Tort

Experience

Class Action Plaintiffs v. Document Services Provider

Dinsmore & Shohl represented a firm accused of conspiring with its competitors to prevent sales representatives from moving between the defendants.  This class action was settled.

Class Action Plaintiffs v. Medical Devices Manufacturers

The firm represented medical devices manufacturers in a consumer class action alleging product liability claims.  The case was settled.

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.

Firearm Product Liability Litigation

Defended firearm manufacturers against design defect allegations.

Frederick Moore v. The Glidden Company

Dinsmore & Shohl represented Glidden in connection with several lawsuits brought by children and parents alleging personal injuries as a result of exposure to lead paint.  The cases were dismissed by the Plaintiffs.

Health Insurance Subrogation Litigation

Representation of health care insurers seeking enforcement of their contractual subrogation rights in tort litigation.

Hotel Owners v. Painting Subcontractor

Plaintiff hotel owners filed a $300,000 suit against our client, a painting and moisture proofing subcontractor, and against the coating manufacturer for moisture damage to the hotel.  The claim settled favorably for the client after mediation and before trial.

In re: New Steel Pails Antitrust Litigation

This was a nationwide class action.  We served as liaison counsel for seven defendants and worked closely with their out-of-town counsel.  They saved substantial costs on local counsel.  Some defendants settled.  One defendant won summary judgment.  Another defendant was dismissed.

In re: Silica Product Liability Litigation

Dinsmore & Shohl represented Robert Bosch Tool Corporation in the MDL litigation involving claims of personal injury for exposure to silica.  The United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Corpus Christi Division, remanded the cases to the Mississippi State Courts.  The cases were then dismissed.

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.

John Deere Credit Co. v. Towe

Successfully defended numerous commercial and fraud-based claims seeking in excess of $9 million against John Deere. Obtained pre-trial dismissal of claims accounting for over 99% of the damages sought and then settled the remainder of the action favorably for the client.

Joseph Boyd v. Enerfab Corporation, et al., Jefferson County Court of Common Pleas

Plaintiff brought class action intentional tort claims and product liability claims. Successfully negotiated dismissal of claims against client without payment by client.

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.

Premises Liability Litigation

Defended premises liability cases for auto parts client and major retailer.

Recreational Vehicle Product Liability Litigation

Defending manufacturer of RV refrigerators in product liability cases.

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.

Richard Rector, et al. v. Lincoln Electric Company, et al., Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas

Plaintiff brought class action intentional tort claims and product liability claims. Successfully negotiated dismissal of claims against client without payment by client.

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.

Tire Product Liability Litigation

Defending tire manufacturers in product liability cases involving allegations of design and manufacturing defects.

Warranty and Lemon Law Litigation

Defense of motor vehicle manufacturers in cases involving alleged breach of warranty, lemon law violations and complex litigation involving Article 2 of the UCC.