↓
 

William A. Ruskin's Toxic Tort Litigtion Blog

News, Analysis, and Trends

  • HOME
  • ABOUT
  • LAW PRACTICE

Post navigation

<< 1 2 3 4 >>

Preparing Your Client for SDNY Mediation

William A. Ruskin's Toxic Tort Litigtion Blog Posted on January 8, 2018 by William A. RuskinJanuary 8, 2018

The growth of the SDNY mediation program increases the likelihood that a matter docketed there will be referred to mediation. There is a wealth of good information on the SDNY’s website that can help practitioners prepare their clients for participating in ADR in the court-annexed voluntary mediation program. The answer to many questions that a client may have concerning the SDNY mediation “experience” is likely provided on the court’s Mediation/ADR website.  Therefore, even if the practitioner has never mediated a case in the court’s mediation program, there is great deal of helpful information on the court’s website that explains what is involved and how the process … Continue reading →

Posted in Mediation, Uncategorized | Tagged "SDNY Mediation Program's Annual Report", ADR, alternative dispute resolution, mediation referral order, SDNY, voluntary mediation | Leave a reply

GMOs And “100% Natural” Found Consistent In Food Class Action

William A. Ruskin's Toxic Tort Litigtion Blog Posted on December 7, 2017 by William A. RuskinDecember 7, 2017

In the absence of any legitimate science suggesting that GMOs are unsafe, the anti-GMO movement is seeking to promote “alternative facts” in a judicial setting and achieve, through deceptive trade practice and tort litigation, what they have failed to achieve in a scientific or regulatory setting. The Hon. Richard G. Stearns recently dismissed a federal Massachusetts consumer class action, Lee v. Conagra Brands, Inc., 1:17-cv-11042 (D.Mass October 25, 2017),  contending that Wesson vegetable oil was falsely labeled “100% natural”  because the manufacturer extracted from genetically modified corn, soybean and rapeseed.  In his decision,  Judge Stearns opined that:  “Because Wesson’s “100% natural” label conforms to … Continue reading →

Posted in Class Action, GMOs | Tagged bioengineered ingredient, class action, deceptive business practices, deceptive trade practices, genetically modified organism, GMO, Hon. Richard G. Stearns, Lee v. Conagra Brands, Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 93A, McGuire Woods, Wesson vegetable oil | Leave a reply

Major U.S. Government Report Acknowledges That People Cause Climate Change

William A. Ruskin's Toxic Tort Litigtion Blog Posted on November 3, 2017 by William A. RuskinNovember 3, 2017

On November 3, 2017, the United States issued an exhaustive scientific report, titled the “Climate Science Special Report”, which acknowledges that human activity is a major cause of the temperature rise that has occurred over the past century.  The climate science report is part of a Congressionally mandated review that occurs every four years known as the National Climate Assessment.  The National Climate Assessment represents the findings and analyses of hundreds of experts and scientists from federal agencies, national laboratories, universities, and the private sector. The final work product was peer reviewed by the National Academy of Sciences. The National Oceanic and … Continue reading →

Posted in Climate Change Litigation | Tagged Christopher Field, clean energy, climate change, Department of Defense, global warming, National Climate Assessment, Paris accord, Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment, U.S. Army | Leave a reply

Defending Ecosystem Damage Claims: A Primer

William A. Ruskin's Toxic Tort Litigtion Blog Posted on November 2, 2017 by William A. RuskinNovember 2, 2017

Claims alleging natural resource or ecological damage are on the rise, but the standards governing the performance of ecological risk assessments are  not nearly as developed as the standards used for evaluating human health risks.  Consequently, the legal defenses to natural resource or ecological damage claims are not as well-developed as the defenses to claims of risk to human health.   Fortunately for the environmental defense bar, Carol M. Wood, a partner at King & Spalding; Judi L. Durda, a vice-president and toxicologist/ecologist at Integral Consulting; and Stephen Rahaim, chief environmental counsel at E.I. duPont de Nemours and Company, have written an excellent primer for navigating through … Continue reading →

