Mass Tort

Experience

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 1023: In re: Diet Drugs (Fen-Phen)

As national coordinating counsel and trial counsel, Dinsmore & Shohl defended a distributor of phentermine in the multi-district product liability litigation related to the diet drug commonly known as fen-phen.  Mr. Brittingham assisted the team that represented the client nationally.  Additionally, as local and regional counsel, Mr. Brittingham managed the litigation and discovery of claims pending in Kentucky, successfully obtaining their dismissals.

Michael Thompson v. Brown & Williamson, et al.

Dinsmore & Shohl served as trial counsel for Brown & Williamson in a smoking and health case involving allegations of laryngeal cancer causation and corporate misconduct that was tried in state court in Independence, Missouri in 2005.  The case resulted in a small compensatory verdict for plaintiffs against Brown & Williamson ($200,000.00); no punitive damages were awarded.

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.

Regional Gas & Electric Company v. Turbine Manufacturer

Our client, a turbine manufacturer, contracted with a regional gas & electric company for the sale, construction, and installation of a turbine generator and associated equipment for use at one of its power stations.  The gas & electric company filed a suit seeking in excess of $1 million, alleging that during installation, our client failed to properly install the generator and that the generator suffered substantial damage when certain parts broke. Plaintiff asserted claims for negligence and breach of contract.  We obtained summary judgment for the Defendant, arguing the contract and the economic loss rule precluded all of Plaintiff's claims. The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeal upheld summary judgment.

Serial Litigation Involving EIFS

Our firm acted as National Coordinating Counsel and handled serial product liability construction litigation throughout the country totaling $100 million involving EIFS exterior cladding.  We were retained to represent dozens of clients in the construction industry in over 500 EIFS litigation cases, all of which proceeded through mediation, arbitration, trial or appeal.

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.