Products Liability Litigation: Addressing Other Similar Incidents - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
products liability litigation addressing other similar
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Products Liability Litigation: Addressing Other Similar Incidents - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Nov 14, 2023 278 likes •549 views

Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Products Liability Litigation: Addressing Other Similar Incidents and Lack of Prior Accidents Evidence Navigating Admissibility Issues, Building a Solid Foundation Through Incident

slide-1
SLIDE 1

The audio portion of the conference may be accessed via the telephone or by using your computer's

  • speakers. Please refer to the instructions emailed to registrants for additional information. If you

have any questions, please contact Customer Service at 1-800-926-7926 ext. 10.

Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A

Products Liability Litigation: Addressing Other Similar Incidents and Lack of Prior Accidents Evidence

Navigating Admissibility Issues, Building a Solid Foundation Through Incident Reporting Procedures, and More

Today’s faculty features:

1pm Eastern | 12pm Central | 11am Mountain | 10am Pacific TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 6, 2016

Stephen J. McConnell, Partner, Reed Smith, Philadelphia Sean P . Wajert, Esq., Managing Partner, Shook Hardy & Bacon, Philadelphia

slide-2
SLIDE 2

Tips for Optimal Quality

Sound Quality If you are listening via your computer speakers, please note that the quality

  • f your sound will vary depending on the speed and quality of your internet

connection. If the sound quality is not satisfactory, you may listen via the phone: dial 1-866-869-6667 and enter your PIN when prompted. Otherwise, please send us a chat or e-mail sound@straffordpub.com immediately so we can address the problem. If you dialed in and have any difficulties during the call, press *0 for assistance. Viewing Quality To maximize your screen, press the F11 key on your keyboard. To exit full screen, press the F11 key again.

FOR LIVE EVENT ONLY

slide-3
SLIDE 3

Continuing Education Credits

In order for us to process your continuing education credit, you must confirm your participation in this webinar by completing and submitting the Attendance Affirmation/Evaluation after the webinar. A link to the Attendance Affirmation/Evaluation will be in the thank you email that you will receive immediately following the program. For additional information about continuing education, call us at 1-800-926-7926

  • ext. 35.

FOR LIVE EVENT ONLY

slide-4
SLIDE 4

Program Materials

If you have not printed the conference materials for this program, please complete the following steps:

  • Click on the ^ symbol next to “Conference Materials” in the middle of the left-

hand column on your screen.

  • Click on the tab labeled “Handouts” that appears, and there you will see a

PDF of the slides for today's program.

  • Double click on the PDF and a separate page will open.
  • Print the slides by clicking on the printer icon.

FOR LIVE EVENT ONLY

slide-5
SLIDE 5

Products Liability Litigation:

Addressing Other Similar Incidents and Lack of Prior Accidents Evidence

5

Presented By: Stephen J. McConnell Partner Reed Smith – Philadelphia smcconnell@reedsmith.com Sean P. Wajert Partner Shook, Hardy & Bacon – Philadelphia swajert@shb.com

slide-6
SLIDE 6

The Power of Other Similar Incident Evidence

6

  • Merely “circumstantial” evidence?
  • Or reversible error?

General Motors Corp. v. Moseley, 213 Ga. App. 875, 447 S.E.2d 302 (1994).

slide-7
SLIDE 7

The Potential Relevance of Other Similar Incident Evidence

7

  • Strict liability and negligence
  • Complexity of approaches
  • Existence and nature of the defect
  • Magnitude of danger/risk
  • Feasible safer alternative?
  • Lovett ex rel. Lovett v. Union Pac. R. Co., 201 F.3d 1074, 1081 (8th Cir. 2000)

(evidence of similar incidents may be relevant to prove the magnitude of the danger, the product's lack of safety for intended uses)

  • Shipler v. Gen. Motors Corp., 710 N.W.2d 807, 834–35 (Neb. 2006)

(evidence of other similar incidents allowed to support allegation that the design of the Blazer's roof structure was defective)

slide-8
SLIDE 8

The Potential Relevance of Other Similar Incident Evidence

8

  • Causation
  • Circumstantial
  • Causation of the other incident
  • Impact on such other issues as contributory negligence, misuse, alteration
  • Bass v. Cincinnati, Inc., 536 N.E.2d 831, 833 (Ill. App. 1989)

