Sentences with phrase «product liability litigation from»

Keesal, Young & Logan attorneys have experience in every stage of products liability litigation from the initial, pre-litigation accident investigation through pretrial discovery, trial and appeal in state and federal courts.

Not exact matches

Important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those reflected in such forward - looking statements and that should be considered in evaluating our outlook include, but are not limited to, the following: 1) our ability to continue to grow our business and execute our growth strategy, including the timing, execution, and profitability of new and maturing programs; 2) our ability to perform our obligations under our new and maturing commercial, business aircraft, and military development programs, and the related recurring production; 3) our ability to accurately estimate and manage performance, cost, and revenue under our contracts, including our ability to achieve certain cost reductions with respect to the B787 program; 4) margin pressures and the potential for additional forward losses on new and maturing programs; 5) our ability to accommodate, and the cost of accommodating, announced increases in the build rates of certain aircraft; 6) the effect on aircraft demand and build rates of changing customer preferences for business aircraft, including the effect of global economic conditions on the business aircraft market and expanding conflicts or political unrest in the Middle East or Asia; 7) customer cancellations or deferrals as a result of global economic uncertainty or otherwise; 8) the effect of economic conditions in the industries and markets in which we operate in the U.S. and globally and any changes therein, including fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates; 9) the success and timely execution of key milestones such as the receipt of necessary regulatory approvals, including our ability to obtain in a timely fashion any required regulatory or other third party approvals for the consummation of our announced acquisition of Asco, and customer adherence to their announced schedules; 10) our ability to successfully negotiate, or re-negotiate, future pricing under our supply agreements with Boeing and our other customers; 11) our ability to enter into profitable supply arrangements with additional customers; 12) the ability of all parties to satisfy their performance requirements under existing supply contracts with our two major customers, Boeing and Airbus, and other customers, and the risk of nonpayment by such customers; 13) any adverse impact on Boeing's and Airbus» production of aircraft resulting from cancellations, deferrals, or reduced orders by their customers or from labor disputes, domestic or international hostilities, or acts of terrorism; 14) any adverse impact on the demand for air travel or our operations from the outbreak of diseases or epidemic or pandemic outbreaks; 15) our ability to avoid or recover from cyber-based or other security attacks, information technology failures, or other disruptions; 16) returns on pension plan assets and the impact of future discount rate changes on pension obligations; 17) our ability to borrow additional funds or refinance debt, including our ability to obtain the debt to finance the purchase price for our announced acquisition of Asco on favorable terms or at all; 18) competition from commercial aerospace original equipment manufacturers and other aerostructures suppliers; 19) the effect of governmental laws, such as U.S. export control laws and U.S. and foreign anti-bribery laws such as the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and the United Kingdom Bribery Act, and environmental laws and agency regulations, both in the U.S. and abroad; 20) the effect of changes in tax law, such as the effect of The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (the «TCJA») that was enacted on December 22, 2017, and changes to the interpretations of or guidance related thereto, and the Company's ability to accurately calculate and estimate the effect of such changes; 21) any reduction in our credit ratings; 22) our dependence on our suppliers, as well as the cost and availability of raw materials and purchased components; 23) our ability to recruit and retain a critical mass of highly - skilled employees and our relationships with the unions representing many of our employees; 24) spending by the U.S. and other governments on defense; 25) the possibility that our cash flows and our credit facility may not be adequate for our additional capital needs or for payment of interest on, and principal of, our indebtedness; 26) our exposure under our revolving credit facility to higher interest payments should interest rates increase substantially; 27) the effectiveness of any interest rate hedging programs; 28) the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting; 29) the outcome or impact of ongoing or future litigation, claims, and regulatory actions; 30) exposure to potential product liability and warranty claims; 31) our ability to effectively assess, manage and integrate acquisitions that we pursue, including our ability to successfully integrate the Asco business and generate synergies and other cost savings; 32) our ability to consummate our announced acquisition of Asco in a timely matter while avoiding any unexpected costs, charges, expenses, adverse changes to business relationships and other business disruptions for ourselves and Asco as a result of the acquisition; 33) our ability to continue selling certain receivables through our supplier financing program; 34) the risks of doing business internationally, including fluctuations in foreign current exchange rates, impositions of tariffs or embargoes, compliance with foreign laws, and domestic and foreign government policies; and 35) our ability to complete the proposed accelerated stock repurchase plan, among other things.

