JEFFERY J. CARLSON
Direct Dial: (310) 242-2201
University of California, Los Angeles Law School – J.D.
Moot Court Honors Program in Appellate Advocacy.
University of Minnesota – PhD. Graduate Study
Awarded National Institute of Mental Health Traineeship in Deviant Behavior
University of Minnesota – B.A.
summa cum laude
Phi Beta Kappa
Student Editor, Law and Society Review, University of Minnesota
Nominated for a Woodrow Wilson Fellowship
GOVERNMENTAL AND PUBLIC ENTITY-RELATED PROFESSIONAL MEMBERSHIPS
National School Board Association (NSBA) Council of School Attorneys
Defense Research Institute (DRI), Governmental Liability Committee
Mr. Carlson specializes in tort defense with emphasis on governmental liability and public entity defense, employment, torts and personal injury, product and professional liability, property loss, insurance matters, commercial tort and toxic tort litigation, and business litigation.
Mr. Carlson is rated, “AV Preeminent,” by Martindale-Hubbell, which is its highest possible Peer Review Rating for ethical standards and legal ability.
Torts and Personal Injury
Mr. Carlson is highly experienced in these areas, having defended thousands of personal injury lawsuits, including catastrophic injuries, ranging from automobile, pedestrian and motorcycle accidents to products liability matters. Alleged injuries included crushed limbs, severe burns, neurological deficits, hearing loss, loss of eyesight, major reconstructive surgeries, cognitive deficits, emotional distress, loss of earnings, loss of consortium and wrongful death claims.
Mr. Carlson has lectured and published on a vast array of Trial, Evidence and case handling issues. He has performed cross-examination and Trial demonstrations for prestigious bar and professional organizations, such as the ABA, Defense Research Institute, FDCC, and many others.
Jeffery Carlson has authored supplements to the Continuing Education of the Bar (CEB) California Tort Guide, Second Edition, for a number of years and has served as a consultant to CEB in connection with the California Tort Guide, Third Edition. He is a member of the Products Liability Advisory Council and enjoys a nationally-recognized reputation as an experienced trial lawyer.
Governmental Liability and Public Entity Defense
Mr. Carlson’s experience in this area involves dangerous conditions on public property, slip and falls, trip and falls and claimed liability for criminal acts of third parties, including criminal assault and major exposure personal injury cases. He has represented universities, landowners, business owners, and security guard companies in civil cases brought by persons who were victims of criminal acts while on the premises of the civil defendants. The criminal perpetrators were usually third parties, but sometimes they were never identified.
Recently, Jeffery Carlson, Jeanne Zimmer & Stephen Watkins obtained a nonsuit for Los Angeles Unified School District and its employee in a wrongful death action involving the death of a 15 year old boy, based on a cutting-edge application of a Daubert approach to the admissibility of scientific evidence. Immediately following plaintiffs’ counsel’s opening statement, Jeffery Carlson made the motion for nonsuit based on the fact that plaintiffs could not prove a prima facie case of negligence in a multi-vehicle sequence of collisions due to the fact that plaintiffs would proffer no expert testimony on the issue of causation. The judge did not rule on the motion immediately, allowing plaintiffs to file opposition. The trial began and witnesses were called. Plaintiffs’ counsel urged the court to allow plaintiffs to finish their case in chief prior to hearing the motion for nonsuit. Plaintiffs had begun their damages case; the father of the decedent was on the witness stand in the morning when the lunch recess began. After lunch, but before the jury was ordered back, argument on the motion for nonsuit was heard. Jeffery Carlson, Jeanne Zimmer and Stephen Watkins argued plaintiffs did not have any expert testimony as to how or when the bus lost steering control such that the bus driver could not control it and could not avoid the accident nor the impact with the decedent, so the defense experts on causation were uncontroverted. Since these are areas of expertise beyond the understanding of the common person, expert testimony (accident reconstructionist testimony) was necessary. The defendants’ motion for nonsuit was a very creative application of a Daubert approach (although California has not adopted Daubert; rather California uses the Kelly-Frye approach) to the admissibility of scientific evidence. Defendants urged in the motion, the gatekeeping function of the trial court in keeping out “naked opinions” not based on reliable scientific standards. Jeffery Carlson was one of the main architects on the attack against “junk science” which resulted in the Daubert decision in 1990, a United States Supreme Court decision, and the preeminent case used by the federal courts to exclude “junk science.” The judge granted the motion for nonsuit in favor of defendants Los Angeles Unified School District and its employee. The case continued forward against defendant Smith, who was found 100% liable. Plaintiffs appealed the granting of the nonsuit. Our response was based on a recent California Supreme Court decision in Sargon Enterprises, Inc. v. University of Southern California (2012) 55 Cal. 4th 747, and we successfully defended the appeal to the Second Appellate District, California Court of Appeal, which upheld the granting of the nonsuit on October 9, 2013.
