Toxic Tort & Chemical Exposure

• Defense of U.S. Greenfiber in a class action case pending in federal court in California involving approximately 10,000 potential class homeowners who claim to have suffered over $500 million in mold-related damages in which we successfully obtained an initial order denying class certification.
• Defense of General Electric Company, a government contractor, in several class-action lawsuits arising from alleged exposure to high levels of uranium and uranium contaminants at the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant in Paducah, Kentucky stemming from our client’s operation of a nuclear processing facility in Hanford, Washington. Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant Litigation, United States District Court, Western District of Kentucky.
• Successfully defeated a claim of a nationwide class action against ChemLawn and then acting as national counsel to defend individual actions evolving from the denial of class certification.
• Serves as national counsel for a distributor of flavorings in diacetyl and acetaldehyde cases.
• Serves as national trial counsel in Isocyanate exposure cases in the mining industry.
• Serves as national trial counsel for a manufacturing defendant in welding consumables litigation.
• National coordinating and trial counsel for a number of contractors, developers and suppliers of Chinese drywall.
• Defense of Atlas Material Handling in a multi-plaintiff suit for alleged brain injuries arising out of carbon monoxide exposure by 36 workers at a Wal-Mart Distribution Center in London, Kentucky.
• Serving as lead counsel for Westinghouse in a multitude of cases stemming from alleged exposure to PCBs. The firm received a summary judgment in all cases but one, which eventually settled for nuisance value. PCB Litigation, Kentucky federal and state courts.
• Defense of General Electric Company from wrongful death and personal injury claims arising from an independent contractor’s exposure to trichloroethylene.
• Served as national coordinating counsel for National Starch & Chemical Company in asbestos-related premises and product claims on both coasts and in the Midwest.
• Representing product manufacturers, contractors and premises owners in asbestos-related personal injury and wrongful death claims in Indiana, Kentucky and Ohio.
• Serving as trial counsel for generator defendants in Chem-Dyne litigation.
• Serving as lead trial counsel for NLO, Inc. in claims resulting from the operation of a nuclear processing facility in Fernald, Ohio.
• Defense of Northeastern LogHomes (CGU Ins. Co.) in a pentacholophenol case alleging contraction of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma from exposure to penta. Perkins v. Northeastern LogHomes, United States District Court, Western District of Kentucky.
• Representing manufacturers (ICI Chemicals and American Cyanamide) of organo­phosphate-based pesticides, pool chemicals and industrial chemicals in personal injury exposure actions in state and Federal Court.
• Lead coverage counsel in defense of ammonia exposure, United States District Court, Western District of Kentucky.
• Defense of manufacturer of package sorting equipment arising out of claims of exposure to benzene, methyl ethyl ketone, silicone and industrial inks.
• Defending intentional tort, failure to warn and negligence claims of occupational illness, including occupational asthma from workers alleging exposure to a variety of chemicals.
• Defending silicone (breast implant) exposure claims.
• Representing clients in a number of Superfund cases in Kentucky, Indiana, Ohio, Tennessee and Wisconsin.
• Extensive class action and multi-district litigation experience.
• Lead local counsel in Coal Tar Pitch related personal injury and wrongful death litigation in Indiana.

Cost control is a top priority for each of our clients, and we are dedicated to finding creative ways to reduce your legal costs. Our regional geographic footprint allows us to provide our clients with competitive Middle American rates. Independent law firm surveys indicate that Frost Brown Todd’s rates are more competitive than other competitor firms. The reason is simple: we have aggressively managed overhead through the years and focused on improving performance through process improvements.

We are accustomed to handling a large volume of information and has the ability to customize reporting and processes based on the client’s needs. This experience allows us to streamline legal work, improve efficiency and reduce costs. We also maintain an innovative and experienced electronic discovery team to efficiently manage electronic documents and deal with the risks and problems associated with electronic discovery. All of which enables us to appropriately staff cases and find the most cost-effective solutions for our clients.