Environmental Law

Experts - Daubert Motions Should Not Be Routine

Posted on November 06, 2008
Both plaintiffs and defendants in toxic tort cases routinely file Daubert motions seeking to exclude the other sides’ experts. Often, the motions are based on serious questions about the qualifications of an expert or the expert’s methodology and seek to exclude “junk science...

Class Certification - Medical Monitoring

Posted on November 05, 2008
It continues to be difficult to predict the outcome of motions to certify classes in toxic tort cases. In a recent medical monitoring case in West Virginia, Rhodes v. E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co.,     F.R.D.     , 2008 WL 4414720 (S...

No Perchlorate MCL

Posted on November 04, 2008
 Last month, EPA reached a “preliminary determination” not to regulate perchlorate in drinking water. Unless EPA changes its position, there will be no national primary drinking water regulation or Maximum Contaminant Level (“MCL”) established for perchlorate...

Hiring Counsel for an Environmental Toxic Tort Case - Part 3

Posted on October 28, 2008
Continuing with my series of posts on “Hiring Counsel for an Environmental Toxic Tort Case,” this week I address the third criterion - FAIRNESS The criterion of Fairness is slightly different for plaintiffs than for defendants, but it essentially relates to whether you are charged a fair price for the lawyer’s help...

To access blog feed reader register for free. (You will also learn about new ways to read and access the freshest law blogs.)

Hiring Counsel for an Environmental Toxic Tort Case - Part 2

Posted on October 21, 2008
Continuing with my series of posts on “Hiring Counsel for an Environmental Toxic Tort Case,” this week I address the second criterion - COMMITMENT.  Commitment applies to both plaintiff and defendant. You want the lead lawyer and his/her team to commit fully to your case...

Hiring Counsel for an Environmental Toxic Tort Case

Posted on October 14, 2008
Since I started blogging on environmental toxic torts earlier this year, I received several emails from readers asking me questions about choosing an attorney to represent them in an environmental toxic tort case. Unlike most of the issues I address, there are no cases on point...

New ASTM Vapor Intrusion Standard

Posted on April 15, 2008
In March 2008, ASTM International issued its Standard E2600-08 entitled “Standard Practice for Assessment of Vapor Intrusion into Structures on Property Involved in Real Estate Transactions.”   The goal is to identify whether there is a potential for a vapor intrusion condition to exist...

Later Discovered Environmental Conditions Are Not Title Defects

Posted on February 20, 2008
As is probably no surprise to lawyers and real estate professionals, a Pennsylvania appeals court held that title insurance does not protect a buyer from claims arising from the physical condition of the property such as later discovered environmental problems like asbestos, lead paint or abandoned septic tanks...

Summary Judgment After Exclusion of Property Damages Expert Opinion

Posted on February 20, 2008
Often Daubert or similar motions are the key pre-trial motions in environmental toxic tort cases because exclusion of an expert, particularly the plaintiff’s causation or damages expert, provides the basis for a summary judgment in favor of the defendant...

"Stigma" Property Damages Rejected

Posted on February 20, 2008
Often, plaintiffs in environmental toxic tort cases seek to recover property damages based on a theory that contamination or other environmental conditions have imposed a “stigma” on the property. Sometimes the property is itself contaminated or formerly contaminated...

A PRP Cannot Recover From Other PRPs For Response Costs Paid By Insurer

Posted on February 20, 2008
In Friedland v. TIC - The Industrial Co., et al., Case No. 1:04-cv-01263-REB-KLM, slip opinion issued on January 18, 2008, the United States District Court for the District of Colorado joins two other federal district courts in refusing to allow a CERCLA potentially responsible party to collect response costs from other potentially responsible parties when those costs were paid by an environmental or other insurance policy...

Cause of Action for Medical Monitoring Rejected by North Carolina Court of Appeals

Posted on February 20, 2008
For a number of years, environmental toxic tort plaintiffs have sought to recover future medical monitoring expenses because of alleged exposures to chemicals even though they may not have any present physical injury. Appellate courts in several jurisdictions have recognized such claims...

CGL Policy That Would Reimburse Cleanup Costs Does Not Reimburse Seller For Price Discount Given To Purchaser Of Contaminated Properties

Posted on February 20, 2008
In Goodstein v. Continental Casualty Co., No. 05-35805, (9th Cir. December 3, 2007), a property owner sought reimbursement under his Comprehensive General Liability policy for a discount he provided to purchasers of two contaminated Washington properties...

Class Certification in Environmental Toxic Tort Cases

Posted on February 19, 2008
Like prior cases, the most recently decided class certification opinions provide little consistent direction to litigants for framing future battles over class certification. The opinions do, however, reflect some of the difficulties inherent in class property damage claims...

Commercial Kitchen Waste Is A Pollutant

Posted on February 19, 2008
The United States District Court for Colorado held that used cooking oil and other nontoxic restaurant wastes are “pollutants” under the pollution exclusion clause in a restaurant owner’s commercial general liability policy. Mountain States Mutual Casualty Co...

Defense Verdict in Property Damages Case

Posted on February 19, 2008
On January 7, 2008, following one of the longest jury trials ever held in Kansas, jurors in a class action property damage lawsuit returned a verdict in favor of defendants BP Corp. North America, Inc., BP America Inc., BP Products North America Inc., Atlantic Richfield Company and BP America Production Company...