Among the governmental liability matters Mr. Carlson has handled are alleged dangerous conditions on public property, road design cases, cases involving alleged illegal detention, false arrest and excessive force. His experience also includes cases of police brutality, the responsibility of the County of Los Angeles in placing children in foster homes, civil rights litigation, and a case involving a plaintiff who had been sentenced to spend time in a county youth detention facility who was allegedly “lost in the shuffle” and as a result served approximately 280 days beyond his sentence.
In addition, he has defended a university in a lawsuit involving severe personal injuries involving high voltage electrical injury. The case has raised complex issues of premises liability, peculiar risk, indemnity, and insurance coverage for indemnity obligations. And, he has defended claims alleging toxic and chemically contaminated real property.
Likewise, Mr. Carlson has defended school districts against claims involving alleged violations of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), and has defended academic institutions in wrongful termination and discrimination cases. He represented a major private university in an Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) case involving claimed repeated access problems seeking injunctive relief and damages. He has handled cases on behalf of academic institutions in both federal and state court.
Mr. Carlson has represented school districts and governmental entities in the defense of personal injury cases such as a claim by a student that a teacher assaulted and battered him in the classroom in which discovery developed that plaintiff actually slammed his own face into his desk, causing his nose to bleed; an alleged class action by African-American students who claimed physical and verbal assaults by Hispanic school police officers and improper random searches of students in which he successfully opposed class certification and was able to settle the matter for minimal amounts as to the two named plaintiffs;a case in which plaintiff was chased and beaten by alleged gang members on school premises after school hours in which he developed evidence that the beating did not occur.
Employment, Discrimination and Civil Rights
Jeffery Carlson has defended management in employment-related claims since 1985. He has been an annual lecturer for the California Continuing Education of the Bar on recent developments in tort law, focusing on employment-related torts. He is currently defending a major private professional university, and several of its professors, against allegations of racial discrimination, civil rights violations, retaliation, due process violations, along with various other legal theories asserted by plaintiffs, stemming from plaintiffs’ claims that their low grades were based on discriminatory practices by the university and professors.Recently, he defended a major company’s chief executive officer and other managerial employees from “terroristic threats” from a former employee.
In addition, Mr. Carlson has just successfully defended another case against a public entity representing a professional among 39 defendants who were alleged to have committed civil rights violations resulting in the death of the plaintiff. The successful defense of this matter resulted in the granting of a motion for summary judgment in favor of Mr. Carlson’s client, thereby obviating the need for a very lengthy Federal Court trial.
Environmental and Toxic Torts
Mr. Carlson has successfully defended complex, protracted jury trials in pharmaceutical and chemical product liability matters. He has defended multiple plaintiff actions involving exposure to industrial metals, exposure to chemicals used in theatrical film developing, exposure to asbestos during the installation and removal of asbestos-containing insulation materials, exposure to high-technology paints and primers for the U.S. Government Stealth Fighter Project, claims against a major chemical distributor alleging that ground water contamination had injured over 200 plaintiffs, and claims of mold and mildew contamination.
He successfully completed three trials in the Stealth Lockheed toxic tort cases. The trials involved cases consisting of 14 to 40 plaintiffs, arguably representative of 644 plaintiffs who claimed respiratory ailments, brain injuries, central and peripheral nervous system damages, cancer and the enhanced risk of, and fear of cancer, as a result of exposure to approximately 200 chemicals, including industrial solvents, degreasers, adhesives, resins, advanced structural composite materials, asbestos, silica and other chemicals used in the manufacturing process, which have been alleged to have a co-carcinogenic or synergistic effect, in the workplace environment. There were over 30 chemical defendant manufacturers and suppliers and he represented a Joint Defense Group of (originally) 7 chemical manufacturers or suppliers in this litigation. Two of these defendants were dismissed after motions for summary judgment were made on their behalf. The remaining defendants proceeded to trial, with the first trial lasting for approximately 9 months, including jury deliberations, and resulting in a hung jury. These three trials were in trial or jury deliberation for approximately 20 months.
The second trial resulted in nearly all of his clients’ products being found to have adequate warnings during the relevant time periods of exposure (1950-1990). During the second trial of “pilot” plaintiffs, he was able to secure a directed verdict in favor of one of his clients. Another chemical manufacturer, previously represented by a different firm in this litigation, asked Mr. Carlson to take over its defense. Mr. Carlson obtained defense verdicts in 24 out of 26 warnings issues and punitive damages claims in the Stealth Lockheed cases, and has been advised that his Joint Defense Group clients obtained the most wins (i.e., on warnings, punitive damages) than approximately 10-12 other firms. Additionally, one of Mr. Carlson’s clients was the only defendant to receive a directed verdict in the Stealth Lockheed cases.
In addition to the Stealth Lockheed cases, Mr. Carlson represented a joint defense group in an occupational asthma case involving 40 different chemical defendants. He has defended “sick building syndrome” cases, mold cases, carbon monoxide poisoning cases, long-term asbestos exposure, talc exposure, benzene and various other chemical exposure cases, as well as other toxic tort and environmental clean-up actions. These cases include complex tort matters which present a variety of novel legal, medical and scientific issues.
