| 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" |
| Source: Defense Research Institute (DRI) |
