Source: https://www.americanbar.org/groups/litigation/committees/mass-torts/practice/
Timestamp: 2019-04-23 20:54:07+00:00

Document:
New York state is proposing changing their regulation of consumer and personal care products to be more like California’s.
Don’t just copy and paste your requests to a personal injury plaintiff. Instead, consider following this checklist and writing your own.
Three suggestions you might consider when hiring your next expert witness.
The decision will have a unique impact on class action litigation in the Ninth Circuit.
Excessively aggressive litigation can ultimately cause one’s client more harm than good.
Timing in environmental torts cases is critical. Attorneys should always pay careful attention to the point in time at which an expert appraiser has quantified losses.
A successful attack on expert testimony requires thoughtful, planned, and strategic questioning before trial.
As advocates argue for legalizing marijuana nationwide in the United States, we should all pay close attention to the outcomes of Canada’s new regulations.
Defense attorneys practicing in state court should be intimately familiar with the applicable expert admissibility standards.
The recent decision in Conde v. Sensa reveals ways to defeat class certification, but more interestingly, provides a detailed analysis in dicta on typicality.
How to be successful at networking and “put yourself out there” without being a nuisance to those around you.
The issues raised by this proposal abound, and we offer a few initial observations here.
Every lawyer has a professional responsibility to provide legal services to those unable to pay.
Jurisdictional battle lines are now being drawn around specific jurisdiction, though those lines are becoming narrower each day, particularly after Bristol-Myers Squibb.
A few ways young and diverse attorneys can manage their insecurities of not belonging or being unworthy of praise.
Maryland’s high court again raises the bar for admissibility of expert testimonies on general causation predicated on epidemiology in toxic exposure cases.
There is concern that the current holding could significantly limit the ability of parties to enter into nationwide class settlements of state-law claims.
Personal Versus Professional Ethics: Are They (or Should They Be) the Same?
As much as we may not want to admit it, and as ethical as we may try to be, we regularly encounter situations that make us pause and consider both the professional—and personal—consequences some ethical dilemmas pose.
It is difficult to anticipate how the Court will answer the subject question, particularly when its present makeup differs so greatly from that which produced Levine.
Bottom line: Be diligent and take reasonable steps to avoid production of privileged material.
These defenses remain the holy grail in pharmaceutical products liability cases.
The Mancinelli decisions are the first Canadian cases to prohibit plaintiffs from obtaining discovery from non-parties in the United States. under section 1782.
The case relates to cancer contracted from alleged asbestos exposure on Navy ships.
Ride-sharing companies breathed a sigh of relief in U.S. Chamber of Commerce v. City of Seattle.
The decisions have relied upon SCOTUS’s decision in Daimler AG v. Bauman.
Tips for giving back as you begin practicing law.
It comes down to something that everyone heard over and over while growing up: Treat others as you would want to be treated.
The leadership make-up of mass tort MDL and class action lawsuits still does not reflect the diversity of our clients, communities, or jury pools. How can we change?
It is imperative that practitioners take note of how federal courts are applying the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23.
A court will likely give plaintiffs the chance to conduct jurisdictional discovery if they can show there is a colorable basis for the existence of jurisdiction.
The luxury vehicle giant's emissions litigation is an example of how cases in Canada and the United States can proceed at different speeds and on procedurally different routes.
Young lawyers should be mindful that, despite a client’s track record, it is unlikely to remain perfect forever.
Does American Pipe Tolling Extend to Putative Class Claims?
The Supreme Court is set to resolve this circuit split.
Because this rapidly growing industry of recreational flight is fluid and evolving, hobbyists should regularly consult state and municipal authorities.
SCOTUS Skips a Spokeo Review. But Should You?
It is only a matter of time before the Supreme Court weighs in on the conflicting holdings coming out of the circuit courts.
Responses to Discovery Document Requests Are Now Required to Be . . . Responsive?
Attorneys that have yet to update the boilerplate language used in their discovery "form file" risk increasingly harsh consequences for their failure to do so in the courts.
Will the 2017 Agricultural Health Study Shut the Rule 702 Gate on the Monsanto Roundup Litigation?
This highly publicized litigation currently involves hundreds of cases in the Northern District of California, and thousands of additional cases in state courts in California, Delaware, and Missouri.
