Toxic Torts

Poole & Shaffery, LLP, has an established and proven track record throughout the state of California in successfully litigating toxic tort personal injury claims, including actions based upon exposures to asbestos, trace benzene, radiation, lead paint, pesticides, welding rod fumes and other chemicals. Poole & Shaffery, LLP, consists of experienced trial attorneys who have successfully tried toxic tort cases and received multiple defense verdicts. Poole & Shaffery, LLP, also has a full-range law and motion department that has filed summary judgment motions and obtained defense judgments, and demurrers sustained by the trial court. Because of our extensive background in defending toxic tort claims and our exceptional reputation in the field, we have been highly successfully in negotiating settlements in exchange for mutual waivers of cost or for de minimis amounts. In the first six months of 2009 alone, we were successful in having more than 300 toxic tort cases dismissed for a waiver of costs.

Our attorneys have successfully defended chemical companies, oil companies, distributors, wholesale, retailers, school districts and drug manufacturers from claims of cancer including leukemia, lymphoma, multiple myeloma, as well as other blood-related cancers. Poole & Shaffery, LLP, has also litigated toxic tort cases from claims of lung disease including pulmonary fibrosis, reactive airways disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and other pulmonary diseases. We also continue to successfully defend cases alleging personal injury and property damage arising from exposure to mold.

Our attorneys have authored many leading articles regarding toxic tort litigation. We work closely with respected experts in toxicology and epidemiology and are familiar with the latest medical updates, including cutting edge information on gene and chromosome abnormalities.

Our attorneys have either chaired or been invited featured guest speakers at toxic tort litigation conferences and seminars throughout the country. We regularly attend medical and toxicology conferences to obtain information on the most recent research and case studies in toxicology, epidemiology, medical causation, exposure modeling, industrial hygiene, and occupational medicine.

As an example, Poole & Shaffery, LLP, has successfully defended the following matters:

Defense verdict wherein plaintiff allegedly sustained interstitial pulmonary fibrosis as a result of occupational exposures to respiratory particulates while working in an automotive body shop (Gutierrez v. Bondo Corporation (BC 256 947)).
Summary judgment wherein plaintiff allegedly sustained reactive airway disease as a result of occupational exposures to sewer gas (Ward v. Fotokem (EC 038129)).
Summary judgment wherein plaintiff allegedly sustained respiratory injuries as a result of exposures to mold (Harris v. The Ratkovich Company (BC 355385)).
Summary adjudication of design defect claim wherein plaintiff allegedly sustained silicosis as a result of occupational exposures to soldering and brazing fumes (Tewksbury v. The Rectorseal Corporation (S-1500-CV-259506-AEW)).
Multiple dismissals for mutual waivers of costs after filing motions for summary judgment in cases wherein plaintiff allegedly sustained a blood-related disease, including AML, as a result of occupational exposures to benzene.
Multiple defense verdicts in mesothelioma asbestos exposure cases.

The attorneys at Poole & Shaffery, LLP, have published appellate decisions in the field of toxic torts, including:

Bockrath v. Aldrich Chemical Co., Inc. (1999) 21 Cal.4th 71, seminal toxic tort case which held that legal causation requires evidence that toxin was substantial factor in bringing about, prolonging, or aggravating plaintiff’s illness.
Hernandez v. Superior Court (Acheson Industries, Inc.) (2003) 112 Cal.App.4th 285, seminal toxic tort case which held that case management order is proper exercise of trial court’s power to manage complex litigation.
Fasuyi v. Permatex, Inc. (2008) 167 Cal.App.4th 681, setting aside default judgment entered against manufacturer in relation to claim by plaintiff that chemical caused skin discoloration.
Stadish v. Superior Court (So. Calif. Gas Co.) (1999) 71 Cal.App.4th 1130, holding that trial court, in a benzene exposure case, has obligation to determine whether information is protected by the trade secret privilege.
Roberto Navarette, et al v. Armite Laboratories (Civil Appeal No. B203997) (2009) upholding dismissal of 217 plaintiffs on the grounds that the plaintiffs failed to satisfy the pleading causation standards and failed to satisfy “the delayed discovery” requirement to bring their claims within the two year statute of limitation.

Poole & Shaffery has Offices in Los Angeles, Valencia, and Lancaster Serving the Following Cities:
Los Angeles, Beverly Hills, West Hollywood, Marina Del Rey, Santa Monica, Glendale, South Pasadena, Montrose, La Canada, Pasadena, Bell, Bell Gardens, San Gabriel, Alhambra, Arcadia, Monterey Park , Santa Clarita, Castaic, Val Verde, Piru, Palmdale, Lancaster, Thousand Oaks, San Fernando, Sylmar, Simi Valley, Calabasas, Agoura Hills, Westlake Village, Oakland, San Francisco, Sacramento, Bakersfield, Ventura, Oxnard, Santa Barbara and many more.