Defense Litigation Insider Helping you navigate a clear path through complex litigation.

Brian Gross

Posts by Brian Gross

U.S. Supreme Court to Weigh In on Personal Jurisdiction as State Courts Have Gone Rogue

Posted in California Courts, Litigation Trends

Ever since the United States Supreme Court’s 2014 decision in Daimler A.G. v. Bauman, 134 S. Ct. 746 (2014), in which the Court held that general personal jurisdiction exists over a corporation only where the corporation is fairly regarded as “at home,” many plaintiffs and state courts have attempted to distinguish Daimler in an effort… Continue Reading

CA Supreme Court Offers Interpretation of Personal Jurisdiction Decision

Posted in California Courts, Uncategorized

The United States Supreme Court’s decision in Daimler A.G. v. Bauman, 571 U.S. __, 134 S.Ct. 746 (2014), has played a significant role this year in cases pending in Delaware and Rhode Island. Most recently, the California Supreme Court has weighed in, changing what we thought we knew about personal jurisdiction, at least in California…. Continue Reading

Rhode Island Court Upholds Daimler to Dismiss Claims Against Foreign Corporation for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction

Posted in Asbestos Litigation, Complex Torts, Litigation Trends, Rhode Island Courts

On October 13, 2016, Presiding Justice Alice B. Gibney of the Rhode Island Superior Court ruled on Defendant Dana Companies, LLC’s Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction pending in the case of Harold Wayne Murray and Janice M. Murray v. 3M Company, et al., granting the defendant’s motion to dismiss upon finding that… Continue Reading

Noise-Induced Hearing Loss Claims Against Employers Fall On Deaf Ears

Posted in Employment Litigation, Premises Liability

Occupational Hearing Loss (OHL) is one of the most prevalent work-related illnesses in the United States with 22 million workers exposed to hazardous noise each year, according to the Centers for Disease Control. With approximately $242 million spent annually on workers’ compensation claims for disabilities arising from hearing loss, this number is set to increase… Continue Reading

Latest Fallout in Garlock Highlights Importance of Thorough Discovery of Bankruptcy Claims

Posted in Asbestos Litigation, Litigation Trends, Toxic Tort

Note: For more MG&M analysis on Garlock, please see previous post by William Larson and Brian Gross.   The ramifications of the Garlock asbestos bankruptcy are just beginning to be felt across the country.  As new developments continue to play out, it is important to note that in each of the 15 cases in which… Continue Reading

Maryland Court Continues Trend, Holding There Is No Duty To Warn For Household Exposure

Posted in Asbestos Litigation, Litigation Trends, Maryland Courts, Toxic Tort

The Maryland Court of Appeals unanimously ruled that Georgia-Pacific Corp. was not liable for illness involving a woman who was exposed to asbestos while doing her father’s laundry in the 1960s. The Insurance Journal reported on the recent decision: The Court of Appeals ruled that Georgia-Pacific Corp. was not obligated to warn relatives of the… Continue Reading

North Carolina Bankruptcy Court Limits Garlock’s Asbestos Liabilities and Ford Wants the Court Records Unsealed

Posted in Asbestos Litigation, Litigation Trends, Toxic Tort

Background: Garlock Sealing Technologies, LLC (“Garlock” or “Debtors”) filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in June 2010.  Garlock had been an active asbestos defendant for its asbestos-containing precut gaskets, sheet gasket material, and packing materials.  In January, after extensive discovery and a trial held under seal, the Bankruptcy Court issued an opinion (pdf download) in… Continue Reading

Congresswoman’s Asbestos Lawsuit Emblematic of an Increasing Trend of Allegedly Asbestos-Related Lung Cancer Cases

Posted in Asbestos Litigation, Delaware Courts, Litigation Trends

Companies and insurers continue to experience an increase in the number of lawsuits they face, which involve Plaintiffs who allege that their lung cancer was caused by asbestos exposure, despite the fact that many of these Plaintiffs were longtime smokers.  The trend, which has emerged over several years, has gained nationwide prominence as highlighted by… Continue Reading

Top 5: Changes to New Delaware Asbestos Standing Orders

Posted in Asbestos Litigation, Delaware Courts, Litigation Trends

Approximately a year ago Delaware Asbestos Judge John A. Parkins, Jr. asked the asbestos bar to recommend a revised Standing Order No. 1  (pdf download) and General Scheduling Order (pdf download) (“GSO”) to govern the ten asbestos trial settings in Delaware each year.  The endeavor was led by the ADR Master, David A. White, and then Judge… Continue Reading

Delaware Judge Upholds $2.8 Million Verdict in Galliher Asbestos Trial

Posted in Asbestos Litigation, Delaware Courts

Background:  Judge John A. Parkins, Jr. recently upheld a $2.8 million verdict awarded to the estate of a deceased 62 year old man in a mesothelioma case .  The Simmons firm represented Plaintiffs in this case against R.T. Vanderbilt (“Vanderbilt”).  Plaintiffs argued that Vanderbilt’s NYTAL industrial talc (pdf download) contained asbestiform materials and caused Mr. Galliher’s mesothelioma. … Continue Reading

Another Brick In The Wall Against Medical Monitoring Claims

Posted in Asbestos Litigation, Massachusetts Courts, Toxic Tort

United States District Court Judge Mark L. Wolf recently denied the “medical monitoring” claims of a putative class alleging beryllium exposure. This is the first decision addressing medical monitoring claims in Massachusetts since the landmark Donovan ruling in 2009, and strengthens the restrictions on such claims. Medical monitoring claims, a relatively modern addition to tort… Continue Reading