Practitioners must understand the limitations of this tool and navigate through a challenging search process to use it effectively.
A new study suggests it may be, and law firms should take note.
As information becomes more readily available, the legal community must question whether bright-line rules regarding Internet citations are even tenable.
A report on new decisions in consumer cases based on the theory that the labeling of certain food products as "natural" is improper where glyphosate is allegedly present.
The opinion provides clarity regarding when plaintiffs' experts must consider potential alternative causes in forming their opinions.
But the Court leaves open the question of federal forums.
Learn the practices and techniques that will help you become more present in your day-to-day life.
A wife spent 22 years washing her husband's asbestos-laden clothing, and died of mesothelioma.
A Pennsylvania court’s holding makes it clear that clients sustaining pre-takeoff injuries will be permitted to proceed under state negligence claims.
The Carlson decision offers a lesson regarding the strictness of the federal rule.
Litigators should look to the specific state statutory language and related jurisprudence to avoid baseless positions.
The case is Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California, San Francisco County.
Conflicting rulings demonstrate the fact-specific nature of Article III standing inquiries in data breach cases.
The EPA issued its final rule relating to reporting requirements under TSCA for nanoscale chemicals.
The case is Peaker Energy Group, LLC, et al. v. Cargill, Incorporated, et al.
The case arose from the crash of a twin-engine plane in Portugal.
Learn about the timing change regarding electronically served discovery that all litigators will need to keep in mind.
It has become increasingly important for practitioners to analyze how federal courts interpret the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 to certify a class.
The plaintiff’s experts need to have some assessment of the requisite dose to cause the disease at issue and the relative doses that a plaintiff may have received.
Few amendments to the Federal Rules have garnered as much notoriety and attention.
Supreme Court declines to review case dismissal after successful Daubert challenge.
The Southern District of New York's decision in Mirena.
With hectic schedules for both lawyer and client, timing is everything.
Read about the latest turn in the long-running dispute between Chevron and Ecuadorian residents alleging environmental damages.
The non-binding guidance provides a degree of certainty to manufacturers of popular devices such as FitBit and the Apple Watch.
The case is Adams v. United States Auto. Association.
The rule applies, with some exceptions, to U.S. and foreign companies who are required to register as food facilities under the Food, Drug, & Cosmetic Act.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit recently affirmed a district court's decision to sanction attorneys for ethical violations surrounding the Deepwater Horizon oil-spill settlement program.
Fear not. With a couple of simple rules, you can navigate cross-examining a surprise witness!
The First Circuit affirmed the district court’s ruling to reject the relative risk testimony of the plaintiff’s specific causation expert under Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence.
The opinion illustrates how state standards for dismissal based on this discretionary power can vary.
SCOTUS ruled that the violation of a statutorily created personal interest, alone, is insufficient for standing.
The case is Chen v. Allstate Insurance Co..
Counsel who have benefitted from the use of the highly orchestrated MDL system will be disappointed to find that a class proceeding will not possess the same degree of coordination if it migrates north of the border.
The case is Flagg v. Stryker Corp.
A corporate defendant must not discount the emotional, deeply moral nature of an invasion of privacy.
The case is Sullivan v. Alaska Air Group Inc..
Mass tort practitioners should revisit their personal jurisdiction and removal strategies subsequent to this February 2016 decision.
This is an important development for litigation involving prescription pharmaceuticals, and it is obviously a marked change in Mountain State law.
The doctrine provides that the manufacturer of a prescription drug or medical device discharges their duty of care to consumers by providing adequate warnings about the dangerous propensities of the drug or device to the prescribing physician.
The development of this line of authority could have a profound impact on future mass-accident litigation and product-liability claims.
The Siswanto case serves as fresh instruction on the vigorous scrutiny that courts apply to determine the existence of general personal jurisdiction over a foreign defendant.
Depositions: What Do You Want From Me?
By starting at the end of your case and working backwards, a deposition can soon transform from a potentially aimless fact-seeking mission to a direct, concise, but thorough exploration of any and all issues needed for your case, with a detailed eye towards how the testimony may help you down the road.
Although it did not create new law in this area, the Shepherd case emphasizes the difficulty of establishing a legitimate class in medical-device and -products cases like this.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.