Experience
Class Action Defense - Manufactured Housing
Dinsmore & Shohl defended a national seller of manufactured housing in state and federal court against class action claims related to the alleged inherent risks of fire and injury associated with manufactured housing. Following successful motion practice, all claims were dismissed in both state and federal courts.
Class Action Defense - Truth in Lending Act
Dinsmore & Shohl defended its clients in federal court against multi-state claims of fraud, consumer protection violations and violations of the federal Truth in Lending Act. Following summary judgment in the clients' favor, the case was argued to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit before settling favorably for the clients.
Class Action v. Manufactured House Sellers
We defended a national seller of manufactured housing in state and federal courts against alleged product liability, fraud, and RICO claims based on manufactured housing fire risks. Following successful motion practice, all claims were dismissed.
David Burton v. American Tobacco and R.J. Reynolds
Dinsmore & Shohl represented a major cigarette manufacturer (American Tobacco) in a smoking and health case involving allegations of peripheral vascular disease causation and corporate misconduct that was tried in Federal Court in Kansas City, Kansas in 2002. The case resulted in a small compensatory damages verdict against American Tobacco in the amount of $1984.00 (yes, that is the correct number) and no punitive damages. After the verdict was rendered the case against American Tobacco was dismissed without payment.
In re: Tobacco Litigation: Medical Monitoring
A medical monitoring action tried to a defense verdict in state court in Wheeling, West Virginia in 2001 that was instituted against multiple tobacco companies by a class of West Virginia smokers who sought medical monitoring in the form of CT scanning and spirometry to screen for smoking related disease. In this action (which was affirmed on appeal) Dinsmore & Shohl represented The American Tobacco Company and Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corporation. In addition to acting as trial counsel, Dinsmore & Shohl consulted with and retained pre-eminent experts in the fields of public health, preventive medicine and pulmonology to develop and present a scientifically sound defense in emerging areas of law and medicine.
Linda Welch v. Brown & Williamson, et al.
Dinsmore & Shohl served as trial counsel for Brown & Williamson in a smoking and health case involving allegations of bronchioloalveolar cancer causation and corporate misconduct that was tried in state court in Missouri in 2005. The case resulted in a verdict for the defense after a two-week trial.
MDL 1057: In re: Telectronics Pacing Systems, Inc., Accufix Atrial "J" Leads Product Liability Litigation
Served as local counsel for defendant product manufacturer where plaintiffs claimed personal injury from allegedly defect atrial leads in federal multidistrict litigation in the S.D. of Ohio.
Michael Thompson v. Brown & Williamson, et al.
Trial counsel for Brown & Williamson in dozens of tobacco/smoking cases including obtaining a defense verdict in a class action in West Virginia making claims for medical monitoring.
Popcorn Flavoring / Diacetyl Litigation
Dinsmore & Shohl represents International Flavors & Fragrances in the butter flavoring litigation that arose after a NIOSH investigation found a significant lung disease, bronchiolitis obliterans, in a Missouri popcorn plant. The firm's trial team, consisting of Frank C. Woodside, III, Mary-Jo Middelhoff and J. David Brittingham, has taken 8 cases to trial since 2003 and continues to litigate numerous cases in a variety of jurisdictions.
Silicone Breast Implant Litigation
Dinsmore & Shohl coordinated on a national basis thousands of lawsuits in state and federal courts. We developed and presented complex medical and scientific evidence on emerging issues, involving silicone chemistry, product integrity, immunology and rheumatology.
Smoking and Health Litigation
Dinsmore & Shohl represented its tobacco clients in cases in a variety of state and federal courts participating in out of town trials in six cases. The cases ranged from medical monitoring class action to a major consolidated personal injury matter to individual lawsuits involving claims of lung cancer, peripheral vascular disease, laryngeal cancer, etc. The cases involved significant document management, as well as complex legal, factual and medical issues. All cases were fully litigated and either dismissed, disposed of on motion or tried to a verdict. In no case handled by Dinsmore & Shohl were the clients subject to punitive damages.
St. Elizabeth Medical Center / Dr. James C. Burt
Represented SEMC in nearly 50 lawsuits alleging injuries from Dr. Burt’s infamous “Love Surgery.” Plaintiffs alleged that SEMC was negligent in its credentialing of Dr. Burt and that it should not have allowed him to do the surgery. Defense verdict for SEMC obtained in the only case tried. Several summary judgments obtained in favor of SEMC. Three of these cases ultimately reached the Ohio Supreme Court.
Tampon Product Liability Litigation
Defense of The Procter & Gamble Company against claims of Toxic Shock Syndrome and other illnesses alleged to have resulted from the use of tampons.