Environmental Torts Archives

Intersects with Mass Torts (some include this in Mass Torts), pollution, PFAS, chemical fires, climate change.

PFOA: Science & Litigation | 11/15/2018

October 21st, 2018|Categories: CLE OnDemand, Complex Business Litigation, Environmental Torts, HB Tort Notes|Tags: Risk Management, Scientific & Medical Studies|

[one-third-first] DATE: Nov. 15, 2018 TIME: 2 p.m. EDT; 1 p.m. CDT; 12 p.m. MDT; 11 a.m. PDT PLACE: Your computer or mobile device PRICE: $197* per dial-in site *Price is good through Oct. 31. After that it's $247. GROUPS ARE GOOD: Registering qualifies you to multiple attendees at your location. CLE: 1 credit Please send CLE questions to CLE@LitigationConferences.com speakers Michael Dourson, Ph.D., DABT, FATS, FSRA Director of Science Toxicology Excellence for Risk Assessment (TERA) Register now and get: Access for multiple colleagues at your location. Practical insights from a board-certified toxicologist. A through and informative PowerPoint presentation for later reference. Answers to your questions via live chat. CLE credit. And more! [/one-third-first] [two-thirds] PFOA Toxicology: What's a Safe Level for the Environment? What toxic tort and environmental attorneys need to know about this ubiquitous compound. Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) has been described as more toxic than methyl mercury. Yet not all organizations tasked with developing safe-dose levels agree on the best approach for PFOA, resulting in recommended levels that are more than 100-times apart. Differences in these recommended safe-dose levels result in cleanup costs that vary by billions of dollars. Background Environmental contamination with PFOA has been known for some time. In the early 2000s safe doses in drinking water were considered to be in the range of 30-to-50 parts per billion. Recent safe-dose assessments by EPA, [...]

Cognitive Shortcuts: Assessing Case Value & Litigation Risk with Homer Simpson and Spock

September 11th, 2018|Categories: Complex Business Litigation, Environmental Torts, HB Tort Notes|Tags: Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR), Arbitration, Emerging Litigation & Risk, Mediation, Risk Management, Toxic Torts|

By Jeff Trueman, Esq. Mediator The central question on the minds of counsel, their clients, and insurance professionals in civil litigation is, of course, “What’s the case worth?” Although lead paint litigation may be going through some changes, it remains a mature tort where enough historical settlement and verdict data exist for counsel to argue why a particular case should or should not fit within a certain settlement range. In the midst of these discussions, the human brain plays tricks on us. For example, litigators sometimes assume that their trial experience can determine how jurors will negotiate with one another and resolve factual discrepancies after closing arguments. This assumption is a “heuristic” – a cognitive shortcut called attributional error or illusion of control. Underneath the games of litigation “chicken” that are the hallmark of settlement negotiation, heuristics lead to erroneous valuations and assessments of risk. Although more than one hundred heuristics exist, approximately 15-20 occur commonly in the context of settlement negotiations. It is easy for potential clients to employ a heuristic similar to the illusion of control by imagining a connection between something they desire, such as a favorable case outcome, and the past successes of their prospective lawyer. Representative and confirmation biases influence how we connect “model” to “outcome.” When differences over case value intensify, litigators return to threats [...]

Previous 56