For instance, Mr. Carlson defended a major distributor of chemicals in a case alleging ground water contamination. The 223 plaintiffs claimed that chemicals leaked from a retention pond into wells used for drinking water and other household uses. The plaintiffs claimed a spectrum of maladies, including respiratory ailments, cancer and birth defects. After filing a Motion for Summary Judgment based upon the sophisticated user defense, he was able to obtain a free dismissal on behalf of his clients in this litigation.
Recently, he defended a chemical manufacturer in the General Dynamics and Hughes missile system litigation wherein plaintiff’s injury was testicular cancer, which metastasized to other organs, including the brain. Plaintiff alleged that while he was working on the Tomahawk Missile, he was exposed to MEK, trichloroethane, polytetrafluoroethane, epichlorhydrin, polysulfide sealants and zinc chromate, among other materials. The case was settled for a nominal sum.
And, he defended a kitchen equipment manufacturer in a Superfund cleanup action in Southern California involving trichloroethane (TCA). We were able to successfully extricate our client, who allegedly caused toxic contamination to various properties following alleged improper toxic disposal, by means of a Motion for Summary Judgment.
Mr. Carlson formed and represented a joint defense group consisting of four corporations in the L-tryptophan litigation, involving death and profound neurological damages as a result of EMS after ingestingL-tryptophan nutritional food supplement. Jeffery Carlson served as National Coordinating Counsel for these four corporations.
Recently, he defended a mirror manufacturer in a lead case. The contention was that a child suffered brain damage, mental deficit, birth defects, as a result of lead exposure from the manufacturing process of a mirror. The matter was resolved to the satisfaction of our client and our carrier.
Also, he recently handled a methyl bromide case alleging catastrophic neurological injuries in which we successfully obtained a dismissal for a waiver of costs during trial and subsequently obtained a free dismissal from a recalcitrant co-defendant’s cross-complaint.
Mr. Carlson successfully defended a case involving a railroad worker who was exposed to a large cloud of chlorine gas and subsequently developed restrictive airway disease (RADs). He was able to negotiate an extremely favorable settlement in this case.
He also defended a manufacturer in a case in which plaintiff alleged she developed interstitial lung disease as a result of exposure to carbon dust and other workplace contaminants. And, he recently handled a personal injury and property damage case in which our client performed an inspection of a house prior to its purchase by plaintiffs and plaintiffs allege the inspection failed to detect and/or disclose several areas of water intrusion which allegedly resulted in the growth of various molds, which was claimed to have caused developmental delays in a set of 3 year old twins residing in the house.
Mr. Carlson has also assisted clients in fling Amicus Briefs in California Appellate Courts and the California Supreme Court in toxic tort litigation issues. Our firm is a member of the Joint Neutral Defense Initiative (JNDI), a group of approximately 20 insurance carriers interested in the joint defense of toxic tort cases.
Mr. Carlson has tried cases against leading mass litigation plaintiff’s lawyers throughout the United States and has appeared and tried cases before many different federal and state judges nationwide in our various coordination roles for various clients.
During the late 1970’s, Mr. Carlson was involved in the defense of hundreds of Dalkon Shield cases in which the plaintiffs contended many reproductive system latent injuries. He has defended DPT vaccines, many pesticide cases, food contamination cases and, more recently, we formed and represented a joint defense group consisting of four corporations in the L-tryptophan litigation. Jeffery Carlson served as National Coordinating Counsel for these four corporations.
He routinely speaks at seminars for lawyers, medical professionals and trade personnel on various topics involving personal injury and negligence matters. Mr. Carlson has defended the integrity of such diverse products as automobiles, automobile component parts, medical diagnostic equipment, surgical instruments, heart valves, electrical transformers, high pressure steam pipes, aircraft parts, plywood paneling, air compressors, chemicals, pharmaceuticals, household appliances, and sporting goods.
Mr. Carlson has been retained by many clients to supervise pharmaceutical and/or medical device litigation on a national or regional basis. For example, in the past, he served as national coordinating counsel for E.R. Squibb & Sons, Inc. in the diethylstilbestrol (DES) litigation. Jeffery Carlson was national coordinating counsel in the L-tryptophan litigation on behalf of Nutrilite, a subsidiary of Amway Corporation, Amcon, James Pharmaceutical and Walmart. The L-tryptophan litigation dealt with many cutting-edge bio-technical issues involving complex medical and scientific issues. For example, it was contended that a genetically-engineered substance was a contributory factor in introducing the contaminant into the nutritional food supplement. He has served as regional counsel for Hoeschst Marion Roussel, Inc. (now Aventis Pharmaceuticals, Inc.) in the Bendectin birth defect litigation, in which he tried several of these very challenging birth defect cases to defense victories and assisted in establishing a new rule concerning the admissibility of expert testimony in federal court actions as announced by the United States Supreme Court in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, 113 S.Ct. 2786 (1993).
