Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 260: Listen and Learn -- Elements of a Crime
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 247: Listen and Learn -- Negligence: Factual Causation
Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 382: Listen and Learn -- Negligence: Proximate Cause
Second Circuit Decision Potentially Broadens RICO Proximate Cause Element - RICO Report Podcast
Redefining Personal Jurisdiction: SCOTUS rules on the Ford Cases [More with McGlinchey Ep. 19]
Personal Jurisdiction Part 3 – Oral Arguments in the Ford Cases [More with McGlinchey Ep. 12]
K&L Gates Triage: Emergency Preparedness and Response in Long Term Care - Part II
Jurisdiction: Supreme Court of New York, New York County - Plaintiff John P. Reeves alleges asbestos exposure from, among other things, the asbestos-containing caulk of defendant DAP Inc. while serving in the U.S. Navy aboard...more
Jurisdiction: Supreme Court of New York, New York County - Plaintiff Lita Goldstein was diagnosed in March 2022 with mesothelioma. She initiated a suit against several defendants in May 2022, including Kolmar Laboratories...more
Court: Court of Appeals of Texas, Fourteenth District, Houston - Carolyn and Frank Burford were married from November 1962 until Carolyn’s death in 2015. While married, Frank Buford worked for Alcoa at its aluminum smelter...more
In a win for employers located in Florida, Georgia and Alabama, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit recently concluded that retaliation claims brought under the Family and Medical Leave Act are subject to a...more
Court: Court of Appeals of Texas, Fourteenth District, Houston - In this asbestos action, a Texas Appellate Court reversed and remanded the grant of a no-evidence summary judgment motion as to defendant Howmet Aerospace Inc.,...more
From pharmaceuticals to cosmetics, preemption to expert preclusion, New York state and federal courts issued decisions in 2023, which further shaped the landscape in the medical and life sciences legal world. To prepare the...more
Court: Supreme Court of New York, New York County - In this talc action, plaintiff Christina Thomas alleged she was exposed to asbestos from products manufactured by defendant Port Jervis Laboratories Inc., s/h/a Kolmar...more
Court: Supreme Court of New York, New York County - In this asbestos action, plaintiff Peter Marino alleged he was exposed to asbestos from floor tiles manufactured by defendant, The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company. Goodyear...more
EDITOR’S NOTE - As an initial matter, we experienced a bit of an anomaly with the Third Department. Typically, there are a number of Labor Law decisions that we report on. However, for this reporting period, our research...more
Court: Supreme Court of New York, New York County - Defendant Mannington Mills Inc. moved for renewal of its previously denied motion for summary judgment, arguing the New York Court of Appeals’ Nemeth decision has since...more
Court: Supreme Court of New York, New York County - In this asbestos action, defendant Crosby moved for summary judgment on duty to warn and causation grounds. Plaintiff Joseph Deroy opposed the motion....more
Supreme Court of New York, New York County - In two asbestos actions (Avakian and Layton), defendant Mannington Mills moved to renew its summary judgment motion. Mannington contends that there was a subsequent change in the...more
A recent Massachusetts Federal District Court decision adds to divergent opinions deciding an important health care enforcement question: what causation standard applies to a False Claims Act (FCA) case based on a violation...more
Court: Supreme Court of New York, New York County (NYCAL) - In this asbestos action, defendant SPX Cooling Technologies Inc., individually and as successor to Marley Cooling Technologies Inc., moved for summary judgment,...more
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2) outlines two different sets of pretrial disclosure requirements, imposing more onerous requirements on “retained” than “non-retained” experts. Relatedly, when non-retained expert...more
The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit’s recent opinion in Majestic Oil, Inc. v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's, London Subscribing to Policy Number W1B527170201, No. 21-20542 (5th Cir. Mar. 17, 2023),...more
A central tenet of toxicology is that “the dose makes the poison.” Every chemical is toxic if enough of it is consumed, and every chemical has some dose – even if miniscule – at which it poses no significant risk. A chemical...more
Court: Supreme Court of the State of New York, Nassau County - In this asbestos action, plaintiff Donna Daniell alleged asbestos exposure from working near auto mechanics, including her husband, Robert, while they used...more
On March 9, 2023, a federal judge granted summary judgment on causation to three manufacturers of asbestos-containing products in a maritime lawsuit arising from the death of Thomas Deem from mesothelioma. The judge held that...more
Court: United States District Court for the Western District of Washington - This case arises out of the death of decedent Thomas Deem from mesothelioma, which the plaintiff alleges was caused by the decedent’s exposure...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
We previously reported on Nemeth v. Brenntag North America, et al., 38 N.Y.3d 336 (Ct. App. NY Apr. 26, 2022), a landmark case in which the New York’s Court of Appeals reversed a $16,500,000 asbestos jury verdict because the...more
Supreme Court of New York, New York County, September 22, 2022 - In this NYCAL action, Decedent Maryann Purser (“Decedent”) alleged that she developed pleural mesothelioma through the use of Cashmere Bouquet talcum...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit found that a trade secret owner lacked “non-speculative and sufficiently probative evidence of a causal nexus between Defendants’ alleged bad acts and [the trade secret owner’s]...more