OVERVIEW

White and Williams has been at the forefront of defending product manufacturers since the inception of products liability law 100 years ago. Our vast institutional knowledge, skill and experience have provided optimal results for regional and national manufacturers in state and federal courts throughout the country. Whether we are retained directly by the manufacturer/designer or in collaboration with their insurance carriers, we understand that products liability cases are high-stakes litigation that strike at the heart of a company. The product we are defending is often the reason the company exists. We learn the product from concept to consumer - how it was conceived, designed, manufactured, made safe and sold. 

We work early on and closely with management, in-house counsel and insurance representatives to design and implement a litigation strategy that meets aligns with the client's business objectives. When needed, we employ our vast nationwide network of trial-tested experts and call upon our deep bench of experience to avoid “learning curve” costs. And, whenever possible, we provide litigation prevention strategies to help you avoid lawsuits altogether.

Manufacturer liability is rapidly evolving with the traditional defect and warning claims frequently being supplemented with fraud, misrepresentation, spoliation and punitive damage claims. We have experience handling the unique issues presented by product recalls and understand how these issues impact litigation. We have extensive, successful experience defending these sensational claims within traditional and mass tort litigation throughout the country and returning the focus back to the product where it rightfully belongs.

We take pride in the fact that we have provided these services for start-ups to the global manufacturers. Our long history includes representing national and international manufacturers of motor vehicles, chemicals, heavy construction equipment, industrial machinery, pharmaceuticals and medical devices, aircraft component parts, complex electronic equipment, construction materials, power tools, outdoor power equipment, home appliances, and sporting goods equipment.  

Toxic Torts and Environmental

We represent numerous manufacturers and suppliers in litigation involving third-party claims for personal injury, medical monitoring and property damage.

We represent clients as PRPs in government-driven Superfund litigation, and as both plaintiffs and defendants in private cost-recovery cleanup actions.

We counsel clients on a wide variety of regulatory and compliance matters that arise in both transactional settings and in day-today business operations.

We have had the privilege of litigating — and trying to verdict — some of the most prominent toxic tort and environmental cases over the past thirty years.  We consider ourselves trial lawyers, not just litigators. For example, we tried  — and won — one of the first medical monitoring trials. We also tried — and won — one of the first stigma property damages trials and have successfully fought class certification in toxic and mass tort litigation for decades. 

ASBESTOS LITIGATION

White and Williams is an acknowledged leader in the asbestos personal injury, property damage and medical monitoring litigation. Our firm has been actively involved in the aggressive management of this difficult litigation since the 1970's on behalf of both individual companies and defense groups such as the Asbestos Claims Facility (Wellington Defendants). We have served in the capacity as national counsel, regional counsel, and local counsel for multiple clients with diverse interests. We are at the forefront of the development of “state of the art” medical defense issues such as the medical evidence supporting the association of simian virus 40 polio vaccine (SV40) in the etiology of human mesothelioma. 

Historically, we spearheaded the utilization of case management orders in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania and the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas systems for asbestos cases. These efforts resulted in “master” pre-trial pleadings and discovery procedures which have lead to increased efficiencies and tremendous monetary savings for our clients.

We serve as the coordinator for the defense medical expert preparation of all asbestos personal injury litigation in the Philadelphia area and administer the defense medical cost-sharing program involving over 70 participants. 

MEDICAL MONITORING

White and Williams has a proud history of being recognized as one of the leading law firms in the country in the defense of medical monitoring claims. We successfully tried the first medical monitoring claims to go to verdict before a jury (In re: Paoli RR Yard PCB Litigation). Our lawyers have written extensively on the subject, including a monograph published by the National Legal Center for the Public Interest. We have lectured on the subject before the American Bar Association, The American Chemistry Counsel and the Defense Research Institute. We have been asked to submit appellate briefs amicus curiae on medical monitoring. Our attorneys are conversant in the medical and scientific principles that underlie medical monitoring claims and have a proven track record of success in attacking plaintiffs’ experts in Daubert and Frye hearings, and developing defense medical monitoring experts from the leading medical institutions in America. 

MOLD LITIGATION

We represent property owners, landlords and managers of office buildings and housing complexes throughout the Mid-Atlantic region in personal injury claims associated with mold exposure. In addition, we handle coverage disputes, first party property damage claims and subrogation matters on a regional and national basis for a number of major insurers.

