The following is a list of representative product liability and toxic tort cases handled by Morrison & Foerster’s litigation attorneys. This list includes some cases that were handled by our attorneys while they were at prior law firms.

Pending Cases

Anchor v. Novartis Pharma AG, et. al

• We represent Novartis in a toxic-tort action arising from a release at a chemicals facility. The motion to dismiss challenging jurisdiction and CERCLA liability is currently pending.

Bayer

• We represent Bayer Corporation in cases alleging PPA causes strokes in patients who consume Alka Seltzer Plus.

Cemwood Corp.

• We represent Cemwood Corp. in a class action seeking $400 million in damages from manufacturers of allegedly defective roofing materials.

Cessna Caravan

• We represent Cessna Aircraft Company in a series of wrongful death cases arising out of crashes of Cessna Caravan 208 series aircraft in icing conditions.

Cytec Industries

• We serve as national coordinating counsel for Cytec in asbestos-containing product cases pending in California, Illinois, Mississippi, Minnesota, New York, Maryland, and Wisconsin.

Honeywell

• We represent Honeywell in a series of mass tort cases including a family of cases arising from the crash of Flash Airlines Flight 604 near Sharm El Sheikh, Eqypt involving the deaths of 148 persons, a series of cases arising out of a mid air collision over the Amazon, Brazil between a Boeing 737 operated as Gol Airlines Flight 1907 and an Embraer Legacy jet resulting in the deaths of 154 persons, litigation arising out of crash of an Apache AH-64 near Tikrit, Iraq resulting in serious injuries to two Army pilots, and in
• cases arising out of the crash of a Boeing Chinook CH-47 helicopter off the coast of Greece causing the deaths of 17 persons.

Toyobo Inc.

• We represent Toyobo Inc, a Japanese manufacturer of Zylon® which is used in ballistic-resistant body armor. We are handling 2 cases against Toyobo claiming that bullet resistant vests made of Zylon® failed to adequately protect the users.

UCAN v. Aventis

• We represent Aventis Pharmaceuticals in a case alleging consumer fraud and violation of the Confidentiality of Medical Information Act against Albertson’s/Sav-On pharmacies.

Washington University in St. Louis

• We represent Washington University in St. Louis in a number of breast implant product liability cases involving triglyceride-filled implants. These cases presented issues about the liability of academic institutions regarding defects in products made by their licensees under patented inventions developed at the academic institution. We won these cases in district court and achieved dismissals of three of the cases on personal jurisdiction grounds. An appeal is pending.

Weiss v. NPC et al.

• We represent the German manufacturer of an eczema treatment in a suit alleging that the product causes lymphoma. The case is currently in the pleadings stage.

Resolved Cases

Alusuisse

• We represented Alusuisse in several cases including the AFP plant explosion and Garvin v. Swiss Aluminum. In both of these cases, favorable settlements resulted.

3M Corporation

• The firm was retained by 3M Corporation from 1995 to 1998 to defend it in breast implant litigation. Along with a team of other law firms, Morrison & Foerster participated in the preparation and coordination at a national and regional level of 3M’s defense of a nationwide class action venued in federal court in Alabama and hundreds of opt out cases throughout the United States. In this capacity, Morrison & Foerster was responsible for the preparation of over 100 individual opt out cases for trial. Trial preparation included extensive work with experts to defend a range of scientific and technical issues relating to liability and damages issues. Morrison & Foerster attorneys acted as lead trial counsel in the only individual trial against 3M in the federal MDL action in Alabama (which settled on favorable terms on the eve of trial) and successfully tried cases in New Mexico and California. In addition, in Dinerman v. 3M , Morrison & Foerster obtained the first order excluding a medical expert’s causation opinion for lack of a scientific basis in breast implant litigation in the state of California, resulting in a nonsuit.

Papillon Grand Canyon Helicopters

• We represented Papillon and related companies and individuals in ongoing litigation arising out of the crash of a helicopter near the Grand Canyon that resulted in six deaths and one serious injury.

Alaska Airlines Flight 261

• This multi-district litigation matter involved wrongful death and survival claims by heirs and estates of the 88 passengers and crew who perished in the crash of Alaska Airlines Flight 261 on January 31, 2000 near Point Mugu, California. We represented Alaska Airlines as lead trial counsel. Intensive fact and expert discovery led to a series of successful motions to remove punitive damages from the case, limit theories of recovery against the airline under the Warsaw Convention, stipulate to liability to remove potentially harmful evidence from the trials, and prepare and try damages claims. Trial commenced in the MDL Court, the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, in 2003 leading to settlements during trial of all but one of the remaining cases. After remand to the Central District of California and transfer back to the Northern District of California for trial, the remaining case settled.

Carver, et al. v. Uniroyal, Inc.

