News & Knowledge

Click the image below to review the firm’s 2017 Pro Bono and Civic Engagement Annual Report and special thanks to our 2017/2018 Committee members: Alison O’Neal McMinn, Mimi Arthur, Courtney Hunt, Erin Latuso, Vernon McFarland, and Mitch McGuffey.

On March 5, 2018, Alison McMinn and Peyton Smith argued before the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, defending the summary judgment granted to their client last year. The Appellant contended that summary judgment was improper because fact questions remained regarding the cause of a truck rollover because their expert witness testified that the only possible cause of the accident related to the packaging of the load. In response, Alison McMinn urged the court to affirm summary judgment by highlighting several deficiencies in the expert’s opinion to underscore its speculative nature.

Win Gault and Peyton Smith argued before the Texas Supreme Court on Wednesday on behalf of Mahindra USA Inc. Sharon Garner assisted in the briefing. This wrongful death products liability case presented the Texas Supreme Court with the first opportunity to address the 2015 amendments to the Texas Residency Exception in the Forum Non Conveniens statute.

In the wake of recent sexual misconduct allegations against numerous public figures, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)—the agency responsible for enforcing federal laws prohibiting workplace harassment—has reported a deluge of visits to its sexual harassment website. And the National Women’s Law Center—an organization that disseminates information about the legal definition of harassment and how to file charges with the EEOC—has seen a five-fold increase in the number of calls about sexual harassment. Many expect this increased awareness of improper sexual behavior will lead to a dramatic increase in the number of workplace sexual harassment claims.

New Orleans Partner Amy Maccherone recently prevailed in an arbitration of a significant environmental contamination case. Maccherone’s client, a regional abrasive blasting and painting subcontractor, was accused of contaminating a jobsite with lead based paint during the performance of its work. The general contractor on the job claimed that the alleged contamination resulted in over $1.5 million in clean-up costs. It also claimed the Client was in breach of its subcontract and was liable for over $4 million related to that breach. In total, the general contractor sought roughly $5.5 million from the Client.

As a follow up from our April 2017 post regarding a pro bono asylum case, Louisiana Super Lawyers magazine published a story in the January 2018 issue featuring Michelle Roy’s work on this case. April 2017: Tim Gray and Michelle Roy of our New Orleans office represented a client, a minor, who fled from Guatemala to the United States with her family in 2015 to escape gang violence and political persecution. The firm sought permanent status for this client as a “Special Juvenile Immigrant” and as a member of a persecuted class entitled to asylum. The firm accepted this pro bono representation through a program sponsored by the Catholic Charities which matches volunteer lawyers with undocumented juvenile children in Louisiana. The firm continues to represent other undocumented minors through this program. We are honored for the featured publication on Michelle’s dedication to this case, you can read the full issue by clicking here. Or read her article here:  

On December 13, 2017, Forman Watkins attorneys Jake Banks obtained a favorable jury verdict in the County Court of Hinds County.  Plaintiff claimed she suffered serious personal injuries and sought to recover significant damages. Though the Defendant conceded liability for the accident, she maintained that the Plaintiff was only entitled to recover her past medical bills, and that is exactly what the jury awarded.

On November 27, 2017 Judge New granted summary judgment for two Forman Watkins clients in an asbestos exposure case filed in the Court of Common Pleas for Philadelphia County.  Our clients were two of the three remaining defendants when summary judgment was granted one week prior to the start of trial. Despite a seven-figure demand against each of our clients in a jurisdiction where summary judgment is seldom granted, the court dismissed all claims against our clients, with prejudice.  The court denied the motion for summary judgment of the third remaining defendant. Alison McMinn, Ruth Maron, Sam Kapoor and our Pennsylvania counsel successfully argued that the plaintiff provided no evidence of asbestos exposure from our clients’ products, highlighting the speculative nature of plaintiff’s testimony.

Charles Abbott and Byron Kitchens undertook representation of a national power tools manufacturer in July 2017 in claims arising out of a residential fire in Orleans Parish, Louisiana in which the homeowner’s insurer claimed losses of nearly $700,000.00, casting allegations of sole fault for the loss upon the power tool manufacturer, claiming its product was defective under the Louisiana Products Liability Act. Partnering with attorneys from Lightfoot, Franklin & White, our team quickly removed the lawsuit from the Civil District Court of Orleans Parish to the United States Eastern District of Louisiana.  Within two weeks of removal, the Plaintiff-Insurer transmitted a settlement offer. Assessing the evidence, or more particularly lack thereof, the defense counter-offer was simply an opportunity for the Plaintiff-Insurer to dismiss its case with prejudice.  A week later, the Plaintiff-Insurer accepted the “offer” and agreed to dismiss its case with prejudice.

Forman Watkins’ O-I Louisiana team recently won a contested motion in the Eastern District of Louisiana in the Joseph Savoie case. In 1991, Joseph Savoie filed an asbestosis lawsuit against O-I and other defendants. O-I settled his claim as part of group settlement, and Mr. Savoie and his wife executed an agreement releasing O-I from any cause of action arising out of Mr. Savoie’s asbestos-related injury, including mesothelioma, cancer, wrongful death, and survival claims. Seventeen years later, Mr. Savoie contracted mesothelioma. His wife and children sued O-I again, seeking survival and wrongful death damages. In response, O-I filed an Exception of Res Judicata, arguing for dismissal of the plaintiffs’ claims because the prior release explicitly compromised any prospective mesothelioma claims. A co-defendant removed the case to federal court, where O-I re-urged its state court exception. The plaintiffs opposed O-I’s motion, arguing that Mr. and Mrs. Savoie never intended to release any mesothelioma claims as evidenced by the small settlement sum they received. After reviewing the briefing, Judge Barbier found the prior release was valid and that Mr. Savoie’s mesothelioma claim existed when he executed the release because the prior settlement agreement expressly included mesothelioma and wrongful death claims. Further, Louisiana law provides that the actual settlement value a party receives is inconsequential if the settlement agreement includes a specific reference to the claim released. The Court granted O-I’s exception and dismissed all Mr. Savoie’s survival claims and Mrs. Savoie’s wrongful death claims. Forman Watkins attorneys Trey Watkins and Mimi Arthur […]