A California Court of Appeal decision recognizing an unusual and potentially far-reaching negligence duty for product manufacturers is now before the California Supreme Court. In the Gilead Tenofovir Cases, the Court held that, in “appropriate circumstances,” a manufacturer’s duty of reasonable care to users of its product can extend beyond the traditional obligation not to
Toxic Tort Monitor
Blog Authors
Latest from Toxic Tort Monitor
No Upgrades Required: Texas Shields Lessors from Retrofit Claims
Texas made a targeted amendment to one of its key products liability statutes governing the rental and leasing of motor vehicles. The Texas Legislature recently amended Section 82.009 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code—a statute that significantly limits the exposure of vehicle lessors and rental companies in failure-to-retrofit claims. The statute helps protect…
Texas Supreme Court Clarifies What Slip-and-Fall Plaintiffs Must Prove
A recent ruling from the Texas Supreme Court reinforces a demanding evidentiary standard in premises liability cases and reminds plaintiffs that circumstantial evidence of a hazard’s cause is not the same as evidence of its duration. In H-E-B, LP v. Marissa Peterson, the Texas Supreme Court held that plaintiffs who bring premises liability claims based …
D.C. Court of Appeals Strikes Down 10-Round Magazine Limit: What It Means for Product Liability Defenses
By David O'Leary & Caleb Hunt
The D.C. Court of Appeals recently granted rehearing en banc in this case, which vacated the March 5, 2026 panel decision described below.1 The case will be reargued before the full court, and the analysis in this post reflects the panel decision as issued.
On March 5, 2026, the District of Columbia Court of…
Landmark $6 Million Verdict Holds Social Media Platforms Liable for Harm to a Minor
On March 25, 2026, a Los Angeles County jury in California’s Superior Court returned a $6 million verdict in favor of a minor child Plaintiff, K.G.M., against two major social media platforms. The jury awarded Plaintiff both punitive and compensatory damages.1 The negligence claims in the case centered on the allegation that the Defendants’…
AI-Assisted Pro Se Litigation: Who Pays the Price?
In January 2024, Plaintiff Graciela Dela Torre settled her long-term disability claim with Nippon Life Insurance Company (Nippon) and dismissed her case with prejudice. Later, Plaintiff Dela Torre questioned her settlement. But she did not return to her attorney to ask questions. Instead, she turned to ChatGPT, a widely used AI chatbot.…
Kentucky Supreme Court Affirms Duty to Prevent Take Home Exposures in Asbestos Claims in Schneider Electric USA, Inc. v. Williams
On March 19, 2026, the Supreme Court of Kentucky issued its decision in Schneider Electric USA, Inc. v. Williams, affirming the duty to prevent take home exposure in asbestos claims on summary judgment.…
How AI Is Revolutionizing Product Safety: Essential Insights for Navigating Risks, Recalls, and Regulations
Artificial intelligence is no longer just a buzzword in product safety. AI is actively reshaping the way companies identify hazards, manage recalls, communicate warnings, and address the unique risks of lithium-ion batteries. As products become more complex, consumer complaints arrive faster, regulators demand greater transparency, and recall costs soar. AI offers a powerful solution to…
The Ninth Circuit Holds that BNSF Cannot Be Held Strictly Liable for Asbestos-Contaminated Vermiculite Accumulated on Its Tracks and Railyard
On February 24, 2026, the Ninth Circuit reversed a judgment from the U.S. District Court for the District of Montana awarding damages to plaintiffs in a Libby, Montana asbestos case, holding that BNSF Railway cannot be held strictly liable for asbestos-contaminated vermiculite that accumulated on its tracks and railyard.…
Remand Motion Denied in PFAS Lawsuit Brought by Former Professional Baseball Players
On February 11, 2026, Judge Juan R. Sánchez of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania denied a motion to remand in a high-profile toxic torts case. Former professional baseball players and representatives of their estates filed a lawsuit, claiming that extended exposure to per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (“PFAS”) while playing for…