Pipe Insulation Co. Scores Come-From-Behind Asbestos Trial Win Despite Sanctions
Posted by David Siegel on Jul 20, 2018, 1:01:16 PM
Topics: Products Liability, Asbestos
Hospital Nursing Staff Accused of Fault for Child's Brain Damage, as Med Mal Trial Begins
Posted by Arlin Crisco on Jul 19, 2018, 8:05:49 AM
Stock image.
Fort Lauderdale, FL—Attorneys Monday debated whether a nursing staff’s conduct during a perinatal emergency caused a child’s lifelong brain damage, as trial began against the hospital where she was delivered. Mitchell v. South Broward Hospital, CACE 14005044.
Topics: Medical Malpractice, Florida, Mitchell v. South Broward Hospital District
Mistrial, After Jurors Declare Deadlock in Case Against Doctor Over Patient's Fatal Heart Attack
Posted by Arlin Crisco on Jul 19, 2018, 7:34:00 AM
Stock image.
Lawrenceville, GA—Jurors declared themselves deadlocked Friday over whether a Georgia doctor was responsible for her patient’s ultimately fatal heart attack, sending the case against the physician to mistrial. Herrington v. Tree Lane Inpatient Services, LLC., 16C00703-4.
Topics: Medical Malpractice, Georgia, Herrington v. Tree Lane Inpatient Services
Pipe Insulation Company's Asbestos Blamed For Worker's Deadly Cancer As Trial Begins
Posted by David Siegel on Jul 17, 2018, 5:48:57 PM
Topics: Asbestos, product liability
BREAKING UPDATE: $4.69 Billion Verdict Pounds Johnson & Johnson in 22-Plaintiff, Talc-Cancer Trial
Posted by Arlin Crisco on Jul 12, 2018, 4:23:02 PM
Stock image.
Editor's Note: This story has been updated to reflect a $4.14 billion punitive verdict in the case.
This is a developing story, and updates will be added as events warrant.
St. Louis—Jurors Thursday slammed Johnson & Johnson with a $4.69 billion verdict, including more than $4.1 billion in punitives, for the role they concluded the company played in the ovarian cancer 22 women developed after years of using its talc-based products. Ingham v. Johnson & Johnson, 1522-CC10417.
Topics: Products Liability, Asbestos, Missouri, Talc, Ingham v. Johnson & Johnson


