Hollingsworth LLP : Attorneys and Counselors
News : Latest News About Hollingsworth LLP
Home Firm Profile : An Overview of Hollingsworth LLP Practice Areas : Our Areas of Legal Expertise Cases and Verdicts : Find Cases Verdicts by Map, Jurisdiction, Practice Area or Reverse Chronology Technology : How Our Firm Uses Technology Seminars : Get the Latest Information on Our Seminars Recruiting : Find Out About Recruitment Practices Attorney Directory : Attorney Listings and Bios News : Latest News About Hollingsworth LLP
News

Litigation News
Events and Announcements

Search News by Keyword  

Search by Date  



Search >> 
Sitemap >> 
Contact >> 

1350 I St. N.W. 
Washington, DC  20005 
tel: (202)898-5800 
fax:(202)682-1639 

AD: Featured in THE NATIONAL LAW JOURNAL | July 12, 2010 | MIDSIZE HOT LIST


Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas Mass Torts Court grants Forum Non Conveniens Dismissal Motions for firm client General Electric in three gadolinium cases.

On May 26, 2010, the Hon. Sandra Mazer Moss, the judge presiding over the Gadolinium-Based Contrast Agent (GBCA) mass torts cases for the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas, granted motions to dismiss three cases on forum non conveniens grounds. The motions had been filed by Hollingsworth LLP for defendants General Electric Corp. and GE Healthcare, Inc. (GEHC). (Links to the motions available here: Haynes v. GE Healthcare Inc. et. al., Clark v. GE Healthcare Inc. et. al., and Torres v. GE Healthcare Inc. et. al..) There are approximately 30 GBCA cases pending in Philadelphia, many involving non-Pennsylvania plaintiffs, and these are the first forum motions the Court has decided. In all three cases, the plaintiffs were not Pennsylvania residents and they had never been exposed to GBCAs in Pennsylvania. Plaintiffs contended that Pennsylvania was an appropriate forum because defendant Bayer Corporation was headquartered in Pittsburgh. Defendants presented evidence, however, that Bayer Corp. was a holding company which had no significant involvement in the activities allegedly giving rise to the litigation. Plaintiffs also alleged incidental GEHC contacts with Pennsylvania, including, e.g., that a GEHC witness who worked at GEHC in New Jersey lived in Pennsylvania. The GE defendants demonstrated that private and public factors, including difficulties in discovery, unavailability of trial witnesses, and displacement of Pennsylvania plaintiffs by plaintiffs with no meaningful Pennsylvania connections, favored dismissal. Further, GEHC demonstrated that the states of plaintiffs' residence, plaintiffs' exposure, defendants' residence, or the Federal Multidistrict litigation (N.D. Ohio) would be much more appropriate fora. Judge Moss is currently considering additional forum non conveniens motions and defendants may file additional motions.

Contact
Frank Leone
(202) 898-5825
fleone@hollingsworthllp.com
Recent News News Home Archived News
Copyright ©2002 - Hollingsworth LLP