| Jan 29, 2012 |
A litigator's guide to nanotechnology health and environmental issues
|
|
(Nanowerk News) Be afraid, very afraid, when litigation lawyers start to wrap their brains around nanotechnology liability issues.
|
|
DRI's For the Defense January 2012 issue features an article by John Delany, a founding member of Delany & O'Brien, in Philadelphia.
|
|
Here is a reading example from the article titled "A Litigator's Guide to Health and Environmental Issues":
|
|
"The factors
that could create a toxic, nanolitigation
storm are (1) ubiquitous exposure;
(2) sympathetic plaintiffs; (3) sensational
press (4) reactive politicians; (5) product
identification capability pointing to a
specific product or a specific defendant;
(5) biomarker and causation evidence;
(6) corporate culpability; (7) state-of-the art
medical and liability; (8) the serious,
objective, potentially permanent nature
of a potential injury due to nonmaterial
exposure compared with potentially subjective
transitory injury; (9) deep pockets
of recovery; (10) product benefit-cost
utility;
and (11) warnings and personal choices
involved with exposure.
|
|
In addition, judicial
and legislative factors may affect the
liability picture, including potential immunities,
economic caps, limitations on punitive
damages, joint and several liability,
the collateral source rule, venue shopping,
removal to a federal court, preemption,
and the framework that the judiciary uses
to manage and adjudicate claims, such as
multi-district
litigation processes."
|
|
Here is one particular gem: According to the author, one of the strategies Corporate America should consider in order to reduce their potential exposure is "...lobbying for immunity caps, class action restrictions, and tort reform"
|
