Legal Resources
Johnson & Johnson Loses Battle In New Jersey MDL, Wages Appellate Fight In California
CMBG3 Law previously reported on a verdict against Johnson & Johnson out of California in the amount of $417 million, which was the first California case tried to verdict against Johnson & Johnson in which it was alleged that the company’s talcum powder...
UPDATE – Mistrial In California Case Alleging Mesothelioma Caused By Asbestos-Contaminated Talcum Powder
CMBG3 Law reported yesterday on the start of the first asbestos-contaminated talcum powder trial in California. Later in the day, the Judge declared a mistrial and so a new jury will be picked and the trial will resume at a date to be determined. The reason for the...
Trial Begins In California Case Alleging Mesothelioma Caused By Asbestos-Contaminated Talcum Powder
CMBG3 Law has reported throughout the year on events in the pending talcum powder litigation, in which plaintiffs allege that talcum powder caused their ovarian or uterine cancer. Although the ovarian and uterine cancer cases have dominated the news, most recently in...
Asbestos-Contaminated Talc Plaintiffs’ Experts Precluded From Testifying
On September 25, 2017, two prominent plaintiffs' experts (Sean Fitzgerald, Geologist and Dr. Ronald Gordon, MD) were excluded from testifying in the asbestos case of Sally Brandt and Charles Brandt v. The Bon-Ton Stores, Inc., et al., Court of common Pleas of...
Company Receives $100,000 Grant From EPA To Develop Lead Particle Measurement Technology For Drinking Water
Given the events in recent years that have taken place in Flint, Michigan regarding lead particles in the community drinking water, there has been a significant uptick in news and attention paid to the potential for lead particles in drinking water sources to cause...
Florida Supreme Court Urged To Adopt Daubert Standard of Review For Expert Testimony
Since the 1993 United States Supreme Court case of Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, a majority of state courts in the United States have followed the standard of review established in Daubert for determining whether an expert’s testimony is admissible. The...
Missouri State Court Talcum Powder Trial May Proceed Despite Pending Legal Challenges
In June of 2017, the United States Supreme Court issued two rulings, both of which addressed whether plaintiffs can bring lawsuits in states in which the plaintiffs and defendants have little or no connection. The Supreme Court’s rulings made it clear that in cases...
Pennsylvania Federal Court Extends “Take Home Exposure” Liability To Employers
A Pennsylvania federal court’s ruling expanded the potential liability for workplace chemical exposures with its recent decision allowing a case to proceed based on plaintiff’s argument of “take home exposure” to beryllium. Under the “take home exposure” theory of...
Motion To Reconsider Filed By Trinity Lloyd’s Insurance In Fifth Circuit Over Ruling Requiring Company To Cover $2.5 Million For Asbestos Claims
CMBG3 Law previously reported on an August 18, 2017 ruling by the Fifth Circuit appellate court, in which the court held that excess insurer U.S. Fire Insurance was not required to pay $2.5 million to primary carrier Trinity Lloyd’s Insurance Co. (“Trinity”) to cover...
Court of Appeals Kicks Flint’s Lead-Tainted Water Cases Back To State Court
Last week, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals held that three lawsuits against Michigan’s environmental officials over Flint’s lead-tainted water must be litigated in the state court and not the federal court. At the heart of the appeal was whether the officials were...
“Get the Lead Out” Campaign Aims To Raise Awareness In Schools Over Lead In Drinking Water
Boston area schools started a new school year recently and two organizations took steps to ensure that parents were made aware of steps that they could take to reduce the likelihood that their children would ingest lead particles from drinking water sources. As part...
7th Circuit Court Upholds Asbestos Defense Verdict and Rejection of “Each and Every Exposure” Causation Evidence
A common refrain from plaintiffs’ experts in the asbestos litigation is that “each and every exposure” to asbestos fibers was a substantial contributing cause of a plaintiff’s asbestos-related disease. Under this theory, it makes no difference whether a plaintiff was...