In this products liability case, the plaintiffs, a widow and three children, filed a wrongful death and survival action against numerous defendants, including our clients, alleging that decedent’s exposure to benzene and other alleged toxins from defendants’ chemical products caused him to develop kidney disease and brain cancer. We filed a demurrer as to all of plaintiffs’ survival causes of action, arguing that those claims are barred by the statute of limitations, and that equitable tolling did not save plaintiffs’ claims. The trial court sustained the demurrer without leave to amend. On appeal, the plaintiffs argued that equitable tolling and the relation back doctrines applied. We argued that neither doctrines applied as to our clients, and that the trial court properly sustained the demurrer without leave to amend. The appellate court affirmed the trial court’s decision as to our clients, and ordered plaintiffs to bear the costs of our clients’ appeal.

The plaintiff in this product liability action alleged that while he was employed as a painter in Illinois from 1958 to 2000, he was exposed to defendants’ chemical products which contained benzene. He further alleged that his exposure to benzene from these products caused him to develop serious bodily injuries, including Myelodysplastic Syndrome (“MDS”). The plaintiff filed an action in the Los Angeles Superior Court against approximately 40 corporate defendants alleging claims of negligence, strict liability, and breach of express and implied warranties.  The Court granted a motion to dismiss on the theory of forum non conveniens, thereby terminating the entire action in California.

In this matter, four plaintiffs who had been charged with assault on a peace officer claimed that they were falsely arrested and subjected to excessive force.  The plaintiffs sued those officers as well as the public entity that employed them.  We filed a motion to dismiss all of the individual defendants based on various procedural and substantive grounds, which the Court granted without leave to amend, leaving only the public entity as a defendant in the action.  Through further negotiations between our office and the plaintiffs’ counsel, the plaintiffs agreed to dismiss all of their claims against the public entity.  The Court therefore ordered the dismissal of the case, terminating the action. 

Hurrell Cantrall LLP would like to welcome back Associate Joseph Johnson.  Mr. Johnson was admitted to practice law in California in 2004, and joined Hurrell Cantrall LLP where he honed his skills in all aspects of civil litigation.  In 2007, opportunities brought Mr. Johnson to Memphis, Tennessee, where he focused on personal injury and social security disability matters.  Recently, he authored an article entitled The Constitution’s Perfect Infalliability!  A Young Lawyer’s Discovery During His First Trip to Washington, D.C., which was published in the 2009 issue of the Tennessee Young Lawyer.  Mr. Johnson now returns to Hurrell Cantrall LLP to further pursue his legal career.