2BInformed: The Future of Fluoride in Drinking Water, the New TSCA Fees Rule, and the Drinking Water Contaminant Candidate List 5
DynCorp's 'Strategic' Defense In Drug Crop Spraying Suit
Plaintiffs in toxic tort cases must prove both general and specific causation, generally through the testimony of experts. Experts must establish that a specific chemical exposure can (and did) cause the specific injury at...more
Maffei v. A.O. Smith Water Prods. Co. (In re N.Y.C. Asbestos Litigation), 2025 N.Y. Slip Op. 1425 (N.Y. App. Div. 2025) - Valuing asbestos cases can sometimes be complicated but on March 13th, 2025, the NY Appellate Court...more
The Texas Fourteenth Court of Appeals upheld summary judgment for Exxon Mobil corporation in Stanley Cole v. Exxon Mobil Corp. (No. 14-22-00756-CV), a premises liability case involving alleged exposure to olivine dust. The...more
In a toxic tort case, plaintiffs must establish general causation. If a substance is incapable of causing the type of injury plaintiff claims, then it certainly didn’t cause theirs. Under Texas law, toxic tort plaintiffs must...more
A Review of 2017 Personal Jurisdiction Decisions - In 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court in cases such as BNSF Railway Co. v. Tyrrell and Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California continued the trend that began in...more
Manufacturers of products that contained chrysotile asbestos won a major victory in Crane Co. v. DeLisle on Sept. 14, 2016, when Florida's Fourth District Court of Appeal (Fourth DCA) reversed a verdict entered against a...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
Underscoring the importance of reliable expert methodology, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit upheld the dismissal of a personal injury suit based on unreliable expert testimony. See Henry v. St Croix Alumina,...more