Butler Snow attorneys have defended liability claims against a wide variety of industrial and agricultural chemical products, including:
Crop injury claims
Chemical ineffectiveness claims
Drift/off-target injury claims
Negligent application claims
Fraud/misrepresentation/negligent advice
Illegal/inappropriate use
Inhalation-based, industrial chemical exposure claims
In addition, metalworking fluid litigation is an emerging mass tort field being advanced by national plaintiff firms. Few, if any, firms can match Butler Snow’s experience in defending metalworking fluid claims.
Practice highlights
During the last five years, Butler Snow has advised or otherwise represented agricultural clients with claims or lawsuits in 20 states, ranging from Minnesota to Texas and from California to New Hampshire.
We have tried to verdict many cases – ranging from a single plaintiff to 10,000 plaintiffs – involving a wide range of allegedly toxic chemicals transmitted through surface water, underground water and air.
Representative experience
After years of discovery and motions, the Butler Snow team, won a judgment of dismissal in U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Michigan of a case against a chemical manufacturer brought by 256 plaintiffs with at least $100 million in claims.
We have defended companies faced with toxic soup allegations related to their operations and/or incidents or upsets at their manufacturing and/or formulating facilities.
We defended a chemical manufacturer in West Virginia, Alabama and Louisiana related to fires, accidental releases of toxic materials in connection with spills, use of incinerators, and sending unfiltered product out the stack.
In an Alabama case, we obtained summary judgment for a chemical manufacturer with regard to two firemen injured during a plant fire where they claimed to have been exposed to a toxic soup of burning chemicals.
We tried a West Virginia toxic soup case to verdict twice, resulting in a complete defense verdict the second time around.
We obtained a summary judgment for a chemical manufacturer in a Tennessee case involving a contract dispute over radioactive lithium purchased from Oak Ridge.
