CBA Record November-December 2023

YOUNG LAWYERS SECTION

Before responding to a complaint, defen dants must assess some of the following to determine whether applying another state’s law would be more advantageous than applying Illinois law: • Recognition of and standards for neg ligence, strict liability, and breach of warranty; • J oint and/or several liability; • Causation requirements; • Expert witness and testimony qualifi cations (e.g., Daubert, Frye ); • Damages (e.g., damage caps, punitive damages, prejudgment interest); • Bankruptcy trust disclosures; • Apportionment of fault to settled defen dants or non-parties on verdict sheet; • Settlement set offs; and • Jury demographics and verdicts. When a plaintiff’s allegations do not arise out of the current jurisdiction and the defendant is not “at home,” defen dants often pursue motions to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction or forum non conveniens, in lieu of an answer, to move the lawsuit to a location with more favor able laws and/or to a location where the cause of action actually arose. Defendants may also seek application of another

state’s laws by filing a motion for sum mary judgment under Illinois law with choice-of-law arguments requesting that the Court, in the alternative, apply a for eign state’s laws. Courts typically mandate the comple tion of written and oral discovery specific to personal jurisdiction or the forum before hearing a motion to dismiss. If a defendant seeks to move the lawsuit, plaintiffs should aggressively propound limited interrogatories and document requests and request depositions to solid ify specific or general personal jurisdic tion over the defendant. Discovery Plaintiffs are regularly required to respond to standardized interrogatories and docu ment requests set by a court’s master case management order before depositions can proceed. Claimants, coworkers, and family members are then deposed to iden tify asbestos-containing products and equipment that the claimant was exposed to and the manner of fiber inhalation or ingestion. Corporate representatives may also be deposed to describe a company’s products, use of asbestos-containing mate rials, and its corporate and jurisdictional

history. Experts also play pivotal roles for establishing causation and damages: • Pathologists: examine tissue and fluids to substantiate diagnosis. • Pulmonologists: specialize in diagnosis and treatment of respiratory illnesses. • Epidemiologists: analyze scientific and medical data to create a causal link between friable asbestos and disease. • Industrial Hygienists: assess the nature of asbestos exposure, including respi rability, airborne concentrations, dose, and intensity. • Economists: opine on damages, such as medical expenses and lost income. Four Main Cases Familiarize yourself with these four semi nal cases to solidify your understanding on jurisdiction and causation issues: • Daimler AG v. Bauman, 571 U.S. 117 (2014), established that a corporation is “at home” where it “engages in a substantial, continuous, and system atic course of business.” Unless “excep tional circumstances” are present, the pending jurisdiction must be the defendant’s (1) state of incorporation or (2) principal place of business. • Aspen American Insurance Co. v.

Actuarial Pension Valuations • All Illinois Public Retirement Plans • Private Plans • Military and Federal (CSRS/FERS) • Non-Qualified Plans • Survivor Benefits • QILDRO Income Stream Estimates

John C. Madden (925) 258-7100

www.msmqdros.com info@msmqdros.com

CBA RECORD 37