Such risks, uncertainties and other factors include, without limitation: (1) the effect of economic conditions in the industries and markets in which United Technologies and Rockwell Collins operate in the U.S. and globally and any changes therein, including financial market conditions, fluctuations in commodity prices, interest rates and foreign currency exchange rates, levels of end market demand in construction and in both the commercial and defense segments of the aerospace industry, levels of air travel, financial condition of commercial airlines, the impact of weather conditions and natural disasters and the financial condition of our customers and suppliers; (2) challenges in the development, production, delivery, support, performance and realization of the anticipated benefits of advanced technologies and new products and services; (3) the scope, nature, impact or timing of acquisition and divestiture or restructuring activity, including the pending acquisition of Rockwell Collins, including among other things integration of acquired businesses into United Technologies» existing businesses and realization of synergies and opportunities for growth and innovation; (4) future timing and levels of indebtedness, including indebtedness expected to be incurred by United Technologies in connection with the pending Rockwell Collins acquisition, and capital spending and research and development spending, including in connection with the pending Rockwell Collins acquisition; (5) future availability of credit and factors that may affect such availability, including credit market conditions and our capital structure; (6) the timing and scope of future repurchases of United Technologies» common stock, which may be suspended at any time due to various factors, including market conditions and the level of other investing activities and uses of cash, including in connection with the proposed acquisition of Rockwell; (7) delays and disruption in delivery of materials and services from suppliers; (8) company and customer - directed cost reduction efforts and restructuring costs and savings and other consequences thereof; (9) new business and investment opportunities; (10) our ability to realize the intended benefits of organizational changes; (11) the anticipated benefits of diversification and balance of operations across product lines, regions and industries; (12) the outcome of legal proceedings, investigations and other contingencies; (13) pension plan assumptions and future contributions; (14) the impact of the negotiation of collective bargaining agreements and labor disputes; (15) the effect of changes in political conditions in the U.S. and other countries in which United Technologies and Rockwell Collins operate, including the effect of changes in U.S. trade policies or the U.K.'s pending withdrawal from the EU, on general market conditions, global trade policies and currency exchange rates in the near term and beyond; (16) the effect of changes in tax (including U.S. tax reform enacted on December 22, 2017, which is commonly referred to as the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017), environmental, regulatory (including among other things import / export) and other laws and regulations in the U.S. and other countries in which United Technologies and Rockwell Collins operate; (17) the ability of United Technologies and Rockwell Collins to receive the required regulatory approvals (and the risk that such approvals may result in the imposition of conditions that could adversely affect the combined company or the expected benefits of the merger) and to satisfy the other conditions to the closing of the pending acquisition on a timely basis or at all; (18) the occurrence of events that may give rise to a right of one or both of United Technologies or Rockwell Collins to terminate the merger agreement, including in circumstances that might require Rockwell Collins to pay a termination fee of $ 695 million to United Technologies or $ 50 million of expense reimbursement; (19) negative effects of the announcement or the completion of the merger on the market price of United Technologies» and / or Rockwell Collins» common stock and / or on their respective financial performance; (20) risks related to Rockwell Collins and United Technologies being restricted in their operation of their businesses while the merger agreement is in effect; (21) risks relating to the value of the United Technologies» shares to be issued in connection with the pending Rockwell acquisition, significant merger costs and / or unknown liabilities; (22) risks associated with third party contracts containing consent and / or other provisions that may be triggered by the Rockwell merger agreement; (23) risks associated with merger - related litigation or appraisal proceedings; and (24) the ability of United Technologies and Rockwell Collins, or the combined company, to retain and hire key personnel.

