Recent lawsuits target not only wastewater dischargers but also entities involved in biosolids processing and marketing, emphasizing the importance of legal preparedness.
AI companies or those which offer an AI product need to assess their potential products 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.
The new FRCP 16.1 establishes a process by which courts and parties can (and should) engage on key MDL case management issues from the outset of litigation.
Issues, including, notably, the prominent roles causation and product identification are expected to play as microplastics-based products liability claims emerge as an area of litigation.
An overview of the science of PFAS testing, by firm partners Gary Feldon and Carter Thurman
The article also considers plaintiffs’ evolving strategies to counter the learned intermediary doctrine and potential defense responses.
The article, by Firm partner Joseph Altieri, focuses on FRCP Rule 30(b)(6), which governs the deposition of the company itself, and offers a four-point strategy for in-house counsel.
By Grant W. Hollingsworth and Brett S. Covington for Bloomberg Law
By partner Brett Clements for Litigation Daily
By David Schifrin and Melissa Baney for DRI's For the Defense
