The Jere Beasley Report February 2026

CAPITOL OBSERVATIONS

My brother Billy is seeking another term in the Alabama Senate. Billy has done a tremendous job in the Legislature. While Billy has been an outstanding legislator, the fact that he is so widely respected by all people who have dealt with him tells the full story. He has helped lots of folks in all areas of the district he serves. Billy cares about people. He understands and responds to their needs and concerns. 

My brother has had an open-door policy and has visited all areas of the district regularly during his time in both the House of Representatives and the Senate. I am going to do all I can to help Billy win his race. 

The following counties are in the 28^th District: Barbour, Bullock, Macon, and Henry, along with portions of Russell and Houston.  I would appreciate your help for my brother if you live in the district. 

TALC LITIGATION

Talc Litigation Update

The Baby Powder/Ovarian Cancer trial in Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania started with jury selection on Jan. 17.  This case, Henry, et al v. Johnson & Johnson, involves the children of Gayle Emerson who continued prosecuting her case after she died of ovarian cancer in 2019.  Ms. Emerson was a long-time resident of York, Pennsylvania, where she raised her children and grandchildren while working as a bookkeeper at HR Block for decades.  She used Baby Powder her entire life and developed ovarian cancer at the age of 64.  

This trial was previously put on hold after J&J filed for bankruptcy a third time. It’s now back on track. Beasley Allen lawyers Leigh O’Dell, Ted Meadows, David Dearing and Margaret Thompson are trying the case along with Philadelphia lawyer, Richard Golomb.  As in the recent Los Angeles trial, the evidence will show that J&J knew of the dangers of Baby Powder and continued selling it to unsuspecting victims like Gayle Emerson. 

Our firm is also preparing for upcoming trials in other state courts around the country, starting in March.  Those include Atlantic City, Los Angeles, Chicago, Philadelphia & Miami. The California case should have started by the time you receive this issue. 

Important Ruling On Expert Testimony In J&J Talc Cancer Cases

A court‑appointed special master issued a major report in the Johnson & Johnson talc litigation. Plaintiffs’ experts will be allowed to testify that the company’s talc products can cause ovarian cancer. Retired U.S. District Judge Freda Wolfson concluded in her extensive report that the experts used reliable scientific methods and that the body of epidemiological research—both before and after 2020—shows a statistically significant association between genital talc use and ovarian cancer.

This recommendation reaffirms Judge Wolfson’s 2020 ruling, which similarly allowed expert testimony regarding asbestos contamination and cancer risk. 

The litigation, one of the largest multidistrict proceedings in the country, now encompasses more than 67,000 claims. Judge Wolfson’s recommendation will go to U.S. District Judge Michael Shipp, who is expected to adopt it. This is a critical victory that clears the path toward long‑delayed trials.

The steering committee is represented by Christopher M. Placitella of Cohen Placitella & Roth PC, Michelle A. Parfitt of Ashcraft & Gerel LLP and Leigh O’Dell of Beasley Allen.

The federal multidistrict litigation is In re: Johnson & Johnson Talcum Powder Products Marketing, Sales Practices and Products Liability Litigation, case number 3:16-md-02738, in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey.

Beasley Allen Talc Litigation Team

The ongoing battle with Johnson & Johnson (J&J) continues as set out above. Beasley Allen took on J&J in the very beginning. We will continue to battle J&J on every front and do so as long as necessary. While J&J’s fraudulent bankruptcy attempts delayed justice for thousands of victims, our lawyers have not backed down. Beasley Allen lawyers will continue to fight this battle in the right way and for the right reason to the very end. Justice will ultimately be served for the thousands of J&J victims and their families.

Beasley Allen lawyers Leigh O’Dell and Ted Meadows head our Talc Ovarian Cancer Litigation Team. From the beginning, the litigation team has been directly involved in all phases of the talc litigation. Andy Birchfield, who heads up our Mass Torts Section, has been out front in all aspects of this litigation. Andy actually became J&J’s target. He has been attacked by this huge, powerful company constantly. J&J has tried very hard to intimidate Andy and the firm, but their efforts have not worked and will not work in the future. Andy is leading the trial team in the ongoing case in California. 