In addition to serving our pharmaceutical and medical device clients in various coordinating roles, he also serves as local counsel. For example, he recently defended a client in the Fen-Phen cases in the California coordinated proceedings known as In Re: Diet Drug Litigation.
Business, Breach of Contract Litigation and Intentional Torts
Mr. Carlson has successfully defended complex, protracted jury trials in business-related intentional torts, including the defense of lawyer Paul Morantz in his highly publicized California litigation with the Synanon organization, in an action brought against Mr. Morantz for abuse of process and malicious prosecution. This case was highly publicized because of the notorious attack on Mr. Morantz, in which a rattlesnake (shorn of its rattle) was placed in Mr. Morantz’s mailbox, allegedly by members of the “Imperial Marines” of the Synanon Foundation, at the direction of its leader, Charles Dederich. Mr. Carlson guided this case to a very successful resolution for the defense.
Jeffery Carlson tried an intentional interference with prospective business advantage and fraud case in which he represented a corporate officer and company. Plaintiffs were a closely held corporation, and the principals of that corporation (i.e. a husband and wife) claimed that the defendants engaged in unlawful, usurious and fraudulent lending practices in connection with accounts receivable financing of the garment business. The trial presented a number of interesting legal issues, one of which was a matter of first impression in California, as well as some unusual developments during the process of the defense and trial of the case. These developments included the principals divorcing, claiming the divorce was a result of the financial pressure and lending practices of our clients, the husband plaintiff dying in the middle of trial and their estranged son offering to present evidence damaging to the plaintiff principals’ (i.e. his parents) case in exchange for a payment of money. Mr. Carlson won this case on behalf of our clients and the matter was upheld by the California Court of Appeal. In addition, he defended cases involving retaliatory cross-complaints in foreclosure actions, fraud actions against lenders, receivership issues, fraudulent and unethical leading practices, and improper payment on checks as well as many others.
U.S. District Courts (multiple)
U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Mr. Carlson is a member of the State Bar of California, the Product Liability Advisory Council, the Association of Defense Trial Attorneys, the Federation of Defense and Corporate Counsel, and the Drug and Device Steering Committee, and Industrywide Litigation Steering Committee of the Defense Research and Trial Lawyers Association. He is a Past Chair of the Pharmaceutical Litigation Section of the Federation of Insurance and Corporate Counsel and served as the American Bar Association as Vice-Chair on the Committee on Toxic and Hazardous Substances and Environmental Law for the Section of Tort and Insurance Practice.
American Bar Association, member:
Vice-Chair of the Committee on Toxic and Hazardous Substances and Environmental Law, Section of Tort and Insurance Practice, 1988-98.
Association of Defense Trial Attorneys, member.
AIDA (Association Internationale de Droit des Assurances), International Association of Insurance Law, former member.
American Society of Pharmacy Law (ASPL), former member:
Member of Advisory Committee to the ASPL President.
Nominating Committee member, 1987-90.
Association of Southern California Defense Counsel, former member.
Defense Research Institute, member:
Editorial Board Member, “Rx for the Defense,” Newsletter of the DRI Drug and Medical Device Committee member.
Vice-Chair of the Drug and Medical Device Committee.
Steering Committee member of the Drug and Device Committee.
Medical Device Subcommittee member of the Drug and Medical Device Litigation Committee.
Steering Committee member of the Industrywide Litigation Committee.
Chair of the Discovery Subcommittee member of the Drug and Medical Device Litigation Committee.
Warnings Subcommittee member of the Drug and Medical Device Litigation Committee.
Governmental Liability Committee
Industrywide Litigation and Drug & Device Committee
Federation of Defense and Corporate Counsel, member, 1989 to present:
Meeting Sites Committee Member, 1995-1997.
Chairperson of Pharmaceutical Litigation Section, 1995-1996, 1996-1997.
Vice-Chair, Drug Committee, Pharmaceutical Litigation Section, 1993-1995.
Member of Pharmaceutical Litigation Section, 1993 to present.
Former Member of the Litigation Management College Committee.
Member of Toxic Tort and Environmental Law Section, 1993 to present.
Former Member of the International Claims College Committee.
Member of Property Insurance Section 1994 to present.
Member of the Publications Committee, 1994-1995.
Member of Premises Liability Section 1999 to present.
Member of Products Liability Section 1999 to present.
Member of Litigation Management College Administrative Committee 1999 to present.
Former Member of the International Insurance Law Section.
Former Member of the Industry-wide Litigation Section.
Food and Drug Law Institute, former member.
Mealey Publications Seminars:
Member of Defense Toxic Tort Advisory Council – 2002-2006.
Member of Pharmaceutical Defense Advisory Council
Product Liability Advisory Council, member:
Member of Mass Torts Action Group, 1995
Member of Rules of Civil Procedure Action Group, 1995
Sporting Goods Manufacturers Association (SGMA), member, 1997, 2002.
