Search for: "Asbestos Products Liability v."
Results 1 - 20
of 551
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
6 May 2024, 10:00 pm
Check out this expertly drafted practice note discussing companies that file bankruptcy to address their mass-tort liabilities. [read post]
13 Apr 2024, 3:33 pm
The FDA deferred action on a final monograph for PPA, and product marketing continued. [read post]
2 Dec 2023, 10:40 am
ShareThe Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on Monday in one of the highest-profile bankruptcies in recent memory: Harrington v. [read post]
31 Oct 2023, 9:05 pm
But since Amchem Products v. [read post]
23 Sep 2023, 11:26 am
Woolf v. [read post]
13 Mar 2023, 6:00 am
The report indicates that 42% of the State verdicts above $10 million were cases related to product liability (such as asbestos cases), worker/workplace negligence and construction accidents. [read post]
28 Feb 2023, 11:55 am
“It has been said that though God cannot alter the past, historians can; it is perhaps because they can be useful to Him in this respect that He tolerates their existence. [read post]
25 Feb 2023, 6:50 pm
Selikoff perpetuated a good deal of mischief and misinformation to keep his myth that all fiber types are the same (and that “asbestos is asbestos is asbestos”). [read post]
30 Jan 2023, 5:09 pm
Tisi serves as co-chair of the Plaintiffs’ Discovery for In Re: Johnson & Johnson Talcum Powder Products Marketing, Sales Practices and Products Liability Litigation, MD 2738 (D.N.J.). [read post]
21 Jan 2023, 6:07 pm
Asbestos litigation existed as workman’s compensation cases from the 1930s, and as occasional, isolated cases against manufacturers, from the late 1950s.[1] By 1970, federal regulation of asbestos, in both occupational and environmental settings, however, helped create a legal perpetual motion machine that is still running, half a century later. [read post]
13 Oct 2022, 6:16 am
Asbestos presented a unique and compelling case for recovery for a number of reasons: it is responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths, asbestosis and mesothelioma are diseases solely caused by asbestos exposure, an OSHA standard requires employers to provide protective clothing and changing rooms to prevent take-home exposures, and strict products liability theory may be used because asbestos is a “product. [read post]
14 Aug 2022, 6:12 pm
Tisi serves as co-chair of the Plaintiffs’ Discovery for In Re: Johnson & Johnson Talcum Powder Products Marketing, Sales Practices and Products Liability Litigation, MD 2738 (D.N.J.). [read post]
3 Jul 2022, 1:41 pm
Fowler v. [read post]
24 Mar 2022, 5:52 am
In Jones v. [read post]
19 Mar 2022, 2:09 pm
The agency assessing risk may decide to bar a substance or product if the potential benefits are outweighed by the possibility of risks that are largely unquantifiable because of presently unknown contingencies. [read post]
29 Dec 2021, 12:00 pm
In Owens Corning, the court found the securities class action – which alleged the company misrepresented its exposure to asbestos claims in its financial reports – did not “arise out of” asbestos, but rather out of the directors misleading investors regarding the company’s projected financial performance. [read post]
13 Dec 2021, 4:16 pm
The MDL is larger than the asbestos and talc product cases. [read post]
21 Nov 2021, 12:51 pm
§9601) and petroleum products. [read post]
17 Oct 2021, 2:17 pm
Kehm v. [read post]
30 Jul 2021, 10:20 am
In Roverano v. [read post]
