Allocation of defense costs when there are uninsured periods: yet another confusing aspect of asbestos and other insidious disease litigation

Article Abstract:

Insurers should carry the entire cost of defending asbestosis or other insidious disease suits in actions involving uninsured and insured years. The broad duty to defend falls on the insurers, regardless of the trigger theory. Case law holds insurers responsible for defense costs under manifestation, injury-in-fact, and continuous trigger theories. In exposure theory courts, insurers should be responsible because apportioning defense costs is difficult. Placing the entire burden on insurers meets the equitable and administratively feasible solution standard. Moreover, standard policy language does not address mixed insured and uninsured periods.

Insurance industry, Asbestosis

---

The silicone gel breast implant controversy: the science surrounding the regulation and litigation

Article Abstract:

The class action settlement for health problems stemming from silicone breast implants has revealed problems with scientific data about products. The Food and Drug Administration approved implants even though safety testing had not been carried out and did not classify them as highly risky until 1988. However, access to data concerning their safety became available only after records from Hopkins v. Dow Corning Corp were released. More litigation is inevitable if scientific research does not resolve health problem questions before products are marketed as safe.

Laws, regulations and rules, Medical equipment, Breast implants, Silicones in medicine, Medical silicones

---

Lead and litigation

Article Abstract:

Lead poisoning litigation may develop into a major area of products liability practice because of the widespread use of lead-based house paints and the growing body of knowledge about the harm to children caused by lead. Lead litigation can be treated similar to other mass torts based on harm done by useful products, and theories of liability may include intentional torts, negligence and strict liability theories. Judges have case management challenges to deal with, but the product use and the harm should be understandable to juries.

Paints & Allied Products, Paint and Coating Manufacturing, Paints and allied products, Chemicals, Practice, Coatings, Paints, Mass tort suits, Lead poisoning

Similar abstracts:

• Abstracts: Perspectives on 'organised crime': an overview. Organising plastic fraud: enterprise criminals and the side-stepping of fraud prevention
• Abstracts: Somebody out there doesn't like us: a study of the position and respect of business ethics at schools of business administration
• Abstracts: Judicial Signposts. Self-insured employers may cap health coverage for specific diseases
• Abstracts: Monopoly in the computer software industry: higher prices, inferior products, and retarded innovation. Vertical nonprice restraints and the mail-order industry: 30% higher prices without intrabrand competition
• Abstracts: Compliance costs of the Americans with Disabilities Act. The unpopular disabled: drug addicts and alcoholics lose benefits

This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.