FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W314881741> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W314881741 startingPage "366" @default.
• W314881741 abstract "By requiring plaintiffs to produce early in discovery the specifics of their claims, judicial resources are preserved and contentions sharpened LONE PINE orders are a type of case management order requiring plaintiffs in toxic tort lawsuits to produce early in the discovery process basic evidence supporting a prima facie case. Cases in which defendants can persuade a court to enter a Lone Pine order typically have multiple plaintiffs and occasionally multiple defendants. The orders generally require plaintiffs to identify their injuries and produce some evidence of causation. As a result, these orders help courts organize claims and focus on key issues early in litigation. Courts may rely on either their inherent authority to control their dockets or applicable rules of civil procedure to issue these case management orders. While most jurisdictions have not considered Lone Pine orders, their use appears to be spreading as plaintiffs' attorneys continue to push the edge of the class action envelope with new and unproven claims. HOW THEY BEGAN Lone Pine orders take their name from a 1986 case in the Appellate Division of the New Jersey Superior Court, styled Lore v. Lone Pine Corp.,1 involving multiple plaintiffs suing 464 defendants. The plaintiffs alleged personal injuries and property damage from a landfill. In order to streamline the proceedings, the court entered a case management order requiring the plaintiffs to provide certain basic information regarding their claims. With respect to their personal injury claims, each plaintiff was required to provide (1) the facts of his or her exposure to the alleged toxic substances at or from the Lone Pine landfill, and (2) reports of treating physicians and medical or other experts supporting each individual plaintiff's claim of injury and causation by the substances. The court also required each plaintiff to provide in support of claims for diminution of property value: (1) his or her address and (2) reports of a real property or other expert supporting the claim for diminution in value. When the plaintiffs failed to produce the information required by the case management order, the court dismissed all of their claims with prejudice. WHAT THEY REQUIRE A typical Lone Pine order requires a plaintiff to provide an affidavit by a date certain stating: (1) the identity and amount of each chemical to which the plaintiff was exposed; (2) the precise disease or illness from which the plaintiff suffers; and (3) the evidence supporting the theory that exposure to the defendant's chemicals caused the injury in question.2 Other evidence can be required by the order. For example, as in Cattle v. Superior Court (Oxnard Shores Co.),3 the dates of the exposure to the substance, the method of exposure (that is, inhalation, dermal or ingestion), and affidavits from medical experts supporting causation were required. Many Lone Pine orders require expert opinions on causation. For example, in an Oklahoma case, the trial court in Tulsa County entered an order requiring the plaintiffs to provide statements identifying each injury, illness or condition that they claimed more likely than not was caused by exposure to any chemical.4 The case against a utility company involved more than 150 office workers in Tulsa who alleged exposure to polychlorinated biphenols (PCBs) that escaped from an underground transformer. Each plaintiff was ordered to provide a narrative statement, with an affidavit of a physician or other expert, that included: * Identification of each relevant injury, illness or condition suffered; * The underlying facts or data relied on to forming an opinion that he or she was exposed to PCBs and related chemicals at a level or dose which was sufficient to cause injury or illness; * Identification of the precise exposure route-that is, inhalation, skin contact, ingestion-by which he or she was exposed to the listed chemicals; * Specification of the precise chemicals which more probably than not caused each injury, illness or condition; * For each illness, injury or condition, specification of the scientific and medical basis for the opinion, including a specific reference to the particular scientific or literature forming the basis of the opinion; and * A differential diagnosis establishing that the physician or expert formed an opinion that more probably than not the plaintiff's illnesses did not have some etiology other than exposure to PCBs or related chemicals. …" @default.
• W314881741 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W314881741 creator A5001590502 @default.
• W314881741 creator A5063832981 @default.
• W314881741 date "2004-10-01" @default.
• W314881741 modified "2023-09-28" @default.
• W314881741 title "An Overview of Lone Pine Orders in Toxic Tort Litigation: By Requiring Plaintiffs to Produce Early in Discovery the Specifics of Their Claims, Judicial Resources Are Preserved and Contentions Sharpened" @default.
• W314881741 hasPublicationYear "2004" @default.
• W314881741 type Work @default.
• W314881741 sameAs 314881741 @default.
• W314881741 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W314881741 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W314881741 hasAuthorship W314881741A5001590502 @default.
• W314881741 hasAuthorship W314881741A5063832981 @default.
• W314881741 hasConcept C144133560 @default.
• W314881741 hasConcept C159717818 @default.
• W314881741 hasConcept C166151441 @default.
• W314881741 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W314881741 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W314881741 hasConcept C200635333 @default.
• W314881741 hasConcept C2777134139 @default.
• W314881741 hasConcept C2777381055 @default.
• W314881741 hasConcept C2777834853 @default.
• W314881741 hasConcept C97460637 @default.
• W314881741 hasConceptScore W314881741C144133560 @default.
• W314881741 hasConceptScore W314881741C159717818 @default.
• W314881741 hasConceptScore W314881741C166151441 @default.
• W314881741 hasConceptScore W314881741C17744445 @default.
• W314881741 hasConceptScore W314881741C199539241 @default.
• W314881741 hasConceptScore W314881741C200635333 @default.
• W314881741 hasConceptScore W314881741C2777134139 @default.
• W314881741 hasConceptScore W314881741C2777381055 @default.
• W314881741 hasConceptScore W314881741C2777834853 @default.
• W314881741 hasConceptScore W314881741C97460637 @default.
• W314881741 hasIssue "4" @default.
• W314881741 hasLocation W3148817411 @default.
• W314881741 hasOpenAccess W314881741 @default.
• W314881741 hasPrimaryLocation W3148817411 @default.
• W314881741 hasRelatedWork W1520725283 @default.
• W314881741 hasRelatedWork W1541609534 @default.
• W314881741 hasRelatedWork W2047833276 @default.
• W314881741 hasRelatedWork W2110490884 @default.
• W314881741 hasRelatedWork W234072310 @default.
• W314881741 hasRelatedWork W2492772591 @default.
• W314881741 hasRelatedWork W2534034008 @default.
• W314881741 hasRelatedWork W281845284 @default.
• W314881741 hasRelatedWork W286142323 @default.
• W314881741 hasRelatedWork W291585612 @default.
• W314881741 hasRelatedWork W296950349 @default.
• W314881741 hasRelatedWork W3122841483 @default.
• W314881741 hasRelatedWork W3123745084 @default.
• W314881741 hasRelatedWork W3125521425 @default.
• W314881741 hasRelatedWork W317161102 @default.
• W314881741 hasRelatedWork W341309414 @default.
• W314881741 hasRelatedWork W350660077 @default.
• W314881741 hasRelatedWork W571364231 @default.
• W314881741 hasRelatedWork W173675203 @default.
• W314881741 hasRelatedWork W2610346412 @default.
• W314881741 hasVolume "71" @default.
• W314881741 isParatext "false" @default.
• W314881741 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W314881741 magId "314881741" @default.
• W314881741 workType "article" @default.