Many factors could cause BlackBerry's actual results, performance or achievements to differ materially from those expressed or implied by the forward - looking statements, including, without limitation: BlackBerry's ability to enhance its current products and services, or develop new products and services in a timely manner or at competitive prices, including risks related to new product introductions; risks related to BlackBerry's ability to mitigate the impact of the anticipated decline in BlackBerry's infrastructure access fees on its consolidated revenue by developing an integrated services and software offering; intense competition, rapid change and significant strategic alliances within BlackBerry's industry; BlackBerry's reliance on carrier partners and distributors; risks associated with BlackBerry's foreign operations, including risks related to recent political and economic developments in Venezuela and the impact of foreign currency restrictions; risks relating to network disruptions and other business interruptions, including costs, potential liabilities, lost revenues and reputational damage associated with service interruptions; risks related to BlackBerry's ability to implement and to realize the anticipated benefits of its CORE program; BlackBerry's ability to maintain or increase its cash balance; security risks; BlackBerry's ability to attract and retain key personnel; risks related to intellectual property rights; BlackBerry's ability to expand and manage BlackBerry ® World ™; risks related to the collection, storage, transmission, use and disclosure of confidential and personal information; BlackBerry's ability to manage inventory and asset risk; BlackBerry's reliance on suppliers of functional components for its products and risks relating to its supply chain; BlackBerry's ability to obtain rights to use software or components supplied by third parties; BlackBerry's ability to successfully maintain and enhance its brand; risks related to government regulations, including regulations relating to encryption technology; BlackBerry's ability to continue to adapt to recent board and management changes and headcount reductions; reliance on strategic alliances with third - party network infrastructure developers, software platform vendors and service platform vendors; BlackBerry's reliance on third - party manufacturers; potential defects and vulnerabilities in BlackBerry's products; risks related to litigation, including litigation claims arising from BlackBerry's practice of providing forward - looking guidance; potential charges relating to the impairment of intangible assets recorded on BlackBerry's balance sheet; risks as a result of actions of activist shareholders; government regulation of wireless spectrum and radio frequencies; risks related to economic and geopolitical conditions; risks associated with acquisitions; foreign exchange risks; and difficulties in forecasting BlackBerry's financial results given the rapid technological changes, evolving industry standards, intense competition and short product life cycles that characterize the wireless communications industry.

Important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied by such forward - looking statements include, without limitation, possible product defects and product liability, risks related to international sales and potential foreign currency exchange fluctuations, the initiation or outcome of litigation, acts or potential acts of terrorism, international conflicts, significant fluctuations of quarterly operating results, changes in Canadian and foreign laws and regulations, continued acceptance of RIM's products, increased levels of competition, technological changes and the successful development of new products, dependence on third - party networks to provide services, dependence on intellectual property rights, and other risks and factors detailed from time to time in RIM's periodic reports filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission, and other regulatory authorities.

Spring, 2010 — ABA Section of Litigation, Products Liability Litigation Committee, Products Liability, Vol 21, No. 2, Social Media and the CPSIA: Lessons Learned from Mr. Squiggles (print version); The CPSIA and Social Media Make Product Issues Public (online version)

Second, and most important, motor vehicle litigation will move from a system where accidents are assessed based on driver negligence to a products liability system, where manufacturers bear more of the burden for failure of things such as sensors and warning systems.

To date, Tom has been lead counsel in over 100 jury trials in both Federal and State Court encompassing a wide variety of injuries and wrongful death resulting from product liability, premises liability, vehicular, trucking accidents, and bad faith litigation.

Manufacturing defects, design defects and failure to warn consumers of the harmful effects from products continue to fuel product liability claims and have made this case type a growing area of litigation.

While Ms. Blanch's practice has an emphasis in product liability, she has handled litigation of all types and sizes over the past several years, ranging from catastrophic personal injury claims to employment litigation; from commercial disputes to insurance coverage lawsuits.

He has many years of experience representing a variety of clients ranging from Fortune 500 companies to small business owners in all phases of litigation including complex commercial cases, corporations, contracts, deceptive trade practices, mass toxic tort cases, premises liability, products liability, and general civil litigation.

Product liability litigation is likely to include suits for physical injury arising from intoxication and suits for physical injury arising from long - term medical effects including addiction.

Our Product Liability Litigation trial lawyers have handled thousands of liability and major tort cases throughout the United States and abroad for clients from a broad spectrum of industries, iLiability Litigation trial lawyers have handled thousands of liability and major tort cases throughout the United States and abroad for clients from a broad spectrum of industries, iliability and major tort cases throughout the United States and abroad for clients from a broad spectrum of industries, including:

John G. Browning is the managing partner of Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith, L.L.P., in Dallas, where he handles civil litigation in state and federal courts in areas ranging from employment and intellectual property to commercial cases and defense of products liability, professional liability, media law, and general negligence matters.