Former member, Defendant’s Steering Committee in connection with the L-tryptophan Multi-District Litigation, 1990-1996.
1974 UCLA Law School Reunion Committee member.
October 25-26, 1991, Co-Chair of the 1991 National Conference on Toxic Tort Law, Chicago, Illinois
1981-82, Judge Pro-Tem, West Los Angeles Judicial District
1977-78, Lecturer, Business Law, California State University at Northridge. Taught Fall semester Business Law class
FORMER PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS
1988-97: Partner with the law firm of Dickson, Carlson & Campillo
1981-88: Partner with the law firm of Haight, Dickson, Brown & Bonesteel
Who’s Who in America, 49th ed.
Who’s Who in American Law, 4th – 9th ed.
Who’s Who in America’s Emerging Leaders, 1st ed.
Who’s Who in The World, 8th & 9th ed.
SPEECHES AND PUBLICATIONS
INVITED SPEECHES & TRIAL DEMONSTRATIONS
January 19, 2012 Webinar “FDCPA…TCPA…Foti…” sponsored by California Association of Collectors, Inc. (CAC).
March 10, 2010 Webinar “New Players, Tactics and Strategies in FDCPA and TCPA Litigation” sponsored by California Association of Collectors, Inc. (CAC).
November 2, 2005 and November 9, 2005, Executive Webinar Series, “Products Liability Risk Management”, sponsored by Sporting Goods Manufacturer’s Assn. (SGMA).
September 29, 2005 and October 5, 2005, two-part web-seminar, “Risk Management”, sponsored by Sporting Goods Manufacturer’s Assn. (SGMA).
March 8, 2005, Chicago, Illinois, Invited Speaker, “Innovative Approaches to Cost Containment in Litigation”, sponsored by Mealey’s/Lexis Nexis.November 2, 2004, Invited speaker, Teleseminar/ Webcast re: Doing Business in China, What Every Sporting Goods Executive Needs to Know “Product Liability Issues Raised by Chinese Manufacturers”, Sporting Goods Manufacturers Association.
June 4, 2004, Invited speaker re: FDCPA Compliance for the California Practitioner in Los Angeles, California sponsored by the National Business Institute.
November 13-14, 2003, Invited speaker re: “Daubert’s New Frontier: Sexual Torts” at the Defense Research Institute Inc.’s Sexual Torts Seminar, Chicago, Illinois.
November 5, 2002, Sports Litigators Mock Trial Demonstration acting as counsel for the defendant (a sporting goods manufacturer) at the American Society of Testing and Materials Annual Meeting, ASTM Seminar, Miami, Florida.
June 16, 2000, Invited speaker re: “Medi-Cal, Medicare and Medicaid Litigation in California” in Los Angeles, California, sponsored by Lorman Education Services.
May 9, 1997, Invited speaker re: “Practical Approaches to FRE 706 Expert Panels” at The Defense Research Institute, Inc.’s Drug and Medical Device Litigation Seminar, Chicago, Illinois.
May 9, 1997, Panel Member re: “Roundtable Discussion on Court Appointed Experts” with Professor Margaret A. Berger, Jane F. Thorpe, and The Honorable Harry D. Leinenweber, at The Defense Research Institute, Inc.’s Drug and Medical Device Litigation Seminar, Chicago, Illinois.
November 21, 1996, Invited speaker re: “Daubert Update, Use of Science Panels, and Mock Summary Judgment Motion” at Mealey Publication’s Drug and Medical Device Seminar, in West Palm Beach, Florida.
October 1-2, 1996, Invited speaker at University of Malaysia School of Law in Kuala Lumpur re: “Recent Developments in Tort Law in U.S.”, as well as judging the moot court competition of the graduate law students.
May 2, 1996, Invited speaker re: “Daubert: the Sword and the Shield Against Junk Science” at the North Dakota Trial Lawyers Association 1996 Annual Trial Practice Seminar, in Fargo, North Dakota.
March 28, 1996, Invited speaker re: “Daubert – Wielding a Sword & Shield vs. Junk Science” at the 1996 National CLE Civil Litigation Conference, sponsored by the Law Education Institute, Inc., the Bureau of National Affairs, Inc., and the Georgetown University Law Center, Washington D.C.
March 21, 1996, Invited speaker re: “Pharmaceutical, Food and FDA Regulations” at a program entitled Toxic and Mass Torts: New Exposures, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, sponsored by Mealey Publications, Inc.
July 27, 1995, Invited speaker and panel member for a panel entitled “Pretrial Exclusion of Expert Testimony: The Daubert Rule.” The Federation of Insurance and Corporate Counsel 1995 Annual Meeting, Sun Valley, Idaho.
May 2, 1995, Mock direct examination of a physician specializing in Occupational Medicine in a “Sick Building Syndrome” case at an indoor air quality conference program entitled Indoor Environment, 1995 “Strategies for the New Era of Regulations.”
