Toxic tort, mass tort, latent disease and environmental claims are among the costliest for companies and insurers to litigate. They often involve multiple defendants, diverse theories of recovery and emerging science.
Litchfield Cavo attorneys successfully litigated thousands of direct defense matters involving complex toxic torts across the United States. Our toxic tort attorneys devise creative defense theories and produce notable results for our clients. In each case, our trial attorneys consider every possible defense and collaborate with our clients to achieve their targeted goals.
Our litigators across the United States defend clients such as
- Construction managers
- Property managers
Our experienced toxic tort attorneys defend personal injury, chronic illness and property damage lawsuits nationwide including those related to
- Aluminum metal exposure
- Benzene exposure
- Blood transfusions and HIV
- Breast implants
- Carbon monoxide
- Chemical exposure
- Chromium exposure
- Clean Air Act
- Clean Water Act
- Diacetyl – popcorn lung
- Electromagnetic radiation exposure
- Food additives exposure
- Insecticide poisoning
- Latex gloves
- Lead exposure
- Magnesium metal exposure
- Medical device implants
- Mixed dust
- Multiple chemical sensitivity
- Noise-induced hearing loss
- Paint sealant
- Paint sensitivity
- Propane litigation
- Superfund (CERCLA) contamination
- Welding exposure
- Wood sealants
Our Toxic Tort Defense Record
Litchfield Cavo attorneys’ vast resources and experience produce favorable outcomes for clients’ representative matters including
- Successful defense of a ceramics manufacturer client against claim that exposure to manganese used in glazes causes Parkinson’s disease.
- Defense of a large manufacturer client in a wood sealant exposure case in which plaintiff sought a multimillion-dollar recovery. Our attorneys obtained a directed verdict on some of the counts lodged against the manufacturer and a jury verdict in favor of the manufacturer on the remaining counts.
- Prevailed on appeal of a trial court’s dismissal of a complaint brought by a commercial tenant against Litchfield Cavo’s clients, a real estate investment firm and hospitality management company for personal injuries and damages arising from the plaintiff’s purported exposure to mold. The trial court held, and the appeals court affirmed, the evidence demonstrated that the underlying basis for the plaintiff’s expert opinions did not meet the reliability requirements established by Daubert and Lanigan.
- Prevailed in multidistrict litigation (MDL) and Court of Appeals on summary judgment for our client based upon Sophisticated User Doctrine and bulk supplier defense in medical device litigation.
- Our attorneys’ records of success includes dismissals on behalf of asbestos clients across the country and have successfully tried numerous cases to verdict before juries in multiple states with favorable outcomes.
Our attorneys nationwide provide top-tier service for successful outcomes of clients’ toxic tort claims.