Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Toxic Tort

  • Successfully represented a refinery owner at a two week trial against plaintiff’s claim that his lung cancer developed as a result of a “synergistic effect” between his alleged asbestos exposure and his cigarette smoking. The jury returned a verdict that found that the sole proximate cause of plaintiff’s lung cancer was cigarette smoking. In the months leading up to the trial, the parties had argued over which expert witnesses would be allowed to testify on plaintiff’s behalf. The judge accepted the defense arguments that plaintiff’s expert theories were scientifically unreliable, and that the Court should bar its use at trial. Using the Daubert factors, the Court disallowed the witnesses’ testimony concerning their alleged knowledge of asbestos exposure, and particularly the “any exposure” theory, under which any exposure to asbestos results in injury and is considered to potentially cause cancer. Krik v. ExxonMobil, et al, No. 1:10-cv-07435 - Document 299 (N.D. Ill. 2014).
  • Gregory v. Beazer East, 384 Ill. App. 3d 178 (Ill. App. Ct. 1st Dist. 2008)

Commercial Litigation

  • Representation of trustee of an Internal Revenue Code §468B Qualified Settlement Funds (“QSF”) in a lawsuit involving the allocation of the settlement amounts between the various MDL plaintiffs and their attorneys.
  • Representation of a beneficiary of an estate in a lawsuit seeking to recover damages against former insiders and affiliates, asserting claims for, inter alia, breach of fiduciary duty, and fraudulent transfer.
  • Representation of a corporation defending against the theory that it was  liable for the debtor's liabilities on fraudulent conveyance, mere continuation or de facto merger theories.
  • Representation in Delaware Chancery Court of a beneficiary of an IRS Sections 671-677 Creditors Liquidation Trust Agreement, seeking interpretation of the trustee’s obligations.