We staff our mold cases with aggressive and highly successful trial and appellate lawyers who deliver representation of the highest caliber. Our lawyers bring extensive experience in handling other toxic tort litigation, construction defect litigation, complex commercial litigation and large-scale insurance coverage matters. Our lawyers are well versed in the complex and developing medical and scientific state-of-the art so vitally important in this area. We work with leading experts and researchers across the country in the disciplines of immunology, mycotoxicology, industrial hygiene and neuropsychology. Further, we have gained close familiarity with the group of witnesses repeatedly retained by our opponents and routinely prosecute Daubert and Frye

Explore

Representative Matters

  • Represented international sporting goods manufacturer defending a youth baseball aluminum bat which allegedly permitted dangerous batted ball speeds. Plaintiff was a 12-year-old male pitcher hit in the chest with a batted ball causing commotio cordis (extremely rare condition whereby heart stops) and subsequent catastrophic brain injury. Settled on the eve of trial after dismissal of all fraud and misrepresentation claims, mediation and mock trial. (Superior Court of New Jersey, Passaic County)   
  • Represented international furniture retailer/manufacturer defending bedroom chest which toppled onto 3-year-old female causing her death. Settled at mediation. )Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County)
  • Represented international clothing manufacturer defending flammable fabrics claim involving a severely burned 7-year-old boy. Obtained summary judgment on behalf of our client; remaining defendants, including another clothing manufacturer, settled on the eve of trial. (Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County)
  • Represented national manufacturer of residential and commercial water heaters defending claims of catastrophic property damages. Resolved for nominal amount during the pendency of dispositive motions seeking dismissal of the products liability claim. (Superior Court of New Jersey, Cape May County)
  • Represented international automobile company in multiple cases involving alleged defective design resulting in vehicle rollovers causing numerous fatalities in a foreign country. Cases settled at mediation following significant motion practice in both the trial court and the Supreme Court of Delaware)
  • Represented manufacturer defending handgun discharged by 15-year-old male at 8-year-old plaintiff resulting in significant head and brain injuries. Settled on eve of trial. )Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County)
  • Represented international manufacturer of industrial refrigeration systems defending equipment which allegedly discharged refrigerant and damaged millions of dollars of inventory of stored product. Favorable jury trial verdict and appeal. (Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County)
  • Represented manufacturer defending cherry picker which allegedly caused electrocution of plaintiff electrician and permanent neurological disabilities. Retained during expert discovery as lead counsel. Settled at mediation. (Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Allegheny County)
  • Represented manufacturer defending industrial packaging materials which allegedly ruptured causing a 29-year-old female forklift operator to sustain spinal crush injuries rendering her wheelchair-bound. Settled during trial. (Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Westmoreland County)
  • Represented national manufacturer defending underground propane tank which allegedly leaked causing a home to explode, killing a 32-year-old father of two. Settled during trial. (Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County)
  • Represented national manufacturer defending baler which was allegedly defectively designed permitting a worker to bypass safety mechanisms which led to catastrophic crush injuries and death. Settled for nominal amount early in discovery. (U.S. District Court for Eastern District of New York)
  • Represented manufacturer of bottle labeling machine operating in Philadelphia brewery. Defense verdict. (U.S. District Court. for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania)
  • Obtained dismissal of over 35 lawsuits on behalf of international manufacturer in toxic tort matters involving environmental exposure to asbestos containing products. (Superior Court of Delaware, New Castle County)

NEWS & RESOURCES

  • In The News

    White and Williams Welcomes New Lateral Partner and Counsel in Boston
  • In The News

    Best Lawyers® Recognizes 45 White and Williams Lawyers
  • Publication

    Product Manufacturers Beware: You May Be Subject to Jurisdiction in Massachusetts
  • Publication

    Third Circuit Dismisses Chapter 11 Filing by Johnson & Johnson Subsidiary Formed to Segregate Talc Liabilities
  • In The News

    Four White and Williams Lawyers Recognized as "Lawyer of the Year" by Best Lawyers®
  • In The News

    Best Lawyers® Recognizes 40 White And Williams Lawyers
  • In The News

    Congratulations 2022 DE, MA, NJ, NY and PA Super Lawyers and Rising Stars
  • In The News

    Two White and Williams Lawyers Included In City & State PA's Law Power 100
  • Publication

    New York Now Requires Defendants To Provide Automatic, Early Disclosure of Insurance Information
  • In The News

    White and Williams Announces 15 Lawyer Promotions
  • In The News

    White and Williams Ranked in Top Tiers of "Best Law Firms"
  • In The News

    White and Williams Welcomes Ten New Associates
  • In The News

    White and Williams Lawyers Recognized as Super Lawyers and Rising Stars
  • Publication

    How to Patent Safety (Podcast)
  • In The News

    Best Lawyers® Recognizes 38 White and Williams Lawyers
  • Publication

    Medical Device Update: Third Circuit Certifies Questions Concerning Device Manufacturers’ Liability Under Pennsylvania Law
  • Publication

    Don’t Be the Next Boeing: Fixing Tension Between Engineering, Legal
  • Publication

    Legal Use Case 7 Part III: The Analysis
  • Publication

    Legal Use Case 7 Part II: The Prescription
  • Publication

    Are Industry Standards Beside the Point Where Strict Liability is Claimed?
  • Publication

    Legal Use Case 7: A Conversation
  • Publication

    Making Safer Robotic Devices
  • Publication

    Products Liability Law Slow to React to Growing Demand for Commercial Drone Use
  • Publication

    Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court Strikes a Deathblow to Substantial Factor Causation in Most Cases; Is Asbestos Litigation Next?
  • Publication

    Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court Dismisses Medical Device Suit
  • Publication

    Can You Really Be Liable For a Product You Didn’t Make? In New Jersey, the Answer is Yes
  • In The News

