Hollingsworth LLP and Atlantic Legal Foundation To File Amicus Brief Supporting Maker of Tylenol® Kenvue’s Petition for Rehearing
The case is Rutledge v. Walgreen Co., 182 F.4th 168 (2d Cir. 2026).
The case is Rutledge v. Walgreen Co., 182 F.4th 168 (2d Cir. 2026).
Hollingsworth LLP is committed to contributing to the improvement and well-being of our community by performing pro bono legal services.
For more than 40 years, corporate defendants have chosen Hollingsworth LLP for our record of winning at trial and on appeal in federal and state courts across the country.
"Impeccable client service requires more than just 24-hour availability and providing sage legal advice and zealous advocacy—it requires a complete understanding of each client's business and core values."
"I believe providing exceptional client service starts with understanding each client's goals, communicating clearly and proactively, and serving as a trusted partner throughout every stage of a matter."
Successfully questioning a professional witness with a high level of expertise requires both tireless preparation and advanced deposition-taking skills.
The article discusses the importance of judicial gatekeeping and practical considerations for litigants challenging expert testimony.
In this blog post, partner Joe Altieri analyzes these verdicts, what they mean for tech and other industries, the products liability theory driving this new wave of litigation, and how to prepare for what may be coming.
The article highlights plaintiffs’ experts’ continued reliance on “one molecule” or “any exposure” theories in toxic tort cases and addresses several recent litigation developments signaling a growing demand for reliable, dose-specific causation analysis in ethylene oxide cases.
The firms earning the top rankings garnered client recognition for superior client service.
Aleksandra Rybicki and Olivia Sacks analyze a recent Ninth Circuit decision addressing the application of the learned intermediary doctrine to a patient seeing multiple physicians for the same condition.
Panelists addressed the current toxicology, epidemiology, and medical causation evidence with respect to certain PFAS, as well as evidence relating to claims for natural resource damages.