Posted in Climate Change Litigation, Public Nuisance | Tagged Carol M. Wood, causation, DRI, ecological damage claims, Judi L. Durda, lack of duty, natural resource damages, Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Co, Peter Hayes, Stephen Rahaim, When the Exposed are Bugs and Bunnies | Leave a reply

Climate Change, Ecosystem Damage Claims and the Radicalization of the Court System

William A. Ruskin's Toxic Tort Litigtion Blog Posted on October 26, 2017 by William A. RuskinOctober 26, 2017

The use of the court system to address what is at its root  a political and social problem is not only misguided, but dangerous. I have discussed in prior articles the danger implicit in using public nuisance law to effect political change. California plaintiffs in the current climate change litigation are effectively blaming a handful of large industrial concerns for the evolution of our present-day civilization when the blame, if blame is even the appropriate term, should be collectively shared by countless other “responsible” parties.  At a time when USEPA is scrubbing from its website any and all references to climate change or global … Continue reading →

Posted in Climate Change Litigation, Public Nuisance | Tagged Barbara Parker, Big Tobacco, Chevron, climate change litigation, Exxon, failure-to-warn, Fossil Majors, greenhouse gases, Imperial Beach, Marin, Massachusetts v. EPA, NASA, Oakland, public nuisance, San Francisco, San Mateo, Shell | 1 Reply

Connecticut Asbestos Court Gives Short Shrift To Daimler AG v. Bauman

William A. Ruskin's Toxic Tort Litigtion Blog Posted on October 18, 2017 by William A. RuskinOctober 18, 2017

In a decision, dated September 7, 2017, in Rice v. American Talc Co., No. FBT CV-15-6053658-S (9/7/17), the Hon. Barbara N. Bellis of the Connecticut Superior Court of Fairfield at Bridgeport, who presides over the asbestos docket, ruled that the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Daimler AG v. Bauman did not preclude Connecticut from exercising specific jurisdiction over Milwhite, Inc., a Texas-based talc mining company.  To better understand the court’s ruling, the undisputed facts are set forth briefly here: Ernest Rice, Jr, plaintiff’s decedent, worked at American Standard’s plumbing fixtures plant in Connecticut from 1962-1968 and alleges exposure to asbestos-containing talc (and … Continue reading →

Posted in Asbestos, Product Liability | Tagged asbestos, Bristol-Myers Squibb v. Superior Court of California, Connecticut, Daimler AG v. Bauman, due process, general jurisdiction, Justice Barbara N. Bellis, long-arm jurisdiction, Milwlhite, minimum contacts, specific jurisdiction, talc | Leave a reply

Methodology “Mishmash” Dooms Plaintiff Experts in Talcum Powder Mesothelioma Case

William A. Ruskin's Toxic Tort Litigtion Blog Posted on October 12, 2017 by William A. RuskinOctober 12, 2017

In a decision, dated September 25, 2017, a Philadelphia state trial court excluded the opinions of plaintiff’s experts, Mr. Sean Fitzgerald and Dr. Ronald Gordon, on the ground that they did not use generally accepted methodology in forming their scientific opinions.  The case, Sally Brandt v. The Bon-Ton Stores, Inc. et. al. (Court of Commons Pleas of Philadelphia County, First Judicial District of Pennsylvania, September 25, 2017), was being carefully watched because it was alleged that J&J’s cashmere bouquet talcum powder caused, not ovarian cancer–the disease entity at issue in the J&J talcum powder cases pending in St. Louis and elsewhere–but mesothelioma, which affects the … Continue reading →

Posted in Asbestos, Expert Testimony | Tagged asbestos, Brandt v. Bon-Ton Stores, Colgate Palmolive, Dr. Ronald Gordon, expert testimony, Frye, Frye jurisdiction, mesothelioma, ovarian cancer, Sean Fitzgerald, talcum powder, Yamate Protocol | Leave a reply

Using Public Nuisance Law To Effect A Political Outcome

William A. Ruskin's Toxic Tort Litigtion Blog Posted on October 10, 2017 by William A. RuskinOctober 10, 2017