March 24, 1995, Invited speaker re: “Outside Counsel’s Role in Managing the Press and Public Relations in a Crisis Situation” and panel member in a program entitled “The Corporation in the Public Crucible: Corporate Disasters, Public Bias, and Juries” in connection with the ABA Section of Business Law Spring Meeting, San Antonio, Texas.
December 1-2, 1994, Moderator of and speaker for a panel entitled “Toxic Claims Management: Today’s Effective Strategies” at a program entitled “State of the Art Advances in Claims and Litigation Management Seminar,” New York, New York sponsored by The National Underwriters and Business Strategy Network.
November 10-11, 1994, Mock demonstration of “Cross-examination of the Plaintiff’s Expert in a Post Traumatic Stress Disorder Case” at DRI’s “Defense and Evaluation of Psychological and Neuropsychological Injury Claims Seminar,” San Diego, California.
July 30, 1993, Speaker at FICC Toxic Tort Section, Carlsbad, California re: Daubert v. Merrell Dow
June 25, 1993, Invited speaker at Chemical Manufacturers Association Tort Litigation Group Meeting, Cleveland, Ohio re: “Lockheed – Update and Joint Defense Analysis.”
June 24, 1993, Speaker at The MEDMARC/Puritan Bennett 6th Annual Seminar on the Prevention and Defense of Medical Device Claims, Amelia Island, Florida re: “A Day in the Life Tapes and Sympathy Testimony.”
February 25, 1993, Speaker at Federation of Insurance & Corporate Counsel, 1993 Mid-Winter Meeting, Scottsdale, Arizona re: “The Trials & Tribulations of Taking International Depositions: Where do you find a Reporter and Translator? What about Subpoenas, Witness Fees, Reading & Signing, Objections, and Other Things We Usually Take For Granted? A Case Study in the practical aspects of taking depositions in Japan.”
September 25, 1992, Cross-examination demonstration at ABA National Institute, New York, re: “Toxic Litigation: Essential Issues and Diverging Views; Mock Cross-Examination of a Risk Assessment Expert.” Barbara Beck, Ph.D., toxicologist; Ron Simon, plaintiff’s attorney; Jeffery J. Carlson, defendant’s attorney; and the Hon. Jack B. Weinstein, Presiding.
March 6, 1992, Speaker at the Product Safety and Loss Prevention Seminar, Irvine, California, sponsored by MEDMARC Insurance Company, “Results-Oriented Investigation -Legal Defense Needs.”
February 6-7, 1992, Speaker at Chemical Manufacturers Association Torts Litigation Group Meeting, San Diego, California re: “Joint Defense Agreements and the Work Product and Attorney Client Privilege” and “A Defense Win on Expert Testimony in the 9th Circuit,”
January 1992, Panel Member, California Continuing Education of the Bar Panel, “Recent Developments in Tort Practice,” Los Angeles and Santa Barbara.
November 7, 1991, Trial demonstration at Defense Research Institute Symposium on Defense and Evaluation of Psychological and Neuropsychological Injury Claims re: “Techniques of Direct and Cross-Examination of Plaintiffs’ Psychologist Expert Witness In A Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Case.” Robert Fanter for plaintiff, Jeffery Carlson for defendant, Paul Lees-Haley, Ph.D., psychologist witness.
October 25, 1991, Speaker at the 1991 National Conference on Toxic Tort Law, Chicago, Illinois on Legal Causation Science and the Legal Perspective.
AUDIO AND VIDEO TAPES
March 24, 1995, Invited speaker re: “Outside Counsel’s Role in Managing the Press and Public Relations in a Crisis Situation” and panel member in a program entitled “The Corporation in the Public Crucible: Corporate Disasters, Public Bias, and Juries” in connection with the ABA Section of Business Law Spring Meeting, San Antonio, Texas. This is an audio tape.
September 25, 1992, Cross-examination demonstration at ABA National Institute, New York, re: “Toxic Litigation: Essential Issues and Diverging Views; Mock Cross-Examination of a Risk Assessment Expert.” Barbara Beck, Ph.D., toxicologist; Ron Simon, plaintiff’s attorney; Jeffery Carlson, defendant’s attorney; and the Hon. Jack B. Weinstein, presiding. This is an audio tape.
August 6, 1990, ABA Annual Meeting, Organizer and Trial Demonstration Participant in Program of the ABA, Tort and Insurance Practice Section, Mass Toxic Tort — Part I: Mock Trial. My role was Counsel for the Defendant/Polluter, and I demonstrated the cross-examination of a plaintiff’s expert psychiatrist in a toxic tort case. An ABA Videotape was made of the Mock Trial Demonstration.
August 6, 1990, ABA Annual Meeting, Trial Demonstration Participant in Program of the ABA, Tort and Insurance Practice Section, Mass Toxic Tort — Part II: Mock Declaratory Judgment Trial. My role was Counsel for the Defendant/Polluter, and my role was as the Defendant Polluter’s Trial Counsel. ABA Videotape made of the Mock Trial Demonstration.
