Product Liability

Defending products, protecting reputations, with over 100 years of combined experience in complex products liability cases nationwide.

What We Do

Our products liability attorneys provide comprehensive, strategic approaches to the defense of our clients to avoid, resolve, and prevent future lawsuits. We draw on our experience as National Coordinating Counsel identifying nationwide litigation trends that arm our clients with the knowledge and confidence to accomplish this.

In the decades that we have dedicated to defending our clients, we have saved them millions by providing efficient, effective, and cost-conscious legal representation.

How We Help

Our Products Liability Practice Group specializes in the defense of complex scientific and medical cases, including those involving asbestos, talc, and silicosis.

Asbestos Litigation

We represent manufacturers, sellers, suppliers, distributors, and other types of companies that have been sued for asbestos liability. Our decades of experience have given us the knowledge to navigate the specialized dockets in which these cases are filed, enabled us to build a network of experts to support our clients’ defenses against allegations that often date back over 50 years, and draw on relationships with other defense and plaintiff counsel to reach resolutions outside of the courtroom.
Silicosis Litigation

We defend silicosis cases, most of which are currently pending in California. We represent manufacturers, distributors, and suppliers against claims for failing to warn about silica dust risks. The claims alleged in silicosis litigation echo those alleged in asbestos litigation. As a result, several of our clients that we have represented over the past decade in the asbestos litigation have either retained us directly, or referred us to others, to defend against silicosis cases.
Talc Litigation

We represent companies that are sued for alleged asbestos contamination in talc-based products, including both cosmetic and industrial products. The talc litigation has steadily increased over the years, with a marked surge in the 2024 to 2025 timeframe. This uptick stems from failed bankruptcy resolutions, high-profile verdicts, and growing public concerns over talc. With this backdrop, retaining a firm with the required knowledge and expertise in this space is essential. We have represented clients in talc litigation for several years, on both a local and national level, providing the guidance that they need to resolve these matters quickly and quietly.
Industrial and Consumer Products

Our attorneys defend manufacturers of industrial machinery, heavy construction equipment, HVAC systems, vehicles, trains, forklifts, tools, ladders, scaffolding, aerial lift devices, paint, recreational products, cosmetics and other consumer goods.

Why Clients Choose Us

Trendsetters

Other law firms look to us to lead changes in defense of products liability litigation. We have been a longstanding member of the Massachusetts Asbestos Litigation Defense Executive Committee and the Massachusetts Asbestos Litigation Defense Discovery Committee.

Both are small, invite-only committees with direct access to all major players, which enables our firm to effectuate change for the entire defense bar. Further, we are routinely asked to present as keynote speakers at renowned conferences and industry group seminars, including the annual DRI Asbestos Conference and various Perrin conferences. Finally, we have successfully argued precedent-setting motions in both the Massachusetts and California asbestos litigations. Our Partner, Geoff Davis, was part of the appellate team that successfully argued the O’Neil decision in California’s appellate courts, which significantly impacted the asbestos litigation trajectory nationally thereafter.
Trial-Tested

We have started trial in over 40 asbestos cases in Massachusetts, New York, and California. However, our trial experience and reach go far beyond that. Our firm’s Trial Division has been retained by our clients to act as drop-in trial counsel for trials across the country.

Representative Work

CMBG³ Law was retained to appeal a $1.6 million jury award in an Alameda County, California asbestos case. We were not involved in the underlying trial. The trial involved a 63-year-old laborer who installed thousands of feet of asbestos-cement pipe, that was allegedly supplied by our client, on a six-month job in northern California between 1976 and 1977.

The only evidence to connect our client to the pipe was testimony from the plaintiff’s foreman who claimed to recall signing invoices 40 years ago that contained our client’s name. None of the alleged invoices were ever produced. Nevertheless, over objections, the trial court allowed the testimony to be presented. At oral argument before the Appellate Court, we argued that the evidence produced against our client was inadmissible hearsay — an extremely difficult argument to make given that finding in CMBG³ Law’s favor would require the Appellate Court to overturn not only the trial judge’s rulings on the issue, but also the conclusions of the jury during the trial. However, the Appellate Court agreed with us, finding that the trial judge should have excluded the testimony of the foreman since the documents were not produced. The 16-page ruling in favor of our client gave the company a major victory, as it reversed the damages awarded by the jury. This case gained national notoriety due to the difficulty of the argument and received media attention, notably from the San Francisco Chronicle.