This has been a tough battle, but it is a critically important and necessary one. Rest assured, our lawyers will not back down. Beasley Allen will continue its battle with J&J, and our clients’ best interests are at the top of our list of priorities.  

The following Beasley Allen lawyers are members of the Talc Litigation Team:

Leigh O’Dell, Ted Meadows, Kelli Alfreds, Ryan Beattie, Beau Darley, David Dearing, Liz Achtemeier, Jennifer Emmel, James Lampkin, Caty O’Quinn, Cristina Rodriguez, Brittany Scott, and Matt Teague.

CAMP LEJEUNE LITIGATION

Camp LeJeune Update

At a recent status conference before Federal Magistrate Judge Robert Jones, several crucial matters were addressed. Plaintiffs’ Leadership Group (PLG) filed a motion to compel the DOJ to produce digitized muster rolls, which have been requested for several months. The DOJ was granted a one-week extension to respond.

Further, the court raised the concern of whether the government’s offsets (government deductions for medical care and other benefits paid to plaintiffs by the government) would just cancel out the damages claimed. The PLG agreed with this concern, and explained that two additional problems exist with these offsets:

• The PLG needs information on plaintiffs’ out-of-pocket costs such as co-pays; and

• Despite prior court orders, the DOJ has continually updated offset data even though it was supposed to be finalized earlier, which could cause unfairness.

The PLG argued that offsets are intended to prevent double recovery and therefore any offset proven by the government should only be allowed to the extent that same amount has been awarded to a plaintiff for that same medical care or benefit.  For example, if a plaintiff chooses not to claim Medicare damages, the government should not be entitled to an offset for Medicare costs. The DOJ disagrees, arguing that offsets should apply broadly under the CLJA. The DOJ also said finding co-pay info would be burdensome and time-consuming. The court asked both sides to file motions on these issues.

Additionally, the PLG requested that a Department of Navy (DON) representative attend the next hearing to explain delays in processing claims. The DOJ opposed, citing incomplete claimant documentation for the delay. The PLG countered, explaining that claimants are facing long delays trying to obtain military records. The court deferred ruling, noting that there was to be an upcoming meeting with settlement masters and DON representatives.

Lastly, the DOJ requested an evidentiary hearing on water contamination modeling, estimating the hearing would take less than a week. The PLG contended that a hearing is unnecessary as the documentation the court needs to make a ruling has already been given to the court. The court made no rulings on this issue.

Beasley Allen Camp Lejeune Litigation Team 

The lawyers on the Camp Lejeune Litigation Team include Saima Khan, Wesley Merillat, Ryan Kral, Tucker Osborne, Travis Chin, Miland Simpler, Khadiga Carr, Connor Chase, Jeff Price, Elizabeth Walden and Elliot Bienenfeld. 

Rhon Jones, who heads our Toxic Torts Section, is heavily involved in all aspects of the litigation, including the Resolution Committee. Rhon is in leadership as a member of the Plaintiff’s Executive Committee. 

The lawyers on our litigation team are available and will be honored to work with other lawyers on a claim. They will also be available to answer any questions you may have about the litigation.

SOCIAL MEDIA LITIGATION

Social Media Litigation Update

Beasley Allen continues to lead in the fight to hold Meta and other social media platforms accountable for the mental health crisis affecting children, teens, and schools. A team of Beasley Allen lawyers, led by Andy Birchfield and Joseph VanZandt, represent individuals and school districts in litigation advancing in both California federal court and separately in California state court, against Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok, YouTube and Meta platforms for knowingly unleashing dangerous products on the public without adequate protections or warnings. Alleged injuries include suicide, suicide ideation, self-harm, eating disorders, body dysmorphia, severe depression and anxiety, sleep disorders, and social media addiction.

The first trial of the litigation is underway in Los Angeles Superior Court, part of a consolidated state court litigation referred to as the JCCP. Eight other individual personal injury cases against Defendants Meta, YouTube, Snap, and TikTok are set for trial in 2026. Beasley Allen helped establish this important California state court litigation and Beasley Allen attorney Joseph VanZandt was appointed by Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Carolyn B. Kuhl as Co-Lead Counsel for the plaintiffs. Beasley Allen is proud to work alongside the other court appointed Co-Leads Mariana A. McConnell of Kiesel Law LLP, Rachel Lanier of the Lanier Law Firm, and Rahul Ravipudi of Panish Shea Ravipudi LLP.

The plaintiff in the first trial is a 20-year-old identified as K.G.M., who alleges that Instagram and YouTube were deliberately designed with addictive features—infinite scroll, autoplay, algorithmic recommendations, and frequent notifications—that caused her addiction, depression, self-harm, suicidal ideation, and body dysmorphia after she began using the platforms at a young age. The trial is expected to last six to eight weeks and will feature testimony from Meta executives Mark Zuckerberg and Adam Mosseri and YouTube executives. Thousands of pages of internal company documents are anticipated to be admitted as evidence. 

Both Snap and TikTok reached confidential settlements just before trial, leaving Meta and Google as the remaining defendants in the first trial. Snapchat and TikTok continue to be defendants in the larger litigation.

In the related federal litigation (MDL), the first trial on behalf of school districts bringing public nuisance and negligence claims against defendants is set to begin in May 2026. An attorney general trial is in the MDL later in 2026. 

Beasley Allen continues to actively investigate and file new claims involving Meta, Instagram, Facebook, TikTok, Snapchat, and other platforms. Many children are suffering anxiety, depression, self-harm, or other injuries linked to social media use. Our lawyers are available to help.

A Further Update On Social Media

A bill in Congress, entitled the “Kids Online Safety Act” (KOSA), aims to place new duties on technology and social media platforms. These duties include safer designs, improved content moderation, additional parental controls, and more stringent age verification. Similarly, the United Kingdom recently implemented their own measures in 2025 pursuant to their “Online Safety Act.” Despite introducing these measures, the BBC has found that teenagers are still being regularly exposed to social media content about bullying, suicide, and weapons.

The BBC ran two experiments, the first in May 2025 before the social media companies were required to make changes pursuant to the “Online Safety Act,” and the second in July 2025 after the new rules took effect. They set up six fictional profiles, three accounts posing as boys and three as girls, all of which were between the ages 13 and 15. Each account was used to scrolled through content on TikTok, Instagram, and YouTube for at least ten minutes per day over the course of one week.

During the first experiment in May 2025, the fictitious accounts were quickly served concerning posts and sexually suggestive content. They noticed that much of the concerning content would appear suddenly, usually hidden between two innocuous posts about sports or gaming.

After the “Online Safety Act” came into effect in July 2025, the experiment was repeated in the same way. While they noticed some improvements on certain platforms, the BBC’s investigation found that the content on TikTok had not noticeably changed. During the experiment one of the female accounts on TikTok was repeatedly shown posts about bullying, suicide, and sexual content.

The Beasley Allen Social Media Litigation Team

Joseph VanZandt, who leads our firm’s Social Media Personal Injury Litigation Team, is co-lead counsel for the Judicial Council Coordination Proceeding (JCCP) for the plaintiffs in California State Court. Joseph is also a member of the Plaintiffs Steering Committee in the MDL, helping lead the federal social media multidistrict litigation. Lawyers on the Beasley Allen Social Media Litigation Team are set out below.

Social Media Litigation Team

Joseph VanZandt (who heads the team) Jennifer Emmel, Suzanne Clark, Clinton Richardson, Sydney Everett, Davis Vaughn, Soo Seok Yang, James Lampkin, Seth Harding and Slade Methvin. Andy Birchfield, who heads our Mass Torts Section, also works with the team. He can be reached at 800-898-2034 or by email at [email protected].

GAMING LITIGATION

The Evolution Of Gambling – Part One

Beasley Allen lawyers Dee Miles, Mitch Williams, and Trent Mann are currently representing plaintiffs and proposed class members across several states—including Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas, Ohio, and Oregon—in a series of class action lawsuits directed at five defendants, each operating online casino gaming platforms illegally within each Plaintiffs’ state: ARB Gaming LLC (Modo Casino); Social Gaming LLC (Fortune Coins); Sweepstakes Limited (Stake); High 5 Entertainment (High 5 Casino); VGW Group (Chumba Casino). 

