Source: https://www.woodenlawyers.com/people/douglas-b-king/
Timestamp: 2019-04-21 06:19:30+00:00

Document:
Breach of Contract and various commercial claims, and a wide variety of Personal Injury and Wrongful Death claims.
The heaviest concentration of Doug’s work in personal injury defense has been in products liability. Doug was appointed to the subcommittee for mass tort litigation of the Indiana Supreme Court Rules Committee, whose mission is to develop procedures and rules to facilitate and expedite the handling of asbestos and other mass tort cases for all of Indiana.
Doug has tried numerous jury and bench trials in state and Federal courts throughout Indiana, and in other states across the country such as Illinois, Delaware, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and Florida, resulting in a number of published decisions and landmark cases.
In the products liability area, Doug has defended manufacturers and distributors of a wide variety of products, devices, and substances over the last 41 years.
Doug has worked with medical and scientific issues, such as diseases and birth defects allegedly resulting from exposure to asbestos, benzene, silica, coal tar pitch, polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), trichlorethelyne, vinyl chloride, gludalderhyde, formaldehyde, and various other chemicals.
A judge in Marion (County, Indiana) Superior Court appointed Doug as one of two defendants’ liaison counsel for all then-2000 such cases.
The judge who had all asbestos product liability cases in the Lake (County, Indiana) Superior Court appointed Doug as the defendants’ liaison counsel for approximately 70 defendants for all cases pending in Lake County to help the Court develop a uniform case management order to govern procedures and discovery for the handling of all pending and future asbestos cases in Northwest Indiana.
In a fifteen-day jury trial spanning close to four weeks, in which over 100 exhibits were introduced, and twenty-five witnesses testified, including nine experts, Doug defended Cook against allegations that Cook illegally promoted the off-label use of Cook Medical’s Formula 418 Biliary Stent, and that the use of such stent in the plaintiff’s decedent Margaret Horrillo caused her to suffer a stroke that caused her death. In final argument, the plaintiff asked for $10 million in compensatory damages and $100 million in punitive damages.
VERDICT: In favor of Cook and the plaintiff appealed the judgment. Judgment affirmed.
This was the first asbestos premises liability case tried to verdict in Indiana.
In the week immediately following the conclusion of his participation in an eight (8)-week jury trial of a multi-million dollar commercial dispute, Doug tried what ended up being a ten (10)-week jury trial on the plaintiffs’ claim that Kroger and other defendants caused the plaintiff William Lee (“Billy”) Roberts, Jr.’s peritoneal mesothelioma.
A description of the case also appears in PSI Energy, Inc. v. Roberts, 829 N.E.2d 943, 948-950 (Ind. 2005), a published decision affirming the plaintiffs’ judgment on the verdict against Kroger’s codefendant.
The plaintiffs claimed that Bechtel caused their father Billy J. Engle to die of pleural mesothelioma.
A leading Indiana case with respect to product liability for failure to warn with respect to drugs and medical devices. Doug participated in the briefing of Ortho’s appeal from an adverse verdict in the first trial in 1976, which appeal was decided in favor of Ortho in the published opinion cited above. Doug then participated in the new jury trial after remand, which resulted in a defense verdict in 1980.
VERDICT: In favor of defendant – Ortho Pharmaceutical, in the jury trial after remand for a new trial in the published opinion.
The case received media attention in Indianapolis and Bloomington television and newspapers, and nationally in USA Today.
Estate of Denver Smith v. City of Bloomington, et al.
In a very publicized jury trial that lasted approximate 2½ weeks, Doug served as lead trial counsel in the defense of the suit for alleged violations of Denver Smith’s civil rights based on excessive force under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and an Indiana State law pendent claim for wrongful death, brought by the widow of Denver Smith, tried in the U.S.D.C., S.D. Ind., Indianapolis Div., before the Honorable John Daniel Tinder, recently retired from being a Judge of the U.S.C.A. for the 7th Circuit.
The defendants were the City of Bloomington, the Bloomington Board of Public Safety, the Bloomington Police Department, and Bloomington police officers Steven Sharp, Randy Keller and Jimmy Ratcliff in their official and individual capacities.
VERDICT: In favor of all defendants – City of Bloomington, et al.
W&M CLIENT: Bondex International, Inc.
Ott v. Allied Signal, Inc., Bondex International, Inc., et al., 827 N.E.2d 1144 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005), transfer denied.
The two (2) published decisions arise out of an asbestos case filed against Bondex and others in the Allen Superior Court in Fort Wayne, Indiana, in which the Allen Superior Court denied motions for summary judgment filed by Bondex and its codefendants, based on the ten (10)-year Indiana Product Liability Act statute of repose, holding that such statute as applied to asbestos cases was unconstitutional. Bondex and its codefendants appealed and Doug argued the case for Bondex to the Indiana Supreme Court in 2002 during a morning recess in the ten (10)-week jury trial of William Lee Roberts, Jr., et ux v. A.P. Green Industries, Inc., et al., as described above.
