514771873About 80 percent of all food products are regulated by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) regulates meat, poultry and egg products. Both agencies have regulations governing food production, labeling and recalls.
Continue Reading Mislabeled Food Products Risk Allergic Reaction

Mini segway or hover board scooterSince our last blog post on lithium-ion batteries, there has been a report that a self-balancing scooter, known as a hoverboard, is the suspected cause for a March 10, 2017, fatal fire that occurred in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. The fire resulted in the death of a three-year-old girl. Fire origin and cause experts are still investigating, but statements from persons who escaped the home indicate that a charging hoverboard “exploded” and caused the fire.
Continue Reading Lithium-Ion Batteries: Hoverboard Suspected in Fatal Fire

Just over a year ago, I authored a Product Liability Advocate blog entry and a Law360 article explaining appropriate methods for asserting objections under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 34, as amended on December 1, 2015. Last week, Judge Andrew J. Peck, U.S.M.J. of the Southern District of New York, issued an order that in his court any discovery objections that fail to comply with Rule 34 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, as amended on December 1, 2015, will be deemed waived:
Continue Reading Don’t Risk Waiving All Objections to Discovery Responses

In Water Splash v. Menon, case number 16-254 before the U.S. Supreme Court, a long-standing and deep split of authority on a basic question involving international service of process has finally reached the high court. This case was granted certiorari by the Court in early December 2016. It has been briefed by both sides and is now set for argument to proceed on March 22, 2017. The question presented is whether the Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters (Hague Service Convention) allows service of process by mail.
Continue Reading A Challenge to Hague Service by Mail Is Now Before the SCOTUS…Finally

CA Flag 1The Supreme Court of California has overturned prior case law and imposed broad new liability on “employers and premises owners” in “take-home” toxic exposure cases. In a lengthy opinion issued in the consolidated Kesner v. Superior Court  and Haver v. BNSF Railway Co. matters, the Court stated:

We hold that the duty of employers and premises owners to exercise ordinary care in their use of asbestos includes preventing exposure to asbestos carried by the bodies and clothing of on-site workers. Where it is reasonably foreseeable that workers, their clothing, or personal effects will act as vectors carrying asbestos from the premises to household members, employers have a duty to take reasonable care to prevent this means of transmission. This duty also applies to premises owners who use asbestos on their property, subject to any exceptions and affirmative defenses generally applicable to premises owners, such as the rules of contractor liability.
Continue Reading California Imposes Broad Liability in “Take-Home” Toxic Exposure Cases