courtYesterday, March 28, 2017, Missouri Governor, Eric Greitens, signed House Bill 153. This Bill amends parts of section 490.065 of the Missouri Revised Statutes (RSMo), which governs testimony of expert witness.

With the enactment of the new standards under 490.065(2), Missouri’s approach to expert testimony now aligns with that of the Federal Courts. The requirements as set out Subsection Two are identical to those of Federal Rules of Evidence 702, 703 and 705, which are the basis for the principles of the Daubert Standard as set out by the United States Supreme Court. See Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceutical, 509 U.S. 579 (1993). This consistency between Missouri and Federal Court standards is significant because it should make it easier to exclude unscientific “junk science.”


Continue Reading Missouri Governor Signs Bill; State’s Approach to Expert Testimony Now Aligns with that of the Federal Courts

MissouriThe Supreme Court of Missouri recently issued an important decision in Norfolk Southern Railway Co. v. Dolan, holding that Missouri did not have personal jurisdiction over an out-of-state corporation registered to do business in Missouri that was conducting “substantial and continuous” business in Missouri, where an alleged injury to a resident of another state arose due to conduct outside of Missouri.

Continue Reading Missouri Supreme Court Limits Personal Jurisdiction

Product Liability Monitor

December 13, 2016
New Developments
Auto Manufacturers Partner with Nauto to Improve Driverless Car Technology
By Shannon Peters

One of the main obstacles to the autonomous vehicle industry is “infrastructure,” but not in the sense typically associated with the term. Since autonomous vehicles come in all shapes, sizes, and powertrain types (gasoline, electric, and hybrid),

Product Liability Monitor

November 8, 2016
New Developments
Does Talc Cause Cancer? Scientific Evidence in the Courtroom
By Alan Hoffman

This year juries returned verdicts totaling nearly $200 million in three Missouri cases claiming that ovarian cancers is caused by using talcum powder products. By contrast, in September a New Jersey Superior Court excluded expert opinions offered to

Toxic Tort Monitor

June 2, 2016
New Developments
Southern District of Illinois Rules it Does Not Have Personal Jurisdiction Over Defendant in Asbestos Case
By Jenna Marie Stupar

This March, the Southern District of Illinois ruled in favor of Defendant The William Powell Company (“Powell”) on its motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. [Continue Reading

Recently the Supreme Court of Missouri held that The Protection of Lawful Commerce and Arms Act (“PLCAA”) preempts a negligence claim but allows a correctly pled negligent entrustment action against a firearm seller. Gun controlThus, the PLCAA is not only a hot political topic being discussed by the Presidential Candidates, but also one that is being litigated within the legal system.

In Delana v. Ced Sales, Inc., d/b/a Odessa Gun & Pawn, et al., (2016 WL 1357209 (MO en banc April 6, 2016, not released for publication) defendant Odessa Gun & Pawn (“Odessa) sold a firearm, to a mentally ill child of the plaintiff, Janet Delana, which the child used to kill her own father.  Plaintiff telephoned Odessa and asked the store manager, Derrick Dady, to refrain from selling a gun to her daughter, who was severely mentally ill and should not have a gun.  Plaintiff also told Mr. Dady that her daughter had purchased a gun at Odessa the previous month and attempted to commit suicide, and said, “I’m begging you, I’m begging you as a mother, if she comes in, please don’t sell her a gun. Two days later, Mr. Dady sold her a gun and ammunition which she used within an hour to kill her father.


Continue Reading PLCAA Challenged in Politics and in the Courtroom

Employment ApplicationOn April 11, 2016, Missouri Governor Jay Nixon signed an Executive Order that immediately implemented a “Ban the Box” policy for Missouri state agencies, departments, boards, and commissions. Under this Order, state employers must amend their initial employment applications to remove questions relating to an individual’s criminal history unless a criminal history would render an applicant ineligible for the position. State employers may still request information about an applicant’s criminal past and may still conduct a criminal background check as a condition of employment, but the Order requires that state agencies wait until later in the application process to procure that information. The Order does not specify exactly when in the application process employers may make these criminal history inquiries.
Continue Reading Missouri Governor Jay Nixon Signs Executive Order to “Ban the Box”