This article is the first in a series discussing these lawsuits. Plaintiffs allege that these online casino websites operate just like traditional brick-and-mortar casinos, providing classic games of chance such as slot machines, poker, blackjack, roulette, and others. The primary difference is that these businesses operate entirely online, fail to secure the proper licensing or state approval mandated by law, and do not pay taxes to the states where they conduct business.

As alleged by plaintiffs, these online platforms allow residents of the involved states to gamble using cash-equivalent virtual coins, which are converted into U.S. dollars. To participate, users purchase packages of “gold coins,” which is a virtual currency offered on the websites. With each gold coin purchase, the platforms give users an allotment of “sweeps coins.” 

While gold coins can be used for “entertainment play” and have no cash value, sweeps coins serve as the true vehicle for gambling, as they are used to play casino games such as slots, poker, and blackjack. If a user wins with sweeps coins, those winnings can be redeemed and withdrawn as real U.S. dollars, effectively mirroring the experience of traditional gambling. 

Plaintiffs argue that this two-step process is designed to bypass state gambling laws and tax obligations, representing a digital evolution of the old sweepstakes cafés that proliferated across the country nearly thirty years ago, establishments that courts ultimately ruled illegal for similarly attempting to skirt gaming restrictions under the guise of sweepstakes promotions.  

The lawsuits seek to recover gambling losses for affected individuals, utilizing each state’s gambling loss recovery laws. Plaintiffs contend that the defendants are exploiting legal loopholes to facilitate unlawful gaming activities and avoid paying taxes within these states.

Mitch Williams and Trent Mann, lawyers in our Consumer Fraud & Commercial Litigation Section, are continuing to investigate and file these class actions to protect consumers and taxpayers from further abuses. We will keep our readers informed on developments in this important litigation.

Stanford Professor Discusses Dangers Of Video Game Addiction In Teens

Stanford Professor Bradley Zicherman, M.D. recently discussed the impact of video games on developing brains. In his interview, Dr. Zicherman explained that video game addiction is not very different from addiction to gambling, social media, alcohol or drugs, stating that all of these vices work on dopamine response pathways in very similar ways. Dr. Zicherman further states that teens playing a myriad of video games are vulnerable to addiction considering that video game platforms are becoming better at supplying dopamine based on new, immersive technologies.

Dr. Zicherman ultimately explained that there are five (5) main things parents should know about video game addiction. These are: 

• First is that video game addiction is growing rapidly due to the games’ complex stories, sophisticated sounds and graphics, and the ability to interact with other players. 

• The symptoms, and consequences are familiar to that of addiction to drugs or alcohol. 

• It is very rare for children to acknowledge the problem, and the key is to establish trust with the addicted child. 

• Lean on pediatricians, mental health providers, and schools to provide helpful resources and support for the addicted child. 

• Dr. Zicherman explains that if all of the above are successfully accomplished, it will ease the child’s mental health strain and will improve all facets of their lives.

Beasley Allen lawyers Chad Cook and Cade Crow are honored to represent children who have suffered harms through the addictive games of the world’s most successful gaming platforms such as Minecraft, Fortnite, and Roblox.

Roblox MDL Issues First Case Management Order

The U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation has created a new multidistrict litigation (MDL No. 3166) consolidating dozens of lawsuits alleging that children were sexually exploited through the Roblox gaming platform.

In a transfer order filed December 12, 2025, the Panel ordered that all cases be transferred to the Northern District of California. The MDL was assigned to Chief Judge Richard Seeborg for coordinated pretrial proceedings. The judge has already issued Pretrial Order No. 1 and set a case management conference for late January. The litigation currently includes at least 31 actions pending in twelve federal districts, with another 48 potential tag-along actions.

Plaintiffs allege that predators used Roblox to target and groom minors, then often exploited them further by persuading them to continue interactions and exchange sexually explicit material on other platforms, such as Discord, Snapchat, Instagram, or through texting and video calls.

The plaintiffs assert claims including negligence, negligent misrepresentation, failure to warm, and design defect, focusing on whether Roblox failed to implement adequate safety features, such as age and identity verification, or provided insufficient warnings.

Defendants Roblox, Discord, and Meta opposed the centralization, arguing that factual differences and arbitration issues warranted individual handling. However, the Panel rejected those arguments and found that informal coordination would be insufficient given the number of cases and overlapping legal issues.

