The Classification of Gasoline & Gasoline Fumes as a Carcinogen: Considerations for Corporate Executives & Attorneys
What to Expect in Chemicals Policy and Regulation and on Capitol Hill in 2023
PFAS in Focus: Forever-Engineering With Trent Stober, HDR - Reflections on Water Podcast
PFAS in Focus: Wastewater Utility Perspectives From Jay Hoskins, Metropolitan St. Louis Sewer District - Reflections on Water Podcast
[Podcast] Catching Up on Canadian Environmental Regulation
PFAS: Increasing Regulations and Managing Legal Liability
EPA Plan Changes PFAS Outlook For Companies, Regulators
2BInformed: The EPA’s Impact on Supply Chains and Climate Change, and Defining “Unreasonable Risk”
2BInformed: Understanding the EPA’s New PFAS Strategic Roadmap and Upcoming PBT Regulations
2BInformed: Overview of PFAS and Related EPA Regulations; EPA’s New Chemical Program Under Amended TSCA
2BInformed: How TSCA Amendments Impact Industries and Managing the EPA’s Risk Evaluations
2BInformed: The Future of Fluoride in Drinking Water, the New TSCA Fees Rule, and the Drinking Water Contaminant Candidate List 5
Starting 2BInformed: The Inaugural Episode of the Podcast Series, ‘2BInformed,’ with Baptist and Bertrand
The Great Green North: A Discussion on Canada’s Environmental Regulations
Wiley Biotech Briefings – An Advanced Course for the Regulatory Professional: TSCA and Industrial Biotechnology
Forever Chemicals: What They are and What is being Done to Minimize Their Impact
One-on-One with David Fotouhi, Acting General Counsel at the EPA
What are PFAS and Why Should We Care?
We previously wrote about conflicting decisions from New York federal courts on whether alleged economic damages establish Article III standing under a price premium theory in baby food toxic metals class actions. See New...more
California’s Proposition 65 (“Prop 65”), is well-known to companies selling consumer products, including food and beverage items in California. It is common to see Prop 65 warning labels on everything from household...more
Jurisdiction: United States District Court for the Southern District of New York - Plaintiff Scott Keller alleged that he was exposed to asbestos during his employment on ExxonMobil Oil Company vessels and that he developed...more
Jurisdiction: United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana - This case arises from Plaintiff Nolan J. Lebouf Jr.’s alleged exposure to asbestos. The plaintiff specifically claims to have been exposed to...more
As Nobel laureate Richard Feynman once observed, “[w]isdom is knowing when to ask the right questions.” A related proposition is that wise jurists know how to identify and focus on the right questions. Motion practice can...more
The question of whether a particular application of herbicide on one property caused damage on another’s property requires expert testimony. When a plaintiff claims that herbicide drift caused reduced crop yields, it is not...more
On opening an opinion, lawyers habitually roll their eyes when they see a table of contents. Even more so when they learn the opinion is over 300 pages. The MDL order granting defense motions to exclude experts and for...more
Last year, Harris Beach wrote about a federal magistrate judge’s report and recommendation to deny Defendants’ motions for summary judgment in a toxic tort suit arising from occupational exposure to ortho-toluidine...more
On October 19, 2020, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of North Carolina held that a “hazardous materials” exclusion contained in a CGL policy did not preclude a duty to defend the insured against claims...more
Applying the statute of limitations for legal, rather than discoverable, personal injury, the Texas Supreme Court dismissed a personal injury suit against Schlumberger Technology Corporation that arose from the mishandling of...more
The Pennsylvania Superior Court recently issued an opinion in Walsh v. BASF Corp. addressing the gatekeeper role of the trial judge when reviewing and ruling on the admissibility of expert causation opinions. The PA Superior...more
You might recall previous entries discussing Parr v. Aruba – a suit for personal injuries from oilfield pollution (and a $2.9MM verdict for the plaintiffs). Not all similar suits have the same result....more
Issuing an opinion that could lower the bar for proving toxic tort causation, the Michigan Court of Appeals held that direct expert testimony may not be necessary to prove causation in a toxic tort case and that a plaintiff...more