By Ilana R. Morady and Craig B. Simonsen

In a recent District Court decision in a toxic torts case, De Zayas v. Bellsouth Telecommunications, Inc., ___ F.Supp.2d ___, 2012 WL 161330 (S.D.Fla., January 18, 2012), the Court, finding no causal connection between the Defendant and the damage claim, granted the Defendant’s motion for summary judgment.

This case involved a

Continue Reading District Court Requires a Causal Link Between the Source and the Increased Levels of Toxicant

By Andrew H. Perellis

An Illinois Appellate Court has weighed in on whether the “absolute pollution exclusion,” found in the typical commercial liability insurance policy, bars coverage for liabilities arising from emissions that complied with a permit limitation. In Erie Insurance Exchange v. Imperial Marble Corp., the Third District (No. 3-10-0380; September 15, 2011) concluded that the pollution exclusion

Continue Reading “Absolute Pollution Exclusion” Not Really Absolute: Insurance Coverage for Damages May Exist Where Emissions Were In Compliance With A Permit, Thus Triggering Duty to Defend

By Andrew Perellis and Ilana Morady

The Supreme Court’s ruling in Dukes v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 2011 U.S. LEXIS 4567 (U.S. 2011), continues to have ramifications beyond labor and employment cases. In order for a plaintiff to proceed with a class action, the representative class must share common issues of causation or liability, known as the cohesiveness element of

Continue Reading Supreme Court’s Tightening of Class Action Standards in Dukes Relied on by Third Circuit to Defeat Proposed Medical Monitoring and Toxic Tort Class