defense of Pharmaceutical Litigation in the United States,” Fulbright Papers 9, Products Liability, Insurance and the Pharmaceutical Industry, 1990, G. Howells (Ed.).
  • "Products Liability Law Manual," Maryland Institute for Continuing Professional Education of Lawyers, Inc., 1990, Co-Author with J. Dewey and F. Burch.
  • “Probation Revocation in Maryland: The Effect of Nonfinal and Reversed Criminal Convictions,”42 Maryland Law Review,1996, 1983.  

REPRESENTATIVE MATTERS

  • Life Sciences Litigation. Mr. Mullady represents pharmaceutical, chemical and oil and gas companies in product liability and toxic tort litigation. He has defended clients in some of the most celebrated litigation in this area in the past three decades, obtaining key victories for manufacturers of prescription medications, childhood vaccines, medical devices, herbicides, chemicals, asbestos and tobacco products. In 2013, he obtained a defense verdict for a major oilfield services company in the Northern District of West Virginia in a case involving alleged exposure to hydraulic fracturing chemicals.
  • Shale Oil & Gas. Mr. Mullady and the firm currently act as national counsel for a leading oilfield services company in well integrity and groundwater contamination litigation and issues relating to shale oil and gas development.
  • Expert Testimony - Mass Tort Defense. Mr. Mullady has been retained by a major insurer to provide expert testimony on the proper allocation of litigation defense costs in connection with a multi-district litigation involving a pharmaceutical product.
  • Sunshine Act/Aggregate Spend. Mr. Mullady is currently writing, speaking and advising clients on future litigation and enforcement potential on publicly reported data and aggregate spend.
  • CPSC Investigations and Litigation. Mr. Mullady represents clients in the juvenile products industry in Section 15 investigations and litigation initiated by the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission and Department of Justice, as well as product liability litigation involving such products. He also assists clients in challenging and responding to reports of harm published on the CPSC’s saferproducts.gov database.
  • Daubert/Frye-Reed. Mr. Mullady represents clients litigating Daubert and Frye-Reed challenges to “junk science” and unreliable plaintiff expert testimony. In February 2013, he won a Daubert motion in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia resulting in the disqualification of a plaintiff's toxicologist in a case alleging personal injuries as a result of alleged exposure to hydraulic fracturing chemicals. In 2009, he was part of a team of lawyers who extended the boundaries of Frye-Reed in Maryland to preclude expert testimony hypothesizing that the presence of the preservative thimerosal in childhood vaccines causes neurological defects, such as autism. Blackwell v. Wyeth, Inc., Court of Appeals of Maryland, No. 112, September Term 2008 (May 7, 2009). In 1996, he secured the disqualification of the lead, national plaintiff expert in tire/rim “mismatch” personal injury litigation, in the District of Nebraska. He argued the appeal of that decision before the Eighth Circuit, and obtained an affirmance of the lower court’s Daubert ruling in Pietzmeier v. Hennessy Industries, Inc., 97 F.3d 293 (8th Cir. 1996), cert denied 117 S.Ct. 1552 (1997). This case was a precursor to the Supreme Court's landmark decision in Kuhmo Tire, Ltd. v. Carmichael, 526 U.S. 137 (1999), holding that Daubert applies not only to testimony based on scientific knowledge, but also to testimony based on technical or other specialized knowledge. 

Historical Matters:

  • Air France 447 Litigation. Mr. Mullady represented a leading manufacturer of avionics in litigation arising from the crash of Air France 447 off the coast of Rio De Janeiro, on June 1, 2009, which resulted in the deaths of 228 passengers and crew and the initiation of 56 lawsuits in various U.S. courts. The cases were consolidated in a multi-district litigation in the Northern District of California before the Honorable Charles Breyer. The cases were settled with no payment by Mr. Mullady's client.
  • First Amendment Litigation. Mr. Mullady represented an individual defendant in a high-profile, commercial defamation case brought by a Fortune 100 corporation in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. In the same case he was also lead counsel on an interlocutory appeal to the D.C. Circuit on an issue of first impression in the D.C. Circuit involving the application of the D.C. Anti-SLAPP Act to cases in federal court. Over the course of his nearly 30-year career, Mr. Mullady has represented individuals and media outlets as libel and First Amendment counsel. In 2000, he tried to verdict a two-week libel case involving a public figure plaintiff in the Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County Maryland.
  • W.R. Grace Bankruptcy. Mr. Mullady was lead trial counsel for the court-appointed representative of future asbestos personal injury claimants in In re W.R. Grace & Co., Case No. 01-1137 (JKF), in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware. Following several weeks of trial in the Spring of 2008, W.R. Grace reached an agreement with the present and future asbestos claimants that would allow it to emerge from bankruptcy.  
  • Wyeth/Pfizer. For nearly three decades, Mr. Mullady represented Wyeth in product liability actions involving a wide range of products including thimerosal-containing childhood vaccines, diet medications, DTP and oral polio vaccines, tetracycline, anti-depressants, and over-the-counter products.
  • Roche Molecular Systems. Mr. Mullady was counsel for Roche Molecular Systems, Inc. and Hoffmann-LaRoche, Inc. in U.S. ex rel. Promega v. Hoffmann-LaRoche, Inc., et al., a qui tam case in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. The case involved patents and licensing programs relating to Roche's Nobel Prize-winning polymerase chain reaction ("PCR") process for amplifying DNA for research, diagnostic and forensic uses. Mr. Mullady led a team of lawyers who obtained a dismissal of the case with prejudice in September 2004.
  • American Cyanamid Company. Mr. Mullady represented American Cyanamid in Worm v. American Cyanamid Co., 970 F.2d 1301, on remand, 1992 WL 386062, aff’d 5F.3d 744 (4th Cir. 1993), a herbicide product liability case in which he obtained summary judgment on the basis of federal preemption. He argued the case twice before the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, each time obtaining an affirmance of the trial court’s preemption ruling. Mr. Mullady also represented American Cyanamid in a series of lead pigment-in-paint cases spending in state and federal courts around the country. The cases included actions on behalf of states, municipalities, and governmental units, private classes and individuals, and involved both personal injury and property damage claims.
  • Sioux City Air Crash Defendant. Mr. Mullady represented a defendant in 18 wrongful death and personal injury cases filed in the Baltimore City, Maryland state court arising out of the 1989 Sioux City, Iowa air crash disaster involving the MDL DC-10 aircraft. Although the plaintiffs alleged that the design of the hydraulic systems that operated the aircraft's flight controls was defective, discovery established (and the National Transportation Safety Board found) that the probable cause of the accident was a fatigue crack originating from a previously undetected metallurgical defect in the stage 1 fan disk manufactured by a co-defendant. Mr. Mullady first-chaired all motions, hearing and court appearances in the Maryland cases and was lead counsel on all discovery and motions practice in that venue.
  • Major Tobacco Company. Mr. Mullady was regional counsel for a major tobacco company in individual smoker litigation in three mid-Atlantic states and represented the company in the Maryland Attorney General's medical cost reimbursement case against the major tobacco companies. He also defended the company in a class action lawsuit that was decertified on mandamus by the Maryland Court of Appeals.
  • Intellectual Property. In 2002, Mr. Mullady tried to verdict a four-week patent infringement case involving an over-the-counter drug product in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. In 2001-2002, he was lead counsel on behalf of the inventor of a revolutionary protease inhibitor AIDS treatment drug in a US $1 billion fraud and breach of contract case, which was resolved.



SITE SEARCH