Comments on Past Performance

Expert Management Case Study:

Toxic Tort/Pay Federal Collective Bargaining Litigation

GLSGI professionals were retained by the Federal government to support their efforts in defense of a claim of entitlement to additional pay for exposure to a toxic substance (asbestos) brought by a class of more than 3,500 civilian employees. The Plaintiffs' claims entailed allegations of exposure to the toxic substance from numerous sources and work processes over the course of a 25-year period. The Defendant faced a potential liability in excess of $180,000,000.

As part of the support effort, GLSGI professionals:

• identified, screened and retained some of the top national experts in Labor Economics, Statistics, Industrial Hygiene, Radiology, Epidemiology, Pulmonology, Bio-Statistics, Pathology and Industrial Safety,
• supported the efforts of these expert witnesses, keeping them up-to-date on relevant issues, witnesses, documents and data as the cases evolved and facilitating close coordination between case experts and attorneys.

This coordination allowed the attorneys to benefit from having the insight and opinion of world-class experts during every phase of the litigation process from the first interview, throughout all document and data collection and review efforts, in support of all pleading preparations and through the final hearing. GLSGI researchers and staff, under expert supervision:

• assisted in reviewing the massive population of documents and data to identify information relevant to the experts' areas of expertise,
• constructed a number of analytical databases, including a sampling database containing detailed information on more than 11,000 asbestos air samples and 14,000 asbestos bulk material samples taken over a 25-year period,
• compiled a reference library of more than 2,500 items, including relevant statutory and administrative regulations, relevant agency policies and instructions, and scientific publications and studies.

Expert input and involvement in the case insured that the legal staff was aware of how the scientific issues of the case were interwoven with the legal issues and provided an invaluable evaluation of the evidence, both in possible support of the Plaintiffs' allegations and in identification and development of affirmative defenses.

The Defense was successful, with a decision by the hearing judge dismissing most of the Plaintiff's claims. The remaining claims were settled for less than 1% of the original claim. The decision was upheld by the Federal Labor Relations Authority.

Comments on Past Performance: