Robinson+Cole's Product Liability Group is a multidisciplinary team with wide-ranging experience in product liability issues. Our lawyers have defended and resolved hundreds of serious personal injury and property damage claims arising out of the use of a wide variety of products. That experience includes prominent roles in recent product liability matters that have been national in scope. Lawyers in our Product Liability Group played a leading role in managing the defense of a consortium of international asbestos companies in lawsuits brought by hundreds of claimants. In addition, we acted as Connecticut counsel for a Fortune 500 corporate defendant in nearly 200 silicone breast implant lawsuits, and we serve as Connecticut counsel to a Fortune 500 corporate defendant in tobacco litigation. Finally, we have played a very active role in the national diet pill litigation.
Our Product Liability Group routinely handles claims of manufacturing or design defects and claims involving strict liability, breach of warranty and failure to warn. Many of our self-insured clients retain us to act as their national coordinating counsel. Since 1992, we have served as national product liability counsel for a leading food service equipment manufacturer with annual sales in excess of $1 billion. Finally, lawyers in our Product Liability Group have experience dealing with the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), including orchestrating several product recall efforts.
Successfully defended a manufacturer of nutritional supplements against a proposed nationwide consumer product class action brought in California state court. The manufacturer, which distributes its product worldwide, was facing claims based on allegations that included product mislabeling and unfair trade practices, as well as violations of the California Consumers Legal Remedies Act (CLRA) and California-specific causes of action. We aggressively litigated the case in the early stages, and prior to any discovery production by the defendant or any depositions being conducted, the plaintiff agreed to a voluntarily dismissal with prejudice without any payment from the defendant.