Chemical Engineering Expert Witness Experience & Discovery – IMS Insights Podcast Episode 48
Podcast: Science in the Courtroom
Fish Post-Grant Radio: Episode #15: Nick Tsui, Alston & Bird
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 159: Listen and Learn -- Evidence: Expert vs. Lay Witness Testimony
Podcast: What Witness Preparation Means
Podcast: Seven Witness Preparation Mistakes Lawyers Make
Podcast: Raise Your Right Hand, Miss Lillian
Jones Day Talks Intellectual Property: Blurrier Lines and Narrow Grounds—Implications of the Ninth Circuit’s Blurred Lines Decision
Episode 015: Confessions of a Business Appraiser: A Conversation with Chris Mercer
Inter Partes Review: Validity Before the PTAB
Supreme Court Raises the Bar for Class Certification in Comcast Corp. v. Behrend
Massachusetts federal and state courts issued several important product liability decisions in 2022. Nutter’s Product Liability practice group reviewed these cases and report on their significant holdings as follows ...more
As previously reported in Goldberg Segalla’s Asbestos Case Tracker — (NYCAL Verdict Against Talc Product Manufacturer Reversed on Causation Grounds – Asbestos Case Tracker) — the New York Court of Appeals recently overturned...more
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana, July 20, 2022 - In this asbestos action, decedent Callen Cortez was diagnosed with mesothelioma following occupational and take-home exposure to...more
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, March 28, 2022 - In this asbestos action, plaintiff Arnold Pritt alleged that he was exposed to asbestos during his service in the U.S. Navy, and over the course...more
In Delisle v. Crane Co., 2018 Fla. LEXIS 1883, 43 Fla. L. Weekly S 459, the Supreme Court of Florida reaffirmed that the appropriate test for admissibility of an expert opinion about new or novel scientific evidence is the...more
Welcome to our inaugural issue of Product Lines—our e-newsletter focusing on toxic torts and products liability news and issues. As we all know, there are many issues that arise in this complex area of the law every day. We...more
In a new phase of asbestos litigation, attorneys representing individuals who developed mesothelioma without any known industrial exposure to asbestos have set their sights on talcum powder manufacturers and talc mining...more
In Lyons v. Colgate-Palmolive Co. (filed October 19, 2017, A150567), the California Court of Appeal, First Appellate District, held that a plaintiff’s testimony regarding use of a particular manufacturer’s product, joined...more
OIG Advisory Opinions - Manufacturer's Free Replacement of Spoiled Pharmaceutical Products Authorized - On Aug. 25, 2017, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' (HHS) Office of Inspector General (OIG)...more
DC High Court Adopts Daubert Approach to Expert Testimony - In a direct victory for mobile phone manufacturers and service providers, and with implications for any other case involving expert testimony in the District of...more
In an immediate victory for mobile phone manufacturers and service providers, and with implications for any other case involving expert testimony in the District of Columbia, the District of Columbia’s highest court abandoned...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
Underscoring the importance of the distinction between a product and its component parts, a federal court in Louisiana refused to allow expert testimony that exposure to gasoline caused acute myeloid leukemia (“AML”) in a...more
The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit recently held that “a manufacturer cannot be liable for false advertising so long as at least one qualified expert opines that the representations made are truthful,...more