Our products practice involves a wide range of products, and includes local, regional and national responsibilities. We have managed the activities of local counsel in case development of individual cases or in the mass tort context. We have tried numerous cases to verdict in Colorado and many other jurisdications. We specialize in the development of scientific evidence for the defense of claims, and challenges to opposing experts through discovery and Daubert motions. We have developed creative strategies for many Daubert hearings, and worked with court appointed experts or technical advisors in a variety of contexts. We have assisted our clients in local and national class actions and multi district litigation. See e.g., Hall v. Baxter Healthcare Corp., 947 F.Supp. 1387 (D.Or. 1996), In Re Breast Implant Cases, 942 F.Supp. 958 (E.D. and S.D.N.Y. 1996) , In Re Breast Implant Litigation, 11 F.Supp.2d 1217 (D.Colo. 1998), MDL 926 In Re Breast Implant Litigation, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama transcripts at Website www.fjc.gov/BREIMLIT/mdl926.htm 

Representative Products

Vehicles and component parts: airplanes, automobiles, riding lawn mowers, bicycles, engines, and forklifts.
Heavy equipment: hoists, rock crushing and asphalt plant equipment, furnaces, and ski lift equipment.
Pharmaceuticals/chemicals: various human pharmaceuticals, blood products, cleaning products, herbicides, pesticides, and fertilizers.
Medical devices: heart valves, catheters, IV pumps, and breast implants.
Safety equipment: respirators for industrial and home application, helmets, and vehicle restraint systems.
Miscellaneous: engines, ladders, lawn care equipment, water heaters, beverage dispensers, baggage movers, food and beverages and food and beverage processors, asbestos & silica.
 

Significant Representations

Our representation of a Fortune 500 company includes national responsibilities for development of expert testimony to assist in the defense of claims, challenges to plaintiffs' expert testimony and medical causation evidence in respirator products litigation. Our first efforts for this client resulted in termination of 12 years of litigation for this client, by summary judgment.

For a Fortune 100 company involved in national litigation including multiple cases pleaded as class actions, we are responsible for development of expert testimony, trials and appeals.

We are national counsel for four clients in asbestos litigation.

We were active in the breast implant litigation on the national level for a successor to a breast implant manufacturer. We have taken eight plaintiffs’ cases to verdict, and participated in some of the first Daubert hearings challenging plaintiffs’ experts that were held in any arena. We were responsible for the trial testimony of one of the court-appointed expert members of the National Science Panel, appointed by MDL Judge Sam Pointer, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama.

Wells, Anderson & Race was retained by two manufacturers of phentermine, to represent their interests in the "fen/phen" litigation. We were responsible for the defense of all Colorado cases, and participated on the clients’ science team, which developed expert testimony for use in cases nationwide, and challenges to plaintiffs’ experts.

We have been retained by numerous other pharmaceutical manufacturers to represent them in their products litigation with local, regional or national responsibilities.

Our aviation practice includes defense of aircraft & component parts manufacturers, maintenance and repair facilities, and airports.

We have faced crashworthiness issues in a wide variety of contexts including automobiles, airplanes, and heavy equipment. We have defended claims directed to the design of roofs, occupant space, seats, restraint systems, fuel systems, and handling characteristics.

Packaging, labeling, warnings, instruction and human factors issues are prevalent in most product liability matters that we have handled. We are familiar with the regulatory schemes addressing these issues, and we are sensitive to federal preemption defenses.

[Back to Practice Areas Index]