The relationship between science, law and justice has become a pressing issue with US Supreme Court decisions beginning with Daubert v. Merrell-Dow Pharmaceutical. How courts review scientific testimony and its foundation before trial can substantially affect the possibility of justice for persons wrongfully injured by exposure to toxic substances. If courts do not review scientific testimony, they will deny one of the parties the possibility of justice. Even if courts review evidence well, the fact and perception of greater judicial scrutiny increases litigation costs and attorney screening of clients. Mistaken review of scientific evidence can decrease citizen access to the law, increase unfortunate incentives for firms not to test their products, lower deterrence for wrongful conduct and harmful products, and decrease the possibility of justice for citizens injured by toxic substances. This book introduces these issues, reveals the relationships that pose problems, and shows how justice can be denied.

Trying a toxic tort case is unlike other high-stakes litigation. This guide explores the legal elements that distinguish toxic tort litigation, explaining theories of liability and damages as well as procedural and substantive defenses. Chapters cover scientific and medical evidence, causation, trial management and strategy, settlement, and specialized litigation, including mold, lead, asbestos, silica, food products, pharmaceuticals, and MTBE.

Toxic Torts Deskbook is a concise, readable text covering the fastest-growing area of tort and personal injury litigation.Toxic tort suits involve claims arising from exposure to products ranging from pesticides to industrial solvents, manufacturing waste, and asbestos and present unique questions regarding causation, degree of hazard, and expert testimony.Written for environmental professionals as well as attorneys, Toxic Torts Deskbook describes the principal causes of suits for negligence, nuisance, trespass, warranty, strict tort liability, and liability for abnormally dangerous activities. For environmental, product, and workplace injuries from toxic exposure, the book discusses the elements a claimant must plead and prove, as well as defenses, statutes of limitations for long latency harms, and limited immunity for government contractors. "Citizen suits" that individuals may bring to vindicate rights granted by state or federal environmental statutes and insurance coverage issues, including the metes and bounds of the "pollution exclusion", are also covered.

Gary Pittman and his co-workers were systematically exposed to toxic substances while working for Occidental Chemical Corporation's north Florida phosphoric acid plants and mines. "Phosphate - Fluorides - Toxic Torts" is a personal narrative by Pittman describing his seven-year battle with Occidental while suffering with chemical poisoning, and the obstacles he had to overcome in the pursuit of compensation. Occidental Chemical Corporation was no stranger to Toxic Tort litigation. They were the company named in the 1979 landmark case, "United States v. Occidental," about the "Love Canal" public health disaster in the late 1970s. In 1995, the "Love Canal" case was still in the courts when Pittman, a co-worker, and attorney, Dorothy Clay Sims took on the mammoth Occidental machine with their legions of law firms. Did Pittman win? Yes and no. When you have your health, you can always make more money, but when you are poisoned and debilitated, there's not enough money in the world to buy back your health.