Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Product Liability Law & StrategyLJN NewslettersNewsSections

<b><i>Practice Tip</b></i> Lone Pine Orders Increase Judicial Efficiency

By Beth L. Kaufman and David Black

In recent years, an increasing number of state and federal courts nationwide have issued 'Lone Pine orders' ' case management orders that require plaintiffs in mass tort litigation to substantiate their claims early in the litigation. Jurisdictions are split on whether to permit Lone Pine orders, which typically require plaintiffs to submit evidence, often in the form of expert affidavits or reports, of each plaintiff's exposure to toxic substances, each plaintiff's claim of illness, personal injury or property damage, and a causation link between the exposure and the injury. Simeone v. Girard City Bd. of Ed., 171 Ohio App.3d 633, 640-641, 872 N.E.2d 344, 349 (Ct. App., 11th Dist. 2007) ('Under such an order, plaintiffs are required to submit reports or affidavits that identify the chemical or substance causing the injury, the specific disease, illness or injury caused by the substance, and the causal link between the exposure and injury in order to substantiate their health and property-value claims to a reasonable degree of probability or certainty').

On the one hand, some jurisdictions have permitted Lone Pine orders because these orders expedite a mass tort case. Defendants are eager to obtain the entry of such orders because plaintiffs' claims will be dismissed if they are unable to substantiate their injuries, even though plaintiffs have not had full discovery. On the other hand, some jurisdictions have refused to issue Lone Pine orders on the grounds that such orders improperly limit plaintiffs' right to discovery and place an unfair burden upon the plaintiffs, akin to summary judgment. Upon analysis, we believe a Lone Pine order is an excellent tool to protect against the waste of time, money, and judicial resources, because plaintiffs in mass tort litigation should be prepared to substantiate their claims to a reasonable degree at the time they commence a lawsuit. See FRCP 11.

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
Bankruptcy Sales: Finding a Diamond In the Rough Image

There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.

Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws Image

This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.

Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin Image

With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.

Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York Image

In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?

Coverage Issues Stemming from Dry Cleaner Contamination Suits Image

In recent years, there has been a growing number of dry cleaners claiming to be "organic," "green," or "eco-friendly." While that may be true with respect to some, many dry cleaners continue to use a cleaning method involving the use of a solvent called perchloroethylene, commonly known as perc. And, there seems to be an increasing number of lawsuits stemming from environmental problems associated with historic dry cleaning operations utilizing this chemical.