Defense Verdict Obtained Via Independent Rebuttal Witnesses in Living Mesothelioma Case Brought by Medical Expert Dr. Richard Luros

Posted in Asbestos Litigation, California Courts, Toxic Tort

On July 12, 2013 an Alameda jury returned a defense verdict in the living mesothelioma asbestos case Richard Luros v. Amcord, Inc., Alameda Superior Court Number RG11600370. (Luros complaint pdf download). The California defense asbestos bar had been watching the case with interest since it was filed in October 2011, as the Plaintiff, Dr. Richard… Continue Reading

Insurers Hold Attorney-Client Privilege in Instances where Bankrupt Corporation with No Officers or Directors is the Insured

Posted in Asbestos Litigation, California Courts, Litigation Trends

In Melendrez v. Superior Court (download), 214 Cal.App.4th 1343 (2013), the California Court of Appeals, Second District, recently resolved the issue of who may verify discovery responses on behalf of a bankrupt entity with no directors or officers.  The decision also reaffirms prior cases which hold that attorneys cannot waive the attorney-client privilege on behalf of… Continue Reading

Getting the Facts: House Considers the “Furthering Asbestos Claims Transparency (FACT) Act” of 2013

Posted in Asbestos Litigation, Litigation Trends, Toxic Tort

The House of Representatives subcommittee on Regulatory Reform, Commercial and Antitrust Law is currently considering the “Furthering Asbestos Claims Transparency (FACT) Act.”   The bipartisan legislation, introduced by Representatives Blake Farenthold (R-TX) and Jim Matheson (D-UT), aims to bring transparency to federal asbestos bankruptcy trusts. Bill H.R. 982 would require federal asbestos bankruptcy trusts to file quarterly… Continue Reading

Free and Clear: Dissolved Delaware Corporation Deemed Not Liable for Asbestos-Related Liabilities More than 10 Years After Dissolution

Posted in Asbestos Litigation, Delaware Courts

The Delaware Court of Chancery recently took a rare foray into the world of asbestos litigation after it was asked to appoint a receiver to distribute the remaining reserves from casualty insurance policies issued to Krafft-Murphy Company, Inc. (“Krafft-Murphy”) to plaintiffs who allege injury from asbestos-containing products used by Krafft-Murphy.  The Chancery Court, in an… Continue Reading

FDA Prepares to Release a Regulation on the Labeling of “Gluten-Free” Food by the End of 2012

Posted in False-Labeling Claims, Litigation Trends, Products Liability

The Food & Drug Administration (FDA) is preparing to release a regulation on the labeling of “gluten-free” food by the end of 2012. Although the regulation will provide much needed guidance to consumers and food manufacturers, it will also establish a standard that food manufactures will need to follow in order to use a “gluten-free”… Continue Reading

Are California Food Manufacturers Prepared for Proposition 37: Imposed Labeling Mandates For Genetically Modified Organisms?

Posted in California Courts, False-Labeling Claims, Foodborne Illness, Litigation Trends

California’s Secretary of State recently announced that the California Right to Know Labeling Initiative will be Proposition 37 on this November’s state ballot. If passed, this initiative would require labeling by food manufacturers of any genetically modified organisms (GMOs), also known as genetically engineered organisms (GEOs). GMOs made their first public appearance in 1994, when… Continue Reading

The Massachusetts Wage Act: Increased Number of Claims Leads to Influx of Important Rulings

Posted in Employment Litigation, Massachusetts Courts

The Massachusetts Payment of Wages Statute (the “Wage Act”) has lately received a great deal of attention from Massachusetts trial and appellate courts.  Although the statute has been in place since 1993, Massachusetts employers have recently faced a marked increase in Wage Act claims, likely due to the availability of treble damages and attorneys fees.  Just in the past year, Massachusetts court… Continue Reading

Cargill Initiates Salmonella-Related Recall Of Ground Beef Distributed In The Northeast

Posted in Foodborne Illness

OnJuly 22, 2012, Cargill Meat Solutions Corporation (“Cargill”) announced a Class I voluntary recall of approximately 30,000 pounds of fresh ground beef due to contamination from Salmonella Enteritidis.   The recall follows a Salmonella outbreak involving 33 patients in seven states (MA, ME, NH, NY, RI, VA, VT).  An investigation performed by the Food Safety and… Continue Reading

Shed a Little Light: Congressional Hearing on Asbestos Bankruptcy Trusts Promises Much-Needed Transparency

Posted in Asbestos Litigation

  Recently, the Subcommittee on Courts, Commercial and Administrative Law of the U.S. House Judiciary Committee, held a hearing on an important new bill aimed at furthering transparency in asbestos bankruptcy trusts.  Proponents of the controversial new bill, entitled H.R. 4369, the “Furthering Asbestos Claim Transparency Act (FACT) Act of 2012,” say that it would… Continue Reading

Ben & Jerry’s Recall: Container Label Missing Nut Allergen Advisory in Chocolate Nougat Crunch

Posted in Foodborne Illness, Products Liability

With the Summer Solstice only days away, and peak ice cream eating season upon us, Unilever,PLC, the company which owns Ben & Jerry’s, is voluntarily recalling pints of Ben & Jerry’s Chocolate Nougat Crunch Ice Cream because the container label does not include a statement which warns that the product was manufactured on equipment also… Continue Reading

UPDATE: The Pink Slime Backlash

Posted in Foodborne Illness

 As we reported several weeks ago, there has been a media fueled public outcry against the inclusion of Pink Slime, which is otherwise known as, “lean finely textured beef,” or “LFTB,” in ground beef.  LFTB is comprised of the beef scraps which remain after the valuable cuts of meat are sold.  These pieces of meat… Continue Reading