The Charleston product liability attorneys serve the needs of individuals and businesses in litigation involving personal injury and property damage claims resulting from many different types of product liability.

Highly versatile, Enrico advises on cases that range from insolvency disputes and product liability to derivatives litigation and regulatory investigations.

Langdon & Emison's reputation as a national leader in auto product liability litigation comes from 30 years of taking on the world's largest auto manufacturers in courtrooms from coast to coast, including the U.S. Supreme Court.

A - Each annual report includes every case we covered in that area of litigation (medical malpractice, product liability, employment law & construction negligence) from around the entire U.S. in the prior year.

MG+M attorneys have decades of experience successfully litigating high - stakes maritime and marine casualty claims, as well as maritime - related personal injury, wrongful death, commercial litigation and contracts, insurance practice and policy, and product liability claims, from coast - to - coast and everywhere in between.

Sheppard Mullin assists clients in the life sciences industry with strategic issues that range from acquisitions to antitrust, entity formation to enforceability evaluations, licensing to litigation, patents to product liability, and trademarks to transfer pricing.

Diamond specializes in all areas of litigation, from the simplest to the most complex matters, including, but not limited to, personal injury, products liability, medical and legal malpractice, construction, intellectual property, maritime, matrimonial, employment discrimination and insurance and commercial litigation.

Drawing on attorneys from across practice areas and offices, Weil has developed an impressive track record advising with respect to shareholder claims and demands for litigation, internal whistleblower complaints, class and collective actions brought by employees relating to pay, worker classification, and discrimination claims, product liability issues and recalls, privacy rights, intellectual property disputes (patents, trademarks, copyrights, and trade secrets), regulatory investigations commenced by the U.S. Federal Trade Commission, U.S. Department of Labor, U.S. Department of Justice, and state attorneys general, and major disputes with suppliers and competitors.

Cited among the Best Lawyers were six attorneys from Todd & Weld LLP: Jeffrey N. Catalano (Products Liability Litigation - Plaintiffs); Howard M. Cooper (Commercial Litigation and First Amendment Law); Elaine M. Epstein (Family Law); Max D. Stern (Civil Rights Law, Criminal Defense — Non-White-Collar, and Criminal Defense — White Collar); Gary Owen Todd (Family Law and Trusts & Estates); and J. Owen Todd (Commercial Litigation, Eminent Domain & Condemnation Law, and Personal Injury Litigation).

The policy can be tailored to the needs of the insured, regardless of the subject matter or jurisdiction and the type of insurance cover can range from something as simple as a breach of a supply contract or dispute with an employee through to highly complicated intellectual property or product liability litigation.

«The Indianapolis attorneys joining our firm, as well as our attorneys from other offices who will spend significant time in Indianapolis, are veterans of the legal industry, with particular strengths in litigation, regulatory and transactional health care, financial services, intellectual property, product liability and toxic tort defense, and middle - market consultation, augmenting some of our signature areas of practice.»

Stewart Sokol & Larkin's general liability defense spans the distance from individual policy holders to large corporations, and we are committed to helping our clients through liability scenarios ranging from personal injury / wrongful death, premises liability, product liability, uninsured / underinsured motorist liability, insurance coverage litigation, civil rights claims, construction defect to patent / trademark infringement.

An example of his innovative approach to litigation came in a products liability case in which the plaintiff alleged that a death resulted from a defective bathtub.

He has experience in a wide variety of matters, including product - related class actions, product liability prevention and litigation, supply chain disputes (including with long - term agreements (LTAs) that range from hundreds of thousands of dollars to several billion dollars), intellectual property disputes, and environmental matters.

Led by co-founders and senior partners Mary Quinn Cooper and William S. Leach, ECSL specializes in commercial litigation, products liability, class actions and complex civil litigation on a regional and national level for clients ranging from small privately owned companies and government entities to Fortune 100 companies.

Originally from Ashville, Alabama, Mr. Swann is a partner in the Montgomery office who practices in the areas of Construction Litigation, Products Liability, serious personal injury and wrongful death.

Jake has successfully defended corporations in high exposure product liability cases and has obtained favorable outcomes for individual and corporate entities — from successful small companies to Fortune 100 corporations — in complex business litigation disputes.

Although every case is unique, there should rarely, if ever, be a situation in products liability litigation where a plaintiff is able to keep his own conduct from the fact finder through a tactical maneuver.

In re: Depuy Orthopaedics, Inc., Pinnacle Hip Implants Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 2244 (Northern District of Texas): The Honorable Ed Kinkeade, from the Northern District of Texas appointed John R. Climaco one of the members of Plaintiff's Steering Committee.

The agency specializes in all areas of litigation, from the simplest to the most complex matters, including personal injury, products liability, medical and legal malpractice, labor law / construction matters, intellectual property, commercial, maritime, matrimonial, and insurance law litigation.

Beyond looking for more cost - effective ways to defend against medical products liability claims and comply with FDA pre-market and post-marketing mandates, medical device companies are seeking proactive ways to protect themselves from this high - stakes litigation.

Product manufacturers and distributors will find no reprieve from this trend, as a 2009 study commissioned by the Defense Research Institute identified products liability as the leading growth area in tort litigation.

Five of the firm's product liability litigators received accolades from peers and clients: Timothy J. Coughlin, John R. Mitchell, Brian A. Troyer and Elizabeth B. Wright were listed as Litigation Stars, and Andrew H. Cox and was listed as a Future Star in Ohio.

Our reputation as a national leaders in auto product liability litigation comes from three decades of taking on world's largest automakers and parts suppliers in courtrooms from coast to coast, including the U.S. Supreme Court.

Landmark reforms relating to product liability, expert opinion testimony, risk contribution, and caps on punitive damages, among others, turned Wisconsin's souring litigation and business climate into one of the most competitive jurisdictions in the country from a litigation standpoint.

She has also been involved in litigating small business break - ups, construction litigation, insurance coverage disputes, product liability cases, personal injury matters and disputes arising from trusts and estates.

From 1976 to 1989, Bill was an attorney with the Public Citizen Litigation Group, where he litigated law reform cases on state and federal constitutional law, antitrust and administrative law, voting rights, product liability, nuclear power, and food and drug law, and where he argued dozens of appellate cases, including several in the U.S. Supreme Court.

The Testosterone Replacement Therapy Products Liability Litigation, or MDL 2545, began with less than 50 Androgel claims and has now amassed over 1,000 cases regarding injuries allegedly sustained from various Low T drugs.

Ms. Kroeger has achieved an AV rating from Martindale - Hubbell and has been recognized by Best Lawyers in the field of Product Liability Litigation — Plaintiffs.

The attorneys at Curran Law are well versed in legal matters such as: commercial & residential real estate acquisitions, sales, and litigation; business formation and business litigation; landlord and tenant matters; contracts and agreements; personal injury; wrongful death from product liability, automobile, truck, and other accidents; divorce, child custody, wills, irrevocable and revocable trusts, and other family law matters; criminal defense of felony and misdemeanor charges, traffic offense, as well as many other areas of practice.

Defended aircraft manufacturer in product liability litigation in state and federal courts arising from fatal crashes in general aviation.

We confess we haven't seen that much, indeed ever, before in prescription medical product liability litigation, but anything that keeps a plaintiff from relitigating something they've already lost finds favor here.

For more than 25 years, John has defended manufacturers in product liability litigation in trial and appellate courts involving a multitude of products ranging from ATVs and RVs to suction vibrasorbers.

Except for a brief, misguided trip to the «dark side,» Rachel has spent her whole career defending drug and device manufacturers in product liability litigation and in government actions arising from such litigation.

«Johnson & Johnson and subsidiary Ethicon Inc. on April 13 opposed a motion by nine plaintiffs to centralize federal lawsuits alleging injury from the Physiomesh Flexible Composite hernia patch (In Re: Ethicon Physiomesh Flexible Composite Hernia Mesh Products Liability Litigation, MDL Docket No. 2782, JPMDL).»

The Bryan Cave Product Liability team has substantial experience representing companies from a wide array of industries in product liability litigation involving wrongful death, personal injury and commercial diProduct Liability team has substantial experience representing companies from a wide array of industries in product liability litigation involving wrongful death, personal injury and commercial Liability team has substantial experience representing companies from a wide array of industries in product liability litigation involving wrongful death, personal injury and commercial diproduct liability litigation involving wrongful death, personal injury and commercial liability litigation involving wrongful death, personal injury and commercial disputes.