(It is “common sense that the higher the number of accidents involving a product the more likely it is that the product is the cause of the accidents”)

slide-9
SLIDE 9

The Potential Relevance of Other Similar Incident Evidence

9

  • Notice
  • Notice of what?
  • Failure to warn issues
  • A word about timing of the similar incidents
  • Limited use = limited scope?
  • Any reason to admit knowledge?
  • E.g., Olson v. Ford Motor Co., 410 F. Supp. 2d 855, 863–64 (D.N.D. 2006)
slide-10
SLIDE 10

The Potential Relevance of Other Similar Incident Evidence

10

  • Witness issues
  • Impeachment of fact witness / rebuttal
  • Expert credentials / Impeach the expert
  • E.g., Graves v. CAS Medical Systems, 735 S.E.2d 650 (S.C. 2012)
slide-11
SLIDE 11

The Potential Relevance of Other Similar Incident Evidence

11

  • Punitive Damages?
  • State Farm v. Campbell, 538 U.S. 408 (2003)
slide-12
SLIDE 12

How Similar is Similar?

12

Foundation

slide-13
SLIDE 13

How Similar is Similar?

13

Burden on Plaintiff

  • - even during cross-examination of defense expert

Wheeler v. John Deere Co., 862 F.2d 1404 (10th Cir. 1998)

slide-14
SLIDE 14

How Similar is Similar?

14

Sliding Scale

  • Defect v. Notice
slide-15
SLIDE 15

How Similar is Similar?

15

  • Product
  • Defect
  • Conduct
slide-16
SLIDE 16

How Similar is Similar?

16

  • Circumstances
  • Injuries
  • Timing
slide-17
SLIDE 17

How Similar is Similar?

17

  • Planes: Sheesdy v. Cessna Aircraft Co., 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS

77919 (D.S.D. Oct. 24, 2006)

  • Buses: Surles v. Greyhound Lines, Inc., 474 F.3d 288 (6th Cir.

2007)

  • Automobiles: Ford Motor Co. v. Hall-Edwards, 2007 Fl. App.

LEXIS 17738 (Nov. 7, 2007)

slide-18
SLIDE 18

Potential Sources of Other Similar Incident Evidence

18

  • Government reports
  • Recalls
  • Customer complaints (informal to formal)
  • Other lawsuits
  • Incident reports
  • Adverse event reports
  • Internal investigations or testing/company records
  • Warranty claims
slide-19
SLIDE 19

Potential Sources of Other Similar Incident Evidence

19

  • Not all evidence created equal
  • Discovery observations
slide-20
SLIDE 20

Methods of Proof, Part 1

20

  • Mini-trials
  • Documents
  • Hearsay?
slide-21
SLIDE 21

Methods of Proof, Part 2

21

  • Experts
  • Experiments
  • Discovery
  • Pending Lawsuits?
slide-22
SLIDE 22

Rule 403

22

  • Probative value is substantially
  • utweighed by prejudice
  • Confusion
  • Waste of time
slide-23
SLIDE 23

Rule 404(b)

23

  • No “character” evidence
  • Crimes, Wrongs, or Other Acts
  • Permitted uses: “such as proving motive, opportunity,

intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, absence of mistake, or lack of accident”

slide-24
SLIDE 24

Non-Occurrence

  • f Other Similar Incidents

24

  • Mirror?
  • absence of the defect or condition alleged
  • lack of a causal relationship between the injury and the defect or

condition charged

  • nonexistence of an unduly dangerous situation
  • want of knowledge (or of grounds to realize) the danger
slide-25
SLIDE 25

Non-Occurrence

  • f Other Similar Incidents

25

  • Does absence of evidence = absence of incidents?
  • E.g., Forrest v. Beloit Corp., 424 F.3d 344 (3d Cir. 2005)
slide-26
SLIDE 26

Non-Occurrence

  • f Other Similar Incidents

26

  • Evolving approaches
  • Estate of Thompson v. Kawasaki Heavy Industries, Ltd., 933 F. Supp. 2d 1111,

1143–46 (N.D. Iowa 2013)