Parties Exchange Briefing on Post-Trial Motion in Wake of C-8 Exposure Verdict

CLEVELAND –– DuPont has filed a reply brief backing their motion for judgment as a matter of law, saying that the plaintiff failed to directly address “the core causation issues resulting from the erroneous interpretation of the Leach Class Action Settlement….”

In their Nov. 20 opposition brief, however, the plaintiffs said the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio should deny the defendant’s motion and resist the urge to second-guess the sufficiency and weight of the evidence presented at trial.

In an amended complaint filed in 2013, plaintiff Carla Marie Bartlett alleged that she was harmed after DuPont …