Author, “The Joint Defense Privilege: An Illusion or a Magic Wand?”, published in The Attorney-Client Privilege in Civil Litigation – Protecting and Defending Confidentiality, Sixth Edition, American Bar Association, Chapter 18, 2015.
Author, “The Joint Defense Privilege: An Illusion or a Magic Wand?”, published in The Attorney-Client Privilege in Civil Litigation – Protecting and Defending Confidentiality, Fifth Edition, American Bar Association, Chapter 21, 2011.
Co-Author, “If The Phone Doesn’t Ring It’s Me”, published in Collector’s Ink, April 2010, pp 26-27, 32, 38.
Author, “The Joint Defense Privilege: An Illusion or a Magic Wand?”, published in The Attorney-Client Privilege in Civil Litigation – Protecting and Defending Confidentiality, Fourth Edition, American Bar Association, Chapter 21, 2008.
Author, “Litigation Plans, Budgets and Some Practical Tips”, published in Collector’s Ink March/April 2007, pp 24-25, 39-41.
Author, “The Joint Defense Privilege: An Illusion or a Magic Wand?”, published in The Attorney-Client Privilege in Civil Litigation – Protecting and Defending Confidentiality, Third Edition, American Bar Association, Chapter 20, 2004.
Author, “The Role of Outside Counsel in Crisis Management”, published in For The Defense, May 2000, pp 32-33, 61-62.
Author, “Pharmacist Liability for a Customer’s Suicide”, published in For The Defense, December 1999, pp. 32-35, 63-64.
Co-Author of a section included in the Product Liability Advisory Council Deskbook Series, Exclusion of Improper Expert Testimony – Case Law Supplement entitled, “Law in the Ninth Circuit Since Daubert”, 1997 Supplement.
Co-Author of an article included in the MAPbulletin entitled, “Protecting Your Client From Negligent Hiring Claims”, October 1997, pp. 1 & 3.
Co-Author of an article included in the MAPbulletin entitled, “What, You’ve Got To Be Kidding! I Should Not Be Liable For Those Acts”, September 1997, pp. 1-3.
Author, “The Joint Defense Privilege: An Illusion or a Magic Wand?”, published in The Attorney-Client Privilege In Civil Litigation – Protecting and Defending Confidentiality, Second Edition, (formerly entitled as The Attorney-Client Privilege Under Siege) Tort and Insurance Practice Section, American Bar Association, Chapter 18, 1997. Updated December 2003.
Author, “Managing the Press and Public Relations in a Crisis Situation – Part II”, published in Insurance Advocate, November 23, 1996, pp. 24-25.
Author, “Managing the Press and Public Relations in a Crisis Situation – Part I”, published in Insurance Advocate, November 16, 1996, pp. 25-26.
Author, “Searching for Savings: Managing Your Company’s Litigation Costs”, published in Risk Management, Vol. 43, Number 5, May 1996.
Author, “Cost Efficient, Effective Handling of Litigation From the Standpoint of Defense”, published in Insurance Advocate, Vol. 107, Number 9, March 2, 1996.
Consultant, California Continuing Education of the Bar book entitled, California Tort Guide, 3rd Edition, 1996 – present.
Author, “The Trials and Tribulations of Taking Depositions in Foreign Countries: Japan, A Case Study”, published in Federation of Insurance & Corporate Counsel Quarterly, Volume 46, No. 2, Winter 1996.
Author, “Case Management Strategies and The Use of Shared Experts in Joint Defense Cases”, published in Managing Litigation Costs, September 1995.
Co-Author of an article included in The National Law Journal entitled, “Foreign Deposition Hazards,” November 1994.
Author, California Continuing Education of the Bar supplemental book entitled, California Tort Guide, 2nd Edition, Update, May 1994.
Contributor to the FICC 1992 and 1993 Update publications.
Author, California Continuing Education of the Bar supplemental book entitled, California Tort Guide, 2d Edition, Update, August, 1993.
Author, “Health Care Products: ‘Sales’ or ‘Services'”, published in For the Defense, February, 1992.
Consultant, “Civil Procedures and Torts Module” of Bancroft-Whitney’s California Civil Practice, 1992.
Contributor, “Recent Developments in Torts,” 1992 Update, published by California Continuing Education of the Bar.
Author, California Continuing Education of the Bar supplemental book entitled, California Tort Guide, 2d Edition, Update, November 1991.
Co-Author of an article included in the 1991 National Conference on Toxic Tort Law entitled, “The Ultrahazardous Task of Defending the Ultrahazardous Activity Toxic Tort Case,” October 1991.
Author, article re-print of “Challenging the Admissibility of Medical Device Reporting,” as originally published in For The Defense, September 1990. Article re-printed in “Hospitals MPR – The Malpractice Reporter,” Volume 10, July/August 1991.
