Menu
  • Edward W. Gerecke
  • 813.229.4306
  • Share this page
Edward W. Gerecke

Edward W. Gerecke

Shareholder

Overview

Ed Gerecke is a litigator with more than 30 years’ experience defending product manufacturers. He focuses on prescription drug and medical device defense and has been a leader in developing industry-specific defenses such as preemption and expert exclusion.

From the start of a matter, Ed takes a tactical approach, working with clients to formulate and achieve their litigation plan consistent with overall business goals. He is an efficient, effective problem-solver who clearly communicates the information clients need to make decisions that advance their strategy. He is adept at prioritizing and planning to achieve maximum efficiencies, whether through resolution in court or by settlement.

Ed’s recent honors include being named Best Lawyers’ 2019 Tampa Mass Tort Litigation/Class Actions – Defendants "Lawyer of the Year,” and Best Lawyers’ 2017 Tampa Product Liability Litigation – Defendants “Lawyer of the Year."

Ed is certified as a circuit civil mediator by the Florida Supreme Court.

Experience

  • Shuker v. Smith & Nephew, PLC, 885 F.3d 760 (3d Cir. 2018). In a case of first impression, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals held that the plaintiff's negligence, strict liability, and breach of implied warranty claims against our client, a medical device manufacturer, were expressly preempted under the Medical Device Amendments of 1976 to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. The plaintiff's claims involved a hip-replacement system that consisted of a number of component parts subject to different categories of federal regulation.
  • Grubbs v. DePuy Synthes, No. 8:15-cv-00443, 2016 WL 360610 (M.D. Fla. Jan. 19, 2016) (granting summary judgment because the plaintiff failed to allege the violation of any federal requirement in the PMA device components that he received).
  • Marshick v. Johnson & Johnson, No. 5:14-cv-00498, 2015 WL 9266955 (M.D. Fla. Dec. 11, 2015) (granting summary judgment when the plaintiff lacked expert proof of general and specific causation).
  • Teva Pharm. Indus., Ltd. v. Ruiz, 181 So. 3d 513 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015) (reversing denial of motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction when general jurisdiction was lacking and the plaintiff failed to establish specific jurisdiction and sufficient minimum contacts to satisfy due process).
  • Marmol v. St. Jude Med., 132 F. Supp. 3d 1359 (M.D. Fla. 2015) (dismissing claims against PMA medical device under implied preemption and lack of a remedy to enforce FDA regulations or requirements).
  • Ocasio v. C.R. Bard, Inc., No. 8:13-cv-01962, 2015 WL 3496062 (M.D. Fla. June 3, 2015) (granting summary judgment on warnings claim for lack of an expert on inadequacy and rejecting any inference of a manufacturing defect).
  • Homaday v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., 994 F. Supp. 2d 1264 (M.D. Fla. 2014) (wrongful death claim in third amended complaint related back to original filing for purposes of the statute of limitations).
  • Brown v. DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc., 978 F. Supp. 2d 1266 (M.D. Fla. 2013) (granting summary judgment under Riegel preemption and Wolicki-Gables for lack of a parallel claim and no nexus between FDA warning letter and alleged injury).
  • Kaiser v. DePuy Spine, Inc., 944 F. Supp. 2d 1187 (M.D. Fla. 2013) (dismissing claims with prejudice, before discovery, under Riegel preemption and Wolicki-Gables for failing to specify a parallel claim or allege noncompliance with a formal performance standard established by the FDA).
  • Layton v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., No. 05-CA-007440, 2012 WL 4983778 (Fla. Cir. Ct. Oct. 16, 2012) (an evidentiary hearing is not required to determine entitlement to attorneys’ fees and costs based upon a proposal for settlement).
  • Wolicki-Gables v. Arrow Int'l, Inc., 634 F.3d 1296 (11th Cir. 2011 (affirming summary judgment under Riegel preemption and affirming that inference of defect did not apply).

Recognition

  • AV Rated by Martindale-Hubbell
  • Listed in Chambers USA Guide to America’s Leading Business Lawyers, Litigation (2007-2013)
  • Listed in The Best Lawyers in America
    • Bet-the-Company Litigation, Commercial Litigation, Mass Tort Litigation/Class Actions - Defendants, and Product Liability Litigation - Defendants (2005-2020) 
    • "Lawyer of the Year"
      • Tampa Mass Tort Litigation/Class Actions - Defendants (2016, 2019)
      • Tampa Product Liability Litigation - Defendants Product Liability Litigation - Defendants (2017)
  • Listed in Who’s Who Legal, Life Sciences (2016-2019)
  • Listed in Who’s Who Legal, Product Liability Defense (2006-2019)
  • Selected for inclusion in Guide to the World’s Leading Product Liability Lawyers
  • Selected for inclusion in Florida Super Lawyers, Product Liability Defense (2006-2019)

Professional & Community Involvement

  • American Board of Trial Advocates
    • President, Tampa Bay Chapter (2012)
  • Defense Research Institute
    • Drug & Medical Device Committee
  • Thirteenth Circuit Judicial Nominating Commission (2008-2012)
    • Chair (2011-2012) 

Speaking Engagements

  • "Defenses in Drug & Medical Device Litigation," DRI Drug & Medical Device Committee 
    Young Lawyers Seminar, Chicago (September 20, 2016).
  • "Defenses in Drug & Medical Device Litigation," DRI Drug & Medical Device Committee, Young Lawyers Seminar, Chicago (September 30, 2014).
  • "Preemption Survey and Update," ACI Drug & Device Conference, New York (December 9, 2013).
  • "Nanotechnology: It Really Is a Small World," DRI Drug & Medical Device Seminar, Chicago (May 6, 2011).

Credentials

Education
  • Indiana University School of Law (J.D., with honors, 1981)
  • Purdue University (B.S., with distinction, 1978)
Bar Admissions
  • Florida
Board Certifications
  • Florida Supreme Court Certified Mediator
Court Admissions
  • United States Supreme Court
  • U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit
  • U.S. District Court, Middle District of Florida
  • U.S. District Court, Northern District of Florida
  • U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida
  • Florida State Courts

Disclaimer

The information on this website is presented as a service for our clients and Internet users and is not intended to be legal advice, nor should you consider it as such. Although we welcome your inquiries, please keep in mind that merely contacting us will not establish an attorney-client relationship between us. Consequently, you should not convey any confidential information to us until a formal attorney-client relationship has been established. Please remember that electronic correspondence on the internet is not secure and that you should not include sensitive or confidential information in messages. With that in mind, we look forward to hearing from you.