• PPG Indus. Inc. v. United States

    Publication Date: 2020-05-18
    Practice Area: Environmental Law
    Industry: Chemicals and Materials | Federal Government
    Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
    Judge: Justice Fisher
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Adam G. Husik and Joseph F. Lagrotteria (K&L Gates); Joseph M. Rainsbury (Miles & Stockbridge)
    for defendant: Jeffrey Bossert Clark, Assistant Attorney General, and Allen M. Brabender (U.S. Department of Justice, Environmental & Natural Resources Division)

    Case Number: 19-1165

    Government Had No Operator Liability Under CERCLA Where It Had No Control Over Polluting Activities at Manufacturing Facility

  • HDI Global SE v. Phillips 66 Co.

    Publication Date: 2020-05-18
    Practice Area: Dispute Resolution | Environmental Law | Insurance Litigation
    Industry: Chemicals and Materials | Insurance
    Court: U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, U.S. - SDNY
    Judge: District Judge Richard Berman
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 20 Civ. 631

    Award Finding Phillips 66's Claims Covered by PPLE to Pollution Exclusion Is Confirmed

  • In re: Asbestos Litig.

    Publication Date: 2020-04-08
    Practice Area: Products Liability
    Industry: Chemicals and Materials
    Court: Delaware Supreme Court
    Judge: Justice Valihura
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Adam Balick and Patrick J. Smith, Balick & Balick, LLC, Wilmington, DE; Bartholomew J. Dalton, Ipek K. Medford, Andrew C. Dalton, Michael C. Dalton, Dalton & Associates, P.A., Wilmington, DE for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Loreto P. Rufo, Rufo Associates, PA, Hockessin, DE; John V. Work, Law Office of John V. Work, Wilmington, DE; Joseph S. Naylor, Swartz Campbell, LLC, Wilmington, DE; Paul A. Bradley and Stephanie A. Fox, Maron Marvel Bradley Anderson & Tardy, LLC, Wilmington, DE; Brian D. Tome, Reilly McDevitt & Henrich, Wilmington, DE; John C. Phillips and David A. Bilson, Phillips Goldman McLaughlin & Hall, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Christian J. Singewald and Rochelle Gumapac, White and Williams LLP, Wilmington, DE; Kelly A. Costello, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP, Wilmington, DE; Timothy A. Sullivan III, Wilbraham, Lawler & Buba PC, Wilmington, DE for defendants.

    Case Number: D68936

    Motion to extend trial date denied where plaintiffs failed to meet good cause standard after failing to develop factual record required by Texas asbestos law after two extensions to trial date.

  • Delaware Dep't of Natural Res. & Envt'l Control v. McGinnis Auto & Mobile Home Salvage, LLC

    Publication Date: 2020-03-04
    Practice Area: Environmental Law
    Industry: Chemicals and Materials | State and Local Government
    Court: Delaware Supreme Court
    Judge: Justice Seitz
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Ralph K. Durstein III, Department of Justice, Dover, DE for appellant.
    for defendant: John W. Paradee, Daniel F. McAllister, Stephen A. Spence, and Brian V. DeMott, Baird Mandalas Brockstedt, LLC, Dover, DE for appellee.

    Case Number: D68895

    Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control's cease and desist powers could order a property owner to remove an environmentally-contaminating pile of waste, where the mere presence of the pile constituted an environmental violation and therefore removal of the pile would be required to cease and desist the violation.

  • Southern States Chemical, Inc. et al. v. Tampa Tank & Welding, Inc. et al.

    Publication Date: 2019-12-24
    Practice Area: Contractual Disputes
    Industry: Chemicals and Materials
    Court: Georgia Court of Appeals
    Judge: Judge Coomer
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Jonathan Barr, Jeffrey Lewis, Andrew Stevens, (Arnall Golden Gregory LLP), Atlanta, Edwin King, (Attorney at Law), Savannah, George Carley, (Carley, Gregory & Gregory), Decatur, for appellant.
    for defendant: Cecily McLeod, (Gordon & Rees, LLP), Atlanta, Kimberly Sheridan, (Gordon & Rees, LLP), Atlanta, Mike Crawford, Bradley Wolff, (Swift, Currie, McGhee & Hiers, LLP), Atlanta, for appellee. Mark Johnson, (Gilbert, Harrell, Sumerford & Martin, P. C.), Brunswick, Mark Middleton, (Attorney at Law), Brunswick, for AM.