Co-Author, “Toxic and Hazardous Substances and Environmental Law: Annual Survey,” published in Toxic & Insurance Law Journal, Volume XXVI, No. 2, Winter 1991.
Co-Author, “Medical Devices: The Duty to Warn and the Adequacy of the Warning,” published in Federation of Insurance & Corporate Counsel Quarterly, Volume 41, No. 2, Winter 1991.
Co-Author, “The Pharmacist’s Responsibility to Evaluate Suspicious Prescriptions”, published in Food Drug Cosmetic Law Journal, Volume 46, No. 3, May 1991.
Co-Author, “Challenging the Admissibility of Medical Device Reporting Reports”, published in DRI’s For The Defense, September, 1990.
Co-Author, “Joint Defendants Beware: Protecting Your Privilege in Shared Information”, published in DRI’s Selected Issues in Products Liability Defense, Volume 1990, Number 3.
Author, California Continuing Education of the Bar book entitled, California Tort Guide, 2d Edition, Supplement, August, 1990.
Co-Author of the California Civil Procedure Before Trial, 3d Edition published by Continuing Education of the Bar-California, June, 1990, regarding the following chapters in: Setting For Trial – Chapter 49 “At-Issue Memorandum”, Chapter 50 “Demand for Jury Trial”, Chapter 51 “Trial-Setting Conference” (deleted 1995), Chapter 52 “Pre-trial Conferences” retitled in 1995 as “Status Conferences and other Pre-trial Conferences”, Chapter 53 “Motions To Advance, Specially Set, and Reset” and Chapter 54 “Trial Continuances”. Chapters updated yearly 1992 – 1997.
Co-Author, “Joint Defendants Beware: Protecting Your Privilege in Shared Information” published in Product Safety & Liability Reporter, May, 1990.
Co-Author, “Attorney-Client and Work-Product Privilege in a Joint Defense Context”, Toxic Law Reporter, Volume 4, Number 35, February 7, 1990.
Co-Author, “Toxic and Hazardous Substances and Environmental Law: Annual Survey”, Tort & Insurance Law Journal, Winter 1990, American Bar Association.
Co-Author, “The Attorney-Client and Work-Product Privileges in the Context of the Joint Defense and Joint Prosecution of Toxic Tort Litigation” published in The Attorney-Client Privilege Under Siege – Preserving and Protecting It in Civil Cases, Tort and Insurance Practice Section, American Bar Association, May, 1989.
Author, California Continuing Education of the Bar book entitled, California Tort Guide, 2d Edition, Supplement, April, 1989.
Co-Author, “Toxic and Hazardous Substances and Environmental Law: Annual Survey” published in the Tort & Insurance Law Journal, Volume 24, Number 2, Winter 1989, American Bar Association.
Author, “Strict Liability, the Duty to Warn, and the Pharmacist” published in Defending Drug and Medical Device Cases, Defense Research Institute Special Publication, Vol. 1989, No. 4, May, 1989.
Co-Author, Abstract, “The Legitimate Medical Purpose and the Pharmacists’ Role in Screening Doctors’ Prescribing of Controlled Substances.”
Consultant to the California Continuing Education of the Bar on Chapters 14 entitled, “Punitive Damages” and 15 entitled, “Restrictions on Recovery” of the California Tort Damages Guide.
Author, “Today’s Pharmacist: A Seller of Products or a Provider of Services?” published in For the Defense, Vol. 29, No. 11, p. 15, November, 1987.
Author, “The Pharmacist: A Seller of Products vs. A Provider of Service”, p. 3, published in Pharmacy Law Annual.
Author, “Can an RPH Be Sued for Doing His Duty?” published in American Druggist, Vol. 196, No. 6, p. 112, November, 1987.
PUBLISHED INTERVIEWS AND/OR COMMENTS
“More on Product Liability Troubles . . .”, published in The Kiplinger Forecast, KSS weekly on-line publication, Product Liability Legislation section, March 26, 1999.
“Developing a Plan”, published in Risk & Insurance, Vol. 7, Number 15, pages 16-17, May 1996. In an article entitled “Law in Order”, by Barbara A. Morris, pages 15-17, in “Special Report: Litigation and Legal Cost Management”.
Speech given at Mealey’s Toxic Torts Conference on March 21, 1996. Part of the presentation regarding expert witnesses was published by John T. Hayes in an article entitled “Toxic Tort Conference: States Have Mixed Views On Applying Daubert”, published in Mealey’s Litigation Reports: LEAD, Vol. 5, Issue # 13, page 12, April 3, 1996.
“Wrestling With Litigation Costs”, published in Risk & Insurance, Vol. 7, Number 1, Page 14, February 1996.
Speech given at the LACMA District 5 meeting in November 1990. The presentation was published by Loren Frank in an article entitled, “Recent Court Decisions Are Lessening Doctors’ Liability, Lawyer Says,” LACMA Physician, January 14, 1991.