The Indiana Supreme Court reversed the Allen Superior Court’s decision, and reversed the decision of the Indiana Court of Appeals in Allied Signal, Inc., Dresser Industries, Inc. (W&M client), et al v. Herring, 757 N.E.2d 1030 (Ind. Ct. App. 2001), in a related decision, Allied Signal, Dresser Industries, et al. v. Herring, 785 N.E.2d 1090 (Ind. 2003), holding that such statute of repose could be constitutionally applied to bar an asbestos-related disease claim filed more than ten (10) years after the delivery of the alleged asbestos-containing product to the initial user or consumer unless the plaintiff’s disease could have been diagnosed by a reasonably experienced physician within the ten-year repose period, but that the plaintiff could not then have known he had that disease.
The Supreme Court then remanded the case to the Allen Superior Court for evidence to be heard on these issues. After extensive discovery, Bondex and its codefendants renewed their motions for summary judgment and, after a day-long evidentiary hearing, the Allen Superior Court granted the motions for summary judgment of Bondex and its codefendants, finding that the plaintiff’s decedent’s alleged asbestos-related disease could not have been diagnosed by a reasonably experienced physician within the ten-year repose period. The plaintiff then appealed that decision to the Indiana Court of Appeals, which affirmed the Allen Superior Court’s granting of summary judgment to Bondex and its codefendants in Ott v. Allied Signal, Bondex Int’l., et al., 827 N.E.2d 1144 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005), transfer denied.
These two decisions, together with a series of other decisions in which Doug has participated that have construed and applied the Ott precedents, which are described in ¶s 2 – 8 in the case list of published decisions, have led to the dismissal of hundreds of asbestos lawsuits against many clients of Wooden & McLaughlin.
This was the first decision by an Indiana appellate court holding that contractors, who were defendants in an asbestos case because their construction activities allegedly caused the plaintiff’s decedent to be exposed to asbestos, were entitled to summary judgment because the plaintiff’s lawsuit was filed more than ten (10) years after the date of substantial completion of such defendant-contractors’ construction of an improvement to real property, the construction activity that allegedly exposed the plaintiff’s decedent to asbestos.
When the motions for summary judgment filed by Doug’s contractor-defendants based upon the ten (10)-year so-called construction statute of repose were denied, an interlocutory appeal was taken to the Indiana Court of Appeals, which reversed and held that such construction statute of repose could properly be utilized by contractors in such a context to bar asbestos claims. In unpublished opinions by the Indiana Court of Appeals further applying the Spriggs precedent and the construction statute of repose, i.e., Orlin J. Organ, Jr. v. ABB, Inc., et al (we represented J.M. Foster), Ind. Ct. App. Cause No. 49A04-0411-CV-582 (2005), and Sandra Elbrink, on her own behalf and on behalf of the Estate of Robert Elbrink, deceased v. General Electric Co., Industrial Contractors, Inc., et al (we represented Industrial Contractors), Ind. Ct. App. Cause No. 49A02-0711-CV-00984 (2008), Doug’s contractor clients have prevailed, which has led to the dismissal of hundreds of asbestos-related claims against many clients of Wooden & McLaughlin.
After the Indiana General Assembly amended the construction statute of repose in 2005 to expand its scope to possessors of real property under certain circumstances, the Spriggs decision and its progeny are expected to lead to even more dismissals of asbestos-related claims in Indiana.
JUDGMENT: In favor of defendants J.M. Foster, Morrison Construction and Chicago Bridge & Iron Co.
Over a five (5)-day period in 1989, Doug defended Cook Group Incorporated of Bloomington, Indiana, in a wrongful discharge and breach of contract case brought by a former employee, R. Larry Kirschner, in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware, Cause No. 86-268JJF. After the defense verdict for Cook Group Incorporated in the District Court in Delaware, the plaintiff took an appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, though he subsequently dismissed that appeal for no consideration after the appeal had been fully briefed.
In her Complaint filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division, the plaintiff Diana Townsend sought damages and equitable relief against defendants under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as amended, Section 1981 and 1983 of the Civil Rights Act of 1870, Title IX of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Indiana common law for assault, battery and intentional infliction of mental distress, based upon alleged sexual harassment and sexual assaults on her while she worked at Indiana University-Purdue University at Indianapolis (“IUPUI”) in 1987.
After the defendants’ motion for partial summary judgment was granted, and then reversed on the plaintiff’s appeal to the U.S.C.A. for the 7th Circuit (¶ 23 on the case list of published decisions), the case was remanded for trial to the Honorable Larry McKinney, United States District Judge, who tried the case without a jury, since it was a Title VII and Title IX case, for about a week and a half. The case was televised as an experiment.
JUDGMENT: (special findings of fact and conclusions of law): In favor of all defendants Indiana University, Purdue University, et al.
35. Ortho Pharmaceutical Corp. v. Chapman, 180 Ind. App. 3, 388 N. E. 2d 541 (1979), transfer denied.
Law Clerk to the Honorable Patrick D. Sullivan, Ind. Ct. App.

References: v. 
 v. 
 § 1983
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.