The spring edition of the Defense Counsel Journal offers four articles that epitomize the essence of the IADC: leaders of the defense bar sharing their insights and expertise into complex topics that are at the cutting-edge of our profession. Des Berry and Evan Kwarta, who both have experience working on 9/11 related litigation, provide an interesting piece that summarizes the unique legal issues presented by the horrific circumstances that flowed from 9/11 and discusses the resolution of those issues that flowed from seventeen plus years of multifaceted litigation. In “Class Arbitration: Who Decides,” Mitch Lathrop insightfully addresses how the presence, or absence, of one-on-one arbitration provisions impact the viability of class arbitration and when the availability of this remedy is decided by a judge versus an arbitrator. The always thorny topic of the use of epidemiology in examining causation in toxic tort litigation is presented by explaining how misuse of the Bradford Hill criteria affects the validity of expert opinions in an excellent piece by Derek Smith, Jeremy Goldkind, and William Andrichik. Finally, Mica Nguyen Worthy writes a thoughtful article about the impact of public policy issues on the enforceability of international arbitration agreements.
Each of these articles present authoritative views on topics of import to the defense bar and are worthy of citation in your next brief that deals with any of these topics. It is a privilege to have my name associated with these scholarly pieces. As IADC President Craig Thompson says in his introduction, these are prime examples of our members sharing with us the “best of what we are.” Reading these articles brings to my mind, and I am sure yours, the immortal words of Cato the Elder (234-149 BC): “Grasp the subject, the words will follow.” We appreciate all of the time and hard work that went into each of these pieces.
Kenneth R. Meyer
Editor and Chair of the Board of Editors, Defense Counsel Journal