New York Toxic Torts (Toxic Substances) Lawyers

Outside of the well-publicized oil spills like the Exxon Valdez and the BP spill in the Gulf Coast in 2010, oil spills can occur in small environments such as in a workplace, or  as part of a larger incident like a train derailment or big rig accident in which oil was part of the cargo.  When a spill occurs that involves oil or another toxic chemical, there may be long-term evidence that shows how it can affect your body, the environment, and the outlying areas from where the spill occurred.  Hazardous spills can come in the form of acid, oil or gasoline and many other elements that prove to be dangerous.

Continue Reading: Manhattan Law Firms Cautions Oil Spills Not Just At Sea

A party who claims injury through the neglect of another must institute suit within the period prescribed by law or be barred by the applicable statute of limitations. What is a statute of limitations and why does it exist in American law? Essentially, each right that is denied or infringed upon must be pursued within a specific time period against the party claimed to be responsible. For example, under New York law, the right to sue a defendant who is negligent or whose product injures a plaintiff, is three years from the date of the occurrence. The statute of limitations in a New York medical malpractice action is two and a half years from the date of the medical departure or two and a half years from the last date of treatment, so long as it was continuous. The statute of limitations varies with respect to other actions (contract, liable, slander, civil assault, etc.)

Continue Reading: The Statute of Limitations in Toxic Tort Exposure Cases

The cases that require expert scientific support are quite common in the personal injury field. Take for example a typical medical malpractice case in which the plaintiff claims that Dr. “X” through his negligence caused injury “Y”. Typically, and at least thirty days prior to trial, plaintiff must, in accordance with the New York rules, serve a statement upon the defense attorney setting out the specific field of the plaintiff’s medical expert, qualifications, and opinions that will be offered at trial (Rule 3101 [d]). The defendant must also comply with the rule by serving plaintiff’s counsel with a similar statement.   The reason for the rule is to avoid surprise at trial, in addition to generally limiting the expert to that which is set forth in the 3101 [d] statement.

Continue Reading: The Frye Hearing and its Impact upon a Personal Injury Case