    Congratulations 2020 DE, MA, NY and PA Super Lawyers and Rising Stars
  • In The News

    White and Williams Earns Tier 1 Rankings from U.S. News "Best Law Firms" 2021
  • In The News

    Best Lawyers® Recognizes 43 White and Williams Lawyers
  • In The News

    Insurance Lawyers Recognized by JD Supra 2020 Readers' Choice Awards
  • Publication

    COVID-19 Supply Chain Disruption Now and Later
  • Publication

    Supply Chain Disruption – Before the Breach and How Best to Protect
  • Publication

    White and Williams LLP Secures Affirmation of Denial to Change Trial Settings Based on Plaintiffs’ Failure to Meet the Texas Causation Standard for Asbestos Cases
  • Publication

    Unfair Shares: PA Supreme Court Mandates Per Capita Allocation Among Liable Product Defendants and Settled Parties
  • Publication

    The Last One Standing Stands Tall: NJ Asbestos Trial Defendants Can Use Settled Defendants’ Testimony to Prove Cross-Claims
  • Publication

    Dead Men Do Tell Tales: Pennsylvania Permits Decedent Depositions to Sink Summary Judgment
  • Publication

    US Supreme Court Denies Certiorari in Appeal by Gun Manufacturer, Remington, in Case Brought by Families of Sandy Hook Massacre Victims
  • In The News

    Rochelle Gumapac Elected DRI State Representative for Delaware
  • In The News

    White and Williams Earns Tier 1 Rankings from U.S. News "Best Law Firms" 2020
  • In The News

    13th Annual Coverage College Hosts Over 400 Insurance Professionals
  • In The News

    Congratulations 2019 DE, MA, NJ, NY and PA Super Lawyers and Rising Stars
  • In The News

    Best Lawyers® Recognizes 29 White and Williams Lawyers
  • Event

    Ethics/Professional Development
  • Event

    Medicare Compliance in Asbestos Litigation
  • Publication

    New Jersey Jury Unanimously Finds Johnson & Johnson Not Liable in Latest Talcum Powder-Based Mesothelioma Litigation
  • Publication

    Massachusetts Court Holds Statute of Repose Bars Certain Asbestos-Related Construction Claims
  • In The News

    White and Williams Announces Lawyer Promotions
  • In The News

    White and Williams Earns Tier 1 Rankings from U.S. News "Best Law Firms" 2019
  • Publication

    PA Supreme Court Declines to Consider Constitutional Challenge to Statutory Damages Cap Applicable to Commonwealth Agencies
  • In The News

    12th Annual Coverage College Features Current Trends and State of the Insurance Claims Industry
  • In The News

    Congratulations 2018 DE, MA, NJ, NY and PA Super Lawyers and Rising Stars
  • Publication

    PA Supreme Court Dramatically Changes Scope of Qualified Immunity for Government Entities for Torts Related to “Operation of a Motor Vehicle”
  • Publication

    Supreme Court of Pennsylvania to Evaluate Seminal Roverano Decision
  • In The News

    Best Lawyers Recognizes Twenty White and Williams Lawyers
  • Publication

    $37 Million Verdict in Talc Mesothelioma Lawsuit Underscores Potential Exposure for Talc Manufacturers and Retailers
  • Publication

    Social Media in Litigation: The Increasing Impact and Evolving Standards for Discoverability and Admissibility
  • Publication

    Superior Court of Pennsylvania Rejects Pre-Tincher Product Liability Jury Instruction and Grants Tincher Defendant a New Trial
  • Publication

    Superior Court of Pennsylvania Reverses Tincher and Rules that Azzarello Jury Instructions Fail to Conform to Applicable Law
  • Publication

    Pennsylvania’s Fair Share Act: Reshaping Apportionment in Strict Liability Cases
  • In The News

    White and Williams Earns National "Best Law Firm" Rankings from US News
  • Publication

    Philadelphia Court Rejects Expert Methodology for Detecting Asbestos
  • In The News

    Best Lawyers Recognizes Fifteen White and Williams Lawyers
  • Event

    The Importance of ADR
  • Event

    Update on Jurisdictional Issues
  • Publication

    Pennsylvania Superior Court Affirms Verdict Against Honda Motors Despite Tincher
  • In The News

    White and Williams Earns Tier 1 Rankings from U.S. News "Best Law Firms" 2017
  • In The News

    Best Lawyers Recognizes Twelve White and Williams Lawyers
  • Publication

    Delaware Strengthens Jurisdictional Defenses for Foreign Corporations Registered to Do Business in Delaware
  • In The News

    White and Williams Announces the Election of Five Lawyers to the Partnership and the Promotion of Five Associates to Counsel
  • In The News

    The Ninth Annual Coverage College Features True-to-Life Case Study
  • In The News

    White and Williams Lawyers Recognized by Best Lawyers
  • Publication

    Delaware Supreme Court Affirms Huge Loophole in Collateral Source Rule, Leading to Drastic Reduction in Tort Damages
Arrow Back To Top
Jump to Page

By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.