At Beasley Allen, our lawyers are committed to holding gaming companies accountable for their failure to protect young users from exploitation.

MOTOR VEHICLE AND TRUCKING LITIGATION

The Importance Of Understanding Your Client’s Damages

Ben Keen in our Atlanta office recently settled a trucking case for $1,400,000. When Ben received the file, he recognized that the wreck was catastrophic. Ben also realized the physical injuries were not substantial. After discussing the wreck with the family, it was clear that the injuries were substantial in an unconventional way, merely psychological.

Sadly, psychological damages can often be overlooked by trial lawyers in the civil justice system. In this case, however; they were not. Apart from investigating the accident and exposing misconduct on part of the defendants, Ben and his trial team spent hours each week discussing the psychological damages that the injured plaintiff experienced as a result of this wreck. 

This wreck impacted a career, a marriage, friendships, and the personal identity of Ben’s client. These are damages that cannot be healed and interestingly are often ignored. 

Ben says, “the foundation of a successful case is built through the development of the client relationship.” Ben says he was able to build strong relationships with his clients because they felt comfortable sharing personal and sensitive details with him, which helped him truly understand all the ways this wreck affected their lives.

While trucking cases are multidimensional, this case underscores the importance of developing an authentic relationship with clients so that their complete story is heard and given the value it deserves. This allowed Ben to get a good settlement in this case for his client. 

MOTOR VEHICLE RECALLS 

January 2026 Recalls

January 2026 opened with a surge of significant motorvehicle recall announcements, reflecting a busy start to the year for automakers and federal safety regulators. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) issued multiple notices affecting hundreds of thousands of vehicles across brands including Volvo, Audi, Chevrolet, Ford, Rivian, Porsche, Hyundai, Land Rover, East Trailers, and Lamborghini. Many of these recalls center on software failures, rearview camera defects, incorrect labeling, structural weld issues, and critical safetysystem malfunctions—all posing potential risks to drivers, passengers, and pedestrians. 

Volvo – Rearview Camera Failure

• Issue: Rearview camera image may not display due to software/camera rendering failure.
• Models Affected: EC40 (2025), C40 BEV (2022–2024), EX40 (2025), XC40 (2021–2025), XC90 (2023–2025), XC60 (2022–2025), V90/V90 CC (2022), S90 (2022–2025), V60/V60 CC (2023–2025), S60 (2023–2025).
• Units Affected: 413,151. 

Audi – Rearview Camera Software Error

• Issue: Software error prevents rearview camera from displaying.
• Models Affected: Wide range including A6, A7, A8, ETron models, Q7, Q8, RS/ S variants (model years 2019–2026 depending on model).
• Units Affected: 356,649.  

Chevrolet (GM) – Equinox EV Pedestrian Alert System Defect

• Issue: Pedestrian warning sound may not meet required volume change between stationary and low-speed movement.
• Models Affected: 2025–2026 Chevrolet Equinox EV.
• Units Affected: 81,177. 

Ford – Maverick Dashboard Panel Detachment

• Issue: Dashboard panel may detach when airbag inflates, creating projectile risk.
• Models Affected: 2025–2026 Ford Maverick (approx. 6,879 trucks).
• Units Affected: 6,879. 

Rivian – R1S & R1T Toe Link Joint Recall

• Issue: Outdated service procedure may cause rear toe link joint separation, increasing crash risk.
• Models Affected: R1S and R1T (2022–2025), previously serviced for suspension.
• Units Affected: 19,641 (7,031 R1S + 12,610 R1T).
• Notes: One related incident with minor injuries reported.

Jaguar Land Rover – Incorrect Weight Information Label

• Issue: Mislabeled weight information.
• Models Affected: 2026 Range Rover Sport.
• Units Affected: Not specified.

Braun Industries – Ambulances Electrical System Failure

• Issue: Potential failure of vehicle electrical systems.
• Models Affected: Various 2021–2026 Braun ambulance models (Chief XL, Express, Liberty, etc.).
• Units Affected: Not specified.

East Trailers – Faulty Rear Impact Guard Weld

• Issue: Incorrect weld may cause rear impact guard detachment.
• Models Affected: East Beast & Beast II (2024–2026).
• Units Affected: Not specified.

