Products Liability Law Legal Research Blog

Latest from Products Liability Law Legal Research Blog

Jeremy Taylor—Senior Attorney, National Legal Research Group
 

        In a decision dated September 5, 2018, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit held that the due process rights of the defendant tobacco manufacturers were not violated by the district court’s application of collateral estoppel based on a jury’s findings in a previous

Jeremy Taylor, Senior Attorney, National Legal Research Group
            The United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit recently held that evidence of other incidents involving unintended acceleration of the defendant automobile manufacturer’s vehicles was admissible in a products liability action brought by family members of persons killed in an unintended acceleration event. 

Jeremy Taylor, Senior Attorney, National Legal Research Group
     New York’s highest court recently addressed the issue of whether an automobile manufacturer could be held strictly liable for a mechanic’s malignant mesothelioma allegedly caused by the mechanic’s exposure to asbestos while replacing asbestos-containing brakes, clutches, and engine parts in the manufacturer’s automobiles. See Finerty

The Lawletter Vol. 41, No. 2
Fred Shackelford, Senior Attorney, National Legal Research Group
     The New Mexico Supreme Court has resolved an issue of first impression in that state: When a product causes personal injury and suit is filed for breach of warranty, what statute of limitations applies? In Badilla v. Wal-Mart Stores

The Lawletter Vol 41 No 1
Jeremy Taylor, Senior Attorney, National Legal Research Group
     The Supreme Court of South Carolina recently addressed the issue of who is a product “user” for purposes of holding the manufacturer liable for injuries under the theory of strict liability. See Lawing v. Univar, USA, Inc., No.

The Lawletter Vol 40 No 1
Jeremy Taylor, Senior Attorney, National Legal Research Group
     The Virginia Supreme Court recently addressed the issue of the admissibility of expert testimony in a products liability case and ruled such testimony inadmissible under the circumstances presented. See Hyundai Motor Co. v. Duncan, ___ Va. ___, 766

Jeremy Taylor, Senior Attorney, National Legal Research Group
     The New York Court of Appeals recently held that New York law does not recognize an independent, equitable cause of action for medical monitoring for smoking-related diseases, such as lung cancer, brought by current or former smokers who have not been diagnosed with such a

The Lawletter Vol 38 No 9
Jeremy Taylor, Senior Attorney, National Legal Research Group
     The Court of Appeals of South Carolina recently considered whether a worker who was seriously burned when the chemical sodium bromate caught fire at his workplace could recover against the suppliers of the chemical even though the plaintiff was