Late last year the First Circuit affirmed the entry of summary judgment for defendants in a product liability case brought by the Town of Westport, Massachusetts. See Town of Westport v. Monsanto Co., 2017 WL 6205273 (1st Cir. Dec. 8, 2017). Westport sued Monsanto Company, Solutia, Inc., and Pharmacia Corporation to recover remediation costs after polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs)—chemicals that are hazardous above certain concentrations—were found in the town’s middle school.
The contractor, a non-defendant, used caulk containing PCBs when building the school in 1969. Monsanto did not make the caulk at issue, but it sold plasticizers—a component of caulk—to the third-party manufacturer who did. Westport alleged that the defendants were liable for property damage caused by the PCB contamination at the school.
The district court entered summary judgement against Westport on all counts of alleged liability. On appeal, Westport challenged only t
Read the full article →
Earlier this fall, the Third Circuit broke from a nationwide majority when it vacated part of an Eastern District of Pennsylvania court’s summary judgment ruling that turned on the application of the “bare metal defense”. See In re: Asbestos Prod. Liab. Litig. (No. VI), 873 F.3d 232 (3d Cir. 2017).Read the full article →
Last month the Court of Special Appeals of Maryland affirmed a judgment entered after a jury awarded over one million dollars to a college-bound plaintiff who allegedly suffers from mild attention deficits due to lead paint exposure in early childhood. Sugarman v. Liles, No. 1460,SEPT.TERM,2016, 2017 WL 4990672, at *1 (Md. Ct.Read the full article →
The United States Supreme Court recently announced that it would not hear a challenge to the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Sarmad Syed v. M-I, LLC, No. 14-17186 (9th Cir. January 20, 2017) (amended March 20, 2017), in which the appellate court found that the Fair Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”) requiresRead the full article →
Last month the Third Circuit reversed an order of dismissal issued by the District of New Jersey regarding a putative class action brought by consumers of prescription eye medication. See Cottrell v. Alcon Labs, 16-ap-2015 (3d Cir. October 18, 2017). The plaintiffs alleged that the manufacturers and distributors of eye drops packaged theRead the full article →