Free Case Review

Articles Related to Our Toxic Tort Practice

The following articles have been written by our senior staff. We hope you find them informative and helpful. We welcome your comments via e-mail. Click here to send comments.

There are tough times for applicants' attorneys. Since workers' benefits (and consequently their attorneys' fees) have been drastically reduced under Governor Schwarzenegger's administration, applicants' attorneys would be well-advised to supplement their income during these tough times by identifying viable third party cases and either litigating or referring such cases out.

To view this entire article, click here.

"The recent decision of Division 3 of the Second Appellate District in Lockheed Litigation Cases has prompted the defense bar to proclaim that trial judges now have the authority to determine the scientific validity of expert medical testimony. See, Frederick Ufkes' editorial "Message in ‘Lockheed': Courts Must Control Medical Testimony."Not so. ... "

To view this entire article, click here.

"Toxic tort practitioners typically allege negligence and strict liability claims on behalf of their clients in toxic exposure cases, but it is uncommon for toxic tort lawyers to allege the plaintiff exposed to a toxic chemical is the victim of a battery. Can a toxic exposure be a battery? ... "

To view this entire article, click here.

"Daubert is death and disaster to Plaintiffs' attorneys. Any toxic tort case in federal court is dicey for two reasons. ... "

To view this entire article, click here.

"A defendant's equitable indemnity claim against its co-defendants can often be quite valuable to the plaintiff, who may obtain such a claim by assignment as part of a settlement. Plaintiff's counsel can substantially enhance (sometimes almost double) the plaintiff's recovery in multi-defendant tort cases by obtaining assignments of such claims from settling defendants and proving them at trial. ... "

To view this entire article, click here.

"FIFRA is the acronym for an obscure act known as the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act. FIFRA is also the subject of a body of law concerning federal preemption. On this subject FIFRA has spawned a diversity of judicial opinion which ought be resolved by the Supreme Court. What is all the fuss about FIFRA? The fuss is about the interpretation of the preemption provision of FIFRA, which is found at 7 U.S.C. § 136v. ... "

To view this entire article, click here.

"Toxic tort cases are essentially products liability cases. The causes of action usually pled in products liability cases are strict liability based on failure to warn, strict liability for design defect, and negligence (failure to warn). ... "

To view this entire article, click here.

"For 70 years, the Frye rule served as the standard for admissibility of scientific evidence in all jurisdictions. Under Frye, only testimony based on novel scientific techniques that has not gained general acceptance in the scientific community is excluded from evidence. Frye v. U.S. (D.C. Cir. 1923) 293 F. 1013. ... "

To view this entire article, click here.

"As a toxic tort attorney who represents injured plaintiffs, I have become accustomed to defense attorneys and experts calling the evidence that I present on behalf of my clients "junk science." It doesn't really matter whether the scientific methodologies on which my experts rely have been well-studied and proven to be scientifically-valid according to recognized scientific criteria. ... "

To view this entire article, click here.

"In virtually every toxic tort case, the defense asserts that the plaintiff must establish general causation as a necessary element of proof of the case. Sometimes, the defense argues that the plaintiff must establish general causation as part of proving a "prima facie" case before trial. Alternatively, the defense claims that the plaintiff lacks evidence of general causation and that such lack of proof entitles the defense to summary judgment. ... "

To view this entire article, click here.

"In an occupational-disease case, the statute of limitations is a trap for an injured worker's attorney and for third-party counsel (attorneys litigating product-liability cases on behalf of injured workers). ... "

To view this entire article, click here.

"... There is only one problem. The client first came to your office more than a year after he was diagnosed with leukemia and more than a year after he suspected his leukemia was caused by exposure to solvents he used at work. However, the client was unaware that benzene was in the solvents and first suspected that benzene caused his leukemia when an oncologist told him last week that benzene was the only solvent that caused the type of leukemia he had and that benzene was probably in some of the solvents he used in his employment. ... "

To view this entire article, click here.