• This series of cases were tried to a jury over a two-month period in the San Diego Superior Court. These product liability cases involved a complex set of facts arising out of a single vehicle accident in the Carlsbad, California, area in which the occupants of a pickup truck were seriously injured (one death, one quadriplegic, two other serious injuries) when the right rear tire lost tread, the driver lost control of the vehicle, the truck struck the center divider, and the occupants of the bed of the pickup were thrown over the center divider into oncoming traffic. The case was bifurcated on liability and damages with all four consolidated cases being tried together on the issue of liability. The jury made a finding of liability after a 30-day trial. The case then proceeded to a complete trial of each of the four cases on the issue of damages, resulting in low awards to each of the plaintiffs. The case was successfully appealed on liability, and a subsequent favorable settlement resulted.

Degussa/Degesch

• Our lawyers represented Degussa/Degesch in a series of cases. We defended the chemical company whose product was alleged to have caused the explosion in the Continental Grain elevator explosion, a subsequent favorable settlement resulted. The second included numerous toxic exposure cases arising from alleged exposure to pesticides or other chemicals, through the firm’s defense, a favorable settlement resulted.

Diesel Engine Manufacturers

• An environmental group, Coalition for Clean Air, sued manufacturers of diesel truck engines, alleging that they were responsible for exposing pedestrians, employees, and others to carcinogens in the absence of warnings. We represented eight of the nine defendants. We first obtained a determination from the AG’s office that the manufacturers were not responsible for issuing warnings. When this did not deter the plaintiffs, we litigated the case. We obtained summary judgment for our clients—the first ever defense judgment issued in a product failure to warn case of this type.

Gambro AB

• In the case Peluso v. Gambro, Inc. we defended a personal injury claim by a man allegedly rendered deaf by the client’s kidney dialyzer. The case was successfully appealed on liability, and a subsequent favorable settlement resulted.

Hepworth Ceramics

• Our lawyers defended Hepworth Ceramics and insurance carriers in several property damage and personal injury cases. We defended Hepworth against San Antonio Pipe, the claims were brought by the City of San Antonio against all makers of polybutylene including Hepworth subsidiary. The case was settled favorably on appeal. We also defended Hepworth Ceramics in a property damage case in which the City of Tampa alleged defects in clay pipe. A favorable settlement also resulted in this case. We defended Hepworth Ceramics in a personal injury case brought by foundry workers. The case resulted in a favorable summary judgment for our client.

Molson Companies, Ltd.

• We defended Molson in a personal injury case in which an exploding bottle resulted in a permanent eye injury, a favorable settlement resulted in this case. Our lawyers also represented Molson in various claims of product contamination. Several of the claims were dismissed and others resulted in a favorable settlement for Molson.

Novartis Pharma AG

• Our lawyers represented Novartis in the Parlodel product liability litigation involving a prescription drug used for lactation suppression. We handled the day-to-day management and supervision of national products litigation and assisted in all aspects of pre-trial and trial strategy formulation, which included several successful dispositive motions, one of which we defended in the Tenth Circuit. We also handled the Phenylpropanolamine (PPA) product liability litigation. The PPA litigation was consolidated into a multidistrict litigation case. We handled the all aspects of pre-trial and trial strategy formulation, which included preparing and arguing dispositive and discovery motions, conducting witness interviews and depositions, expert discovery and supervising local counsel around the country.

Japanese Product Recall Matters

• The firm represented a major Japanese product manufacturer in the worldwide recall of an allegedly defective thermostat used in industrial furnaces. We assisted the client in structuring and managing the recall program, identifying and tracing the products at issue, including developing external communications with vendors and customers, designing the financial and logistical procedures for the recall, and working with counsel in Europe, Africa, and South America.

Sandoz AG

• Our lawyers defended Sandoz in a personally injury claim arising from exposure to chemical product. The case resulted in a favorable settlement.

Sankyo

• The firm served as nationwide coordinating counsel for Sankyo in the Rezulin product liability litigation. As coordinating counsel, Morrison & Foerster was responsible for devising and implementing Sankyo’s defense strategy in hundreds of claims in state and federal court around the country. The firm has supervised the activities of a network of local counsel in state court cases; coordinated efforts to consolidate cases in federal multi-district litigation (“MDL”) proceedings (or similar state consolidation procedures, where they exist); prepared and responded to all discovery requests; conducted all necessary document collection, organization, and production procedures; identified, prepared, and defended witnesses; and supervised all other aspects of pretrial discovery and trial preparation.

SC Johnson

• We successfully concluded a national class action consumer product case involving an in-tank cleaning product.

Southwest Airlines Flight 1455

• We were retained in March of 2000 to represent Southwest Airlines in the most serious incident in the history of that airline. All but two of the numerous cases were settled, most after a summary judgment decision by the court denying punitive damages. Two cases went to trial, and in both cases the judgments were less than the amounts offered in settlement.

Toro

• The firm defended Toro in a personal injury claim by a young man who allegedly lost four fingers in client’s lawnmower. The case resulted in a favorable settlement.

Wormald, Inc.

• We represented Wormald in a case regarding Agent Orange. The case resulted in a summary judgment in the client’s favor.