    Case Number: A19A0960

    Court denies plaintiff's breach of contract claims because they were barred by the statute of repose

  • Ford Motor Co. v. Knecht

    Publication Date: 2019-12-18
    Practice Area: Personal Injury
    Industry: Automotive | Chemicals and Materials | Manufacturing
    Court: Delaware Supreme Court
    Judge: Justice Vaughn
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Christian J. Singewald and Rochelle L. Gumapac, White and Williams, LLP, Wilmington, DE, Jessica L. Ellsworth, Hogan Lovells US LLP, Washington, DC for appellant.
    for defendant: Adam Balick and Patrick J. Smith, Balick & Balick, LLP; Bartholomew J. Dalton, Ipek K. Medford, Andrew C. Dalton, and Michael C. Dalton, Dalton & Associates, P.A., Wilmington, DE for appellee.

    Case Number: D68807

    Trial court erred in denying new trial/remittitur motion on excessive verdict motions when it focused on defendant's share of damages rather than the entire compensatory damages verdict.

  • December 12, 2019 | The Legal Intelligencer

    Increasing Lawsuits Against the Vaping Industry Amid a Cloud of Controversy

    With a surge in the number of people vaping, mysterious lung injuries and deaths are being rapidly reported all over the country causing what some are referring to as a vaping "epidemic," especially among minors. So, what is vaping and what are the associated risks?

    1 minute read

  • Univar, Inc. v. Greisenberger

    Publication Date: 2019-10-02
    Practice Area: Constitutional Law
    Industry: Chemicals and Materials | Consulting | Distribution and Wholesale
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Noreika
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Michael P. Kelly, David A. White and Matthew J. Rifino, McCarter & English LLP, Wilmington, DE; James G. Ryan and Jameel S. Turner, Bailey Cavalieri LLC, Columbus, OH for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Caroline Lee Cross and Elizabeth R. McFarlan, Delaware Dep’t of Justice, Wilmington, DE; Melanie K. Sharp, Martin S. Lessner, Mary F. Dugan and Robert M. Vrana, Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Steven S. Rosenthal, Tiffany R. Moseley and John David Taliaferro, Loeb and Loeb LLC, Washington, DC for defendants.

    Case Number: D68725

    Plaintiff's claims for equal protection and procedural due process violations were ripe for review, but other matters were not yet ripe.

  • Dulcette Tech. LLC v. MTC Indus. Inc.

    Publication Date: 2019-09-10
    Practice Area: Contracts
    Industry: Chemicals and Materials | Food and Beverage
    Court: Supreme Court, Suffolk
    Judge: Justice James Hudson
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: White Cirrito & Nally, LLP, Hempstead, NY.
    for defendant: Kevin K. Tung, Esq., Flushing, NY. Harwood Lloyd, LLP, New York, NY.

    Case Number: 060071/2013

    Punitive Damages Awarded After Defendant Intentionally Mislabeled Sucralose Shipment

  • Richards v. Copes-Vulcan, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2019-08-07
    Practice Area: Toxic Torts
    Industry: Automotive | Chemicals and Materials
    Court: Delaware Supreme Court
    Judge: Justice Seitz
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Adam Balick and Patrick J. Smith, Balick & Balick, LLC, Wilmington, DE; Bartholemew J. Dalton, Ipek K. Medord, Andrew C. Dalton and Michael C. Dalton, Dalton & Associates, P.A., Wilmington, DE for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Jason A. Cincilla, Amaryah K. Bocchino, Ryan W. Browning and Tye C. Bell, Manning Gross + Massenburg LLP, Wilmington, DE for defendant The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. Paul A. Bradley and Antionette D. Hubbard, Maron Marvel Bradley An-derson & Tardy LLC, Wilmington, DE for defendant Copes-Vulcan, Inc. Christian J. Singewald and Rochelle L. Gumapac, White and Williams LLP, Wilmington, DE; Jessica L. Ellsworth, Hogan Lovells US LLP, Washington, DC for defendant Ford Motor Co.

    Case Number: D68659

    In this asbestos exposure case, the report of plaintiffs' expert relying solely on cumulative exposure was insufficient, because plaintiffs were required to show that exposure from each defendant's product was a substantial factor in causing injury.