Plaintiffs Respond to Motion for Sanctions, Defend Pleadings in Ohio Case

  • Motion for Protective Order
  • Motion for Sanctions
  • Opposition

CLEVELAND -- Parties in an Ohio case alleging personal injury and property damage claims have exchanged briefing on whether the plaintiffs have properly complied with discovery orders, with the plaintiffs arguing that the court has already recognized that they will not be able to identify every chemical component in gasoline or diesel fuel. Baker, et al. v. Chevron USA Inc., et al., No. 05-227 (S.D. Ohio).

In a Dec. 15 opposition filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, the plaintiffs contend that they responded to the defendant's interrogatories with guidance from the court and, as …


HarrisMartin's New Jersey Asbestos Litigation Conference

March 03, 2023 - New Brunswick, NJ
Hyatt Regency New Brunswick


HarrisMartin's MDL Conference: Managing Mass Torts, Status of Key Litigations and Lessons Learned

March 29, 2023 - Tucson, AZ
Omni Tucson National Resort