"When representing a terminally ill plaintiff, it is usually critical to preserve the client's testimony. The California Civil Discovery Act allows for the perpetuation of a party's testimony before an action is filed, C.C.P. § 2035, and pending appeal. C.C.P. § 2036. ... "

To view this entire article, click here.

" ... Proposition 65 ... has two main provisions. The first prohibits businesses from discharging carcinogens and reproductive toxins into sources of drinking water. Health & Safety Code § 25249.5. The second prohibits businesses from exposing individuals to such toxins without first giving them clear and reasonable warning of such toxic hazards. ... "

To view this entire article, click here.

" ... Proving causation is a two-step process. First, counsel must prove that the chemical in question is capable of causing the plaintiff's disease. This aspect of proof is commonly referred to as 'general causation.' Second, counsel must prove that the chemical did, in fact, cause the plaintiff's disease. This aspect of proof is commonly referred to as 'specific causation.' ... "

To view this entire article, click here.

"As the bus left the bus stop, it spewed out diesel exhaust engulfing commuters in a thick black cloud of choking soot. One elderly woman cursed the bus and shouted for all to hear that the MTA was violating her constitutional rights. Another crackpot claiming her constitutional rights were violated? Perhaps not. ... "

To view this entire article, click here.

In 1997, "the California Supreme Court issued a landmark toxic tort decision in Rutherford v. Owens-Illinois, Inc. 16 Cal.4th 953. Rutherford was a lung cancer case brought by a life-long smoker who claimed that his cancer was caused by asbestos to which he was exposed from working on ships. The case went to trial only against Owens-Illinois. The jury found for Rutherford, apportioning 1.2% of fault to Owens-Illinois, 2.5% to Rutherford, and 96.3% to asbestos companies with whom Rutherford had settled before trial. ... "

To view this entire article, click here.

In 1995 " ... one state supreme court observed that"judicially created doctrines such as the ‘sophisticated purchaser' and ‘bulk supplier' defenses have become familiar maxims of product liability law." While it is true that the "sophisticated intermediary" defense is often bandied about, the fact remains that it has not been accepted in most jurisdictions and that it has little, if any, application in toxic tort cases. ... "

To view this entire article, click here.

"In their May 9, 2001 article, "Eye-Balling It: Cottle Proceedings Are Powerful Pretrial Tools to Focus on the Merits of Claims, Defenses or Issue," James P. Barber and William J. Baron argue that Cottle v. Superior Court (1992) 3 Cal.App.4th 1367 allows trial courts to dispose of causes of action and even entire cases by means of a "Cottle" hearing -- a hearing in which the plaintiff in a complex toxic injury case is required to make a prima facie showing of causation before the case is permitted to proceed. ... "

To view this entire article, click here.

" ... the MSDS just says "trade secret ingredient." You call the manufacturer's emergency response number listed on the sheet, and ask the manufacturer what the ingredient is. You are politely told that the identity of the ingredient can't be disclosed, because it is a trade secret. No matter how much you cajole or threaten the polite voice on the phone, you can't get the critical information. ... "

To view this entire article, click here.

Benzene is one of the most poisonous substances on the face of earth that can cost you your life. It is widely used in United States of America and ranks in the top 20 chemicals used for production. While it is used by industries to make plastic, resins, nylon and synthetic fibers, it can also have fatal consequences on the workers who are exposed to this carcinogenic chemical. One such morbid disease caused by Benzene, is leukemia.

To view this entire article, click here.

Acute Myeloblastic Leukemia or AML is a terrible disease which can be caused by exposure to harmful chemical and environmental toxins. Acute Myeloblastic Leukemia is characterized by the presence of immature hematopoietic cells in the victim’s bone marrow and blood. The malignant cells do not differentiate and stop the segregation of the remaining normal hematopoietic precursors.

To view this entire article, click here.

Our Lawyers Can Help!

If you have questions about benzene poisoning or blood disorder symptoms and are concerned about possible occupational diseases and cancers, we are here to help. Toxic tort and injury laws are complex and confusing. The Metzger Law Group is here to help you. Call us today for a FREE evaluation to find out if you have a case or fill out our free evaluation forms to consult with a member of our caring staff.