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.
Given the escalating use of generative AI tools in the legal profession, the article recommends steps for counsel to consider when addressing an opponent’s court submissions.
The Supreme Court’s opinion that the “relating to” requirement in 28 U.S.C. § 1442 should be interpreted broadly is an important development that provides a path to federal court for those who meet the necessary criteria.
The article discusses key considerations for companies to consider when deciding to litigate or arbitrate these claims. In the appropriate circumstance, arbitration may offer a beneficial alternative to traditional litigation.
Following the science in this area, as well as working with effective legal counsel, will be important action items for companies in this space.
“An Update on Regulation and Litigation Concerning PFAS in Biosolids,” Westlaw Today “PFAS in Biosolids: Expanding Regulation and Growing Litigation in 2026,” Wastewater Digest “Expanding State PFAS Regulations Proves Challenging to Business,” Bloomberg Law “What Defense…
The article discusses federal inaction, emerging state regulation, and recent lawsuits including Alessi v. Synagro Technologies, Inc. and Farmer v. EPA, as well as outlining strategies for businesses to manage potential compliance and litigation challenges involving PFAS in biosolids and wastewater.
Recent lawsuits target not only wastewater dischargers but also entities involved in biosolids processing and marketing, emphasizing the importance of legal preparedness.
Recent articles and blog posts available to print or download.
AI companies or those that offer an AI product need to assess their potential product liability-based exposure and work with counsel to explore potential risks and defenses.
The rapid expansion of state laws governing the sale of consumer goods containing PFAS poses compliance challenges and litigation risks for multi-state retail chains, internet retailers, and manufacturers.
This case warrants close monitoring because the effect of EPA’s rescission of the 2009 Endangerment Finding and the subsequent repeal of the greenhouse gas emission standards that were born of it will surely be tested in courts for years to come.
If deemed beneficial, parties should discuss these opportunities early in the litigation when considering early technology-enabled MDL census and/or plaintiff fact sheet programs, pleading/census/plaintiff fact sheet deficiency analyses, and other AI-enabled management strategies.
If plaintiffs’ claims are not preempted, then the avenues to avoid preemption of FDA-approved drugs will be expanded well beyond that countenanced by U.S. Supreme Court jurisprudence.
New opportunities exist to better confront the significant data challenges presented by multidistrict litigation for product liability claims now that FRCP 16.1 is in effect and the sophistication of artificial intelligence is continuing to advance.
