Defense Litigation Insider

Helping you navigate a clear path through complex litigation.

Subscribe
Visit Blog
By: Manning Gross + Massenburg LLP

Blog Authors

Abby Adams
Anna Baitchenko
Amaryah K. Bocchino
Andrew Silverman
Alejandro J. Paz
April Luna
Alexander L. Zodikoff
Brittany Campbell
Brian Gross
Brian G. Lee
Brian Spring
Bryan Smith
Carolyn E. Riggs
Connor T. Gregory
Christos I. Koutrobis
Cory D. Lapin
Carrie Lin
Caroline H. Lopez
Daniel McCarthy
David R. Frohn
Danielle M. Sczesny
Daniel Shevtsov
Dustin Beckley
Eddie B. Dennis
Edward O. Mazzaferro Jr.
Elizabeth Moore
Eric Skelly
Emily M. Westfall
Freddy I. Fonseca
Gary Goldsholle
Helen M. Buckley
Ian Epperson-Temple
Joseph M. Aguirre
Juniper Bacon
Joseph S. Bussiere
Jason Cincilla
Jennifer L. Cree
Javier F. Flores
Jeremiah Harvey
Jessica Reno
Jonathan F. Tabasky
Jennifer A. Whelan
Kenneth R. Costa
Kaylin S. Grey
Kevin W. Hadfield
Kasia Peninska
Kevin R. Sloan
Katherine E. Vogelhuber
Lisa Graham
Mary Katherine Back
Michael R. Brown
Michael Christopher
Meaghan M. Donovan
Meghan Dwyer
Matthew T. Giardina
Michael F. McVinney
Marissa Morte
Michael D. Resnick
Meghan Senter
Natasha Corb
Nicole Harrison
Peter Faben
Paul Seward
Peter Vetere
Ryan Browning
Rebecca Kibbe
Stephanie M. Batchelder
Stephen D. Dargitz
Stephen L. Jenkins
Sarah M. Knoff
Sean C. McGah
Shaina Rasmussen
Stephanie M. Spritz
Tye C. Bell
Thaddeus M. Lenkiewicz
William H. Champlin IV
William Larson

Latest from Defense Litigation Insider

In a recent decision, the Rhode Island Superior Court ruled that claims brought against a dissolved entity’s insurers are barred pursuant to R.I. General Laws § 27-7-2.  This statute bars direct actions against insurers of alleged tortfeasors absent very limited exceptions. In Shirley D’Amico, et al. v. A.O. Smith Corp., et al. (C.A. PC12-0403), the Rhode Island Superior Court examined whether one of those exceptions to R.I. General Laws § 27-7-2, which allows direct actions…
Florida courts have historically relied on the standards set forth in Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C. Cir. 1923) (“Frye”) to determine the admissibility of expert opinions and testimony.  Though the Florida Supreme Court adopted Frye in the mid-1980s, Florida courts had applied this standard long before then. See Bundy v. State, 471 So. 2d 9 (Fla. 1985); Bundy v. State, 455 So. 2d 330 (Fla. 1984). However, in April 2013, the Florida…
Scales of Justice and Law books on a wooden background.
Law and Justice, Legality concept, Scales of Justice l on a wooden background, Law library concept.
Defendants DCo, LLC (formerly known as Dana Companies) and Ford Motor Company (collectively “Defendants”) recently obtained a defense verdict in an asbestos personal injury matter following a nine day trial that took place in the Western District of Washington. Plaintiffs alleged the decedent, Patrick Jack, developed mesothelioma as a result of exposure to asbestos from products manufactured or supplied by the Defendants. Plaintiff passed away at the age of 81. Specifically, Plaintiffs claim that Mr.…
 In Summerlin v. Philip Morris USA, et al., 1581-cv-5255, following a five-week trial before Judge Heidi Brieger, the jury returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiff amounting to $43,100,000. Three defendants remained through verdict; however, the jury found that only R.J. Reynolds was liable. The jury found that defendants, Hampden Automotive and Philip Morris USA, breached the implied warranty of merchantability for selling a defectively designed product, but neither were found to be a…
 On June 29, 2018, a New Jersey state appeals court ruled that a superior court improperly allowed a jury to consider evidence, not represented at trial, in allocating damages among nine defendants in an asbestos case. The state appeals court ordered a new trial in Rowe v. Bell & Gossett Company to address the issue of re-apportioning the $1,500,000.00 jury verdict. Throughout Ronald Rowe’s thirty-plus year career working as an automobile mechanic, and repairing and servicing…
Talk is cheap…until lawyers get involved. “Lawyers: are persons who write a 10,000 word document and call it a brief.” – Franz Kafka Mouthpiece: n. old-fashion slang for one’s lawyer. Burton’s Legal Thesaurus, 4E. (2007). Retrieved August 8, 2018, from https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/mouthpiece There are thousands of sated comedians in the world who make a living off the caricature of loquacious litigators. Indeed, it is probably a fair statement that attorneys like to talk. Attend any bar event…
Often times we, as attorneys, need subtle reminders of the power of burden shifting during discovery. We were provided that reminder in a recent, though unpublished, take-home asbestos appellate court opinion which upheld a trial court’s granting of a motion for summary judgment. (Foglia v. Moore Dry Dock Co., No. A142125, 2018 WL 1193683 (Cal. Ct. App. Mar. 8, 2018) The appellate court in Foglia agreed with the trial court decision that the plaintiffs could…
In DeLong v. Rhode Island Sports Center, Inc., et al., a former college hockey player successfully appealed a Rhode Island Superior Court decision granting an ice rink’s motion for summary judgment in a case alleging that he was poisoned by an ice resurfacer after finding that circumstantial evidence present in the record was sufficient to raise a factual dispute. 182 A.3d 1129 (R.I. 2018).   The plaintiff alleged that he inhaled noxious fumes that emanated…
In a recent case, a Rhode Island Jury awarded $31.3 million to Brett and Stacie Smith after a 2014 swimming accident in a pond at the University of Rhode Island left Mr. Smith paralyzed from the chest down.  The jury found that the University of Rhode Island was negligent in its failure to post warning signs and to inform its guests that swimming was prohibited.   The Smiths were attending a wedding during the weekend…
Ramsey v. Georgia Southern University Advanced Development Center, et al., No. 305, 2017, C.A. No. N14C-01-287 ASB (Del. June 27, 2018).   On June 27, 2018, the Supreme Court of the State of Delaware issued a fifty-seven-page opinion in the above-mentioned case, creating new precedent for Delaware employer liability in secondary or “take-home” asbestos cases. Below is a summary of both the relevant factual and procedural background, as well as Chief Justice Strine’s opinion.  …