The classic definition of public nuisance is “an unreasonable interference with right common to the general public” Camden County Bd. of Chosen Freeholders v. Beretta U.S.A. Corp., 273 F.3d 536, 539 (3d Cir.2001).  However, the utilization of public nuisance  theories in non-traditional product liability and environmental litigation, if given sustenance by the courts, threatens to generate multi-billion dollar exposure for corporate defendants. Remarkably, in many public nuisance cases, the defendant’s conduct  was proper and the product lawfully marketed and sold. It is partly for this reason that public nuisance has been described by various legal scholars and commentators as a “wilderness of law”, “an impenetrable … Continue reading →

Posted in Public Nuisance | Tagged aggregative torts, Connecticut v. American Elec. Power, global warming, interference with a public right, Joseph F. Speelman, native village of kivaluna v. Exxon Mobil, Professor James A. Henderson, public nuisance | 1 Reply

The Challenge of Evaluating Plaintiff Exposure in “Eggshell Skull” Injury Cases

William A. Ruskin's Toxic Tort Litigtion Blog Posted on September 16, 2017 by William A. RuskinSeptember 16, 2017

All defense counsel have at one time or another experienced the exhilaration that comes from discovering, as a result of a deep dive into a claimant’s prior medical records,  that (1) the serious personal injuries alleged by the plaintiff are in fact the result of an aggravation of a serious pre-existing disease or injury and (2) but for the pre-existing disease or injury the present disability and/or impairment claimed would not have resulted.  You advise the client of the gravity of the pre-existing disease or injury.   In response, the client asks defense counsel whether the disclosure of the pre-existing condition warrants downgrading the … Continue reading →

Posted in Personal Injury | Tagged aggravation of pre-exisiting injury, defense counsel, eggshell skull, HFW, Koch v. United States, Longshore and Harborworkers' Compensation Act, personal injury | Leave a reply

Life Of An MDL Case Post-Remand

William A. Ruskin's Toxic Tort Litigtion Blog Posted on August 20, 2017 by William A. RuskinAugust 20, 2017

What must defense counsel do to prepare for trial after a MDL court remands a case to the transferor court?  How are issues not resolved in the Multidistrict Litigation preserved for trial following remand. Not a great deal has been written about the strategic trial issues that may arise post-remand.  This may be because most cases transferred under 28 U.S.C. 1407 are resolved in the MDL and there is often little need to transfer back many cases at the completion of MDL proceedings.  Indeed, the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation reported that, as of September 2013, only slightly more than six … Continue reading →

Posted in Multidistrict Litigation, Product Liability, Uncategorized | Tagged Daubert, Drug & Device Law Blog, Hon. Amy J. St. Eve, Hon. Joseph R. Goodwin, Johnson & Johnson, MDL, MDL remand, medical device litigation, multidistrict litigation, pelvic organ prolapse, stress urinary incontinence, strict product liability | Leave a reply

Post navigation

<< 1 2 3 4 >>

William A. Ruskin

The Toxic Tort Litigation Blog reports on recent developments and trends in toxic tort, environmental and product liability litigation of interest to the defense bar.  It also explores the convergence of complex science and medicine and the law.
Learn more >>

Subscribe

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

RSS

RSS feed RSS - Posts

Recent Posts

  • Trump Administration’s Assault on the Rule of Law
  • Sanctions Awarded For Deposition Misconduct
  • The Corrupting Impact of Plaintiff Litigation Advertising
  • Why Anchoring Is Effective In Generating Excessive Jury Verdicts
  • New York’s High Court Expands Definition of Family

Categories

  • Asbestos
  • Causation
  • CERCLA
  • Class Action
  • Climate Change Litigation
  • Daubert
  • Discovery
  • Emotional Distress
  • Environmental Advocacy
  • Expert Testimony
  • Federal Court Litigation
  • General Causation
  • GMOs
  • Local Counsel
  • Mediation
  • Multidistrict Litigation
  • New York Law
  • Personal Injury
  • Product Liability
  • Public Nuisance
  • Remote Depositions
  • Social Media
  • Specific Causation
  • Uncategorized
  • Value Assurance Plan
  • Zone of Danger
© 2017 William A. Ruskin - Weaver Xtreme Theme
↑
 

Loading Comments...