Mass Torts: State of the Art

The Texas Supreme Court Has Denied The Petition For Review In Bostic v. Georgia-Pacific

Plaintiff didn't get the votes she needed to have the appellate court's decision reviewed.  Chief Justice Jefferson and Justice Lehrmann noted their dissent to the denial. The order was "petition denied" and not "petition refused" so arguably Bostic is just the law of the Dallas Court of Appeals, 5th District and not the law of Texas.

What's likely to follow?

Any defendant whose act or omission cannot be shown to have been sufficient to produce (i.e. capable of generating the effect without the need for any other exposure or action) the harm of which plaintiff complains will move for summary judgment. Particularly in those cases in which the independent actions of multiple defendants produced an indivisible harm and plaintiff cannot show that the act of each alone had the potential to produce her injury.

Odds are the effect of this ruling will first be explored in Texas' asbestos MDL. We'll let you know how it goes.

Trackbacks (0) Links to blogs that reference this article Trackback URL
Comments (0) Read through and enter the discussion with the form at the end
Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease LLP
Columbus, Ohio
52 East Gay Street
PO Box 1008
Columbus, Ohio 43216-1008
Washington, D.C.
1909 K Street NW
Suite 900
Washington, D.C. 20006-1152
Cleveland, Ohio
200 Public Square
Suite 1400
Cleveland, Ohio 44114-2327
Cincinnati, Ohio
301 East Fourth Street
Suite 3500, Great American Tower
PO Box 0236
Cincinnati, Ohio 45202
Akron, Ohio
106 South Main Street
Suite 1100
Akron, Ohio 44308
Houston, Texas
700 Louisiana Street
Suite 4100
Houston, Texas 77002
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
500 Grant Street
Suite 4900
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219