On Aug. 18, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit held that exposure to ethylene oxide (EtO) constitutes a concrete, present injury sufficient for Article III standing where costs for present medical monitoring are...more
The Supreme Court of New Hampshire declined to recognize medical monitoring as a remedy or cause of action for plaintiffs who claim exposure to toxic substances. The court based its reasoning on New Hampshire common law and...more
Last week, the New Hampshire Supreme Court held that state law does not recognize medical monitoring as a remedy or cause of action for plaintiffs who allege that they were exposed to a toxic substance. In Kevin Brown v....more
On March 21, 2023, the New Hampshire Supreme Court, answering a certified question from the U.S. District Court for the District of New Hampshire, concluded that New Hampshire does not recognize a cause of action for recovery...more
Last week, Law360 reported on a hearing that occurred in the Federal District Court for Eastern Pennsylvania before Judge Gerald Pappert concerning PFAS. The hearing concerned a motion to dismiss brought by the United States...more