Supreme Court Oral Argument By O'Melveny's Hacker Covered by Law360

November 16, 2011 In a November 9, 2011 article about the US Supreme Court's consideration of Kurns et al. v. Railroad Friction Products Corp. et al., Law360 spotlighted the oral argument delivered by O'Melveny Appellate Practice Group partner Jonathan Hacker.

Representing the defendants, Hacker "pushed the Court to interpret Napier as delegating to the Department of Transportation the exclusive authority to determine the design and the materials of locomotive equipment," Law360 reported.

The plaintiff, a deceased railway worker's wife, argues that the Locomotive Inspection Act does not bar state product liability tort claims over asbestos exposure. That argument contradicts decades-old case law, according to the online legal newsletter.