Lamborghini – Urus Rearview Camera Malfunction

• Issue: Rearview camera may deactivate due to software error.
• Models Affected: 2019–2024 Lamborghini Urus SUVs.
• Units Affected: 10,554.

Hyundai – Tucson Trailer Hitch Wiring Fire Risk

• Issue: Moisture intrusion can cause short circuits & brake/stop lamp failure; possible fire risk.
• Models Affected: 2022–2024 Hyundai Tucson (with factoryinstalled trailer hitch).
• Units Affected: 51,587.

As automakers continue to confront increasingly complex electrical, software, and structural challenges, January 2026’s recall activity highlights why staying informed is essential for consumer safety. Owners affected by any recall should promptly schedule repairs—most of which are performed at no cost—and may use official tools such as the NHTSA VIN Lookup or manufacturer communications to verify their vehicle’s status. 

PRODUCT LIABILITY LITIGATION

Products Liability – Voir Dire The Defenses Away

Last year, Warner Hornsby, a lawyer in our Personal Injury & Products Liability Section, wrote an article for the Jere Beasley Report concerning voir dire. It was an overview article that laid out the three basic goals of a good voir dire: 

• Identify your bad jurors and get them struck for cause; 

• Start preparing the issues your jurors will confront in the case; and 

• Establish a relationship with the jurors. 

In this issue Warner is diving deeper into the second goal; Preparing the issues your jurors will confront in the case. Warner believes that this tenet of voir dire is best understood once another principle of trial work is also understood- almost every time 95% or more of the facts are agreed upon. Lawyers on both sides rarely argue about what the facts are. But they usually argue about what the facts mean. This is an incredibly important distinction. 

When a lawyer begins to prepare for a case, one can imagine the lawyer asking “How can I best present this case so that the jurors believe me?” Warner tells us that this is the wrong question. 

Most of the time, the jurors won’t have many facts that are in dispute. So, they have to choose who to believe about the veracity of the facts in dispute. What that lawyer should be asking as he or she begins to prepare their case is: “How are the jurors going to interpret these facts?”

As we all know, Indiana just recently won the college football national championship. One of the key plays was a gritty run by Indiana quarterback Fernando Mendoza. It was a key play because it scored a touchdown, but the main reason that this play will likely be talked about for a long time is because it came on a 4^th and 5, from Miami’s 12-yard line, with Indiana up 3 and with 9:27 minutes left in the 4th quarter. 

Conventional wisdom says to kick the field goal, take the nearly guaranteed 3 points. Let’s say you are defending Indiana’s coach in a made-up trial about whether he was a good football coach. So, you tell a jury this story. You want the jury to see that he is gutsy, that he believes in his players, that he isn’t afraid to take risks, and that he won a national championship. There is no dispute about what happened, the facts are the facts. The jury believes everything you told them was true. 

Here’s the problem; you have four 70-year-old high school football players on this jury who think that Indiana’s coach is an idiot. They don’t care that his gamble paid off; they think it was a bad gamble to take. 

It’s not the way they were raised back in the day; you simply take the points. It’s not about what the facts are, it’s about how the jury interprets those facts. You are going to lose this case because you didn’t find out how the jury feels about the arguments you plan on making. 

Let’s look at a more real-life example. Often, the defendant in a product liability case clings to the regulations surrounding their product like they are an impenetrable shield. We have all heard the arguments – “our product passed every safety test that the US government imposes upon it, how could it be defective?” It’s a solid argument for the defense if it isn’t dealt with. Warner says this is where a good voir dire can really shine. 

We all know that compliance does not equal safety. Nearly every product that any jury has ever found to be unsafe in my lifetime met most, if not all, of the regulatory standards governing that product. We know the defense will make these arguments, and we know the arguments we want to make to counter them. The question is, what does the jury think about those issues? 

Warner believes a good way to tackle these issues is to begin with two questions; 

• Is the claim the defense is making true (i.e., did they actually comply with all regulatory standards?)? If the claim is not true, then you can very effectively undermine their argument before they make it by pointing out why their claim is not completely true or is misleading. If the claim is true (as it often is). 

• Why should I still win, even though the defense’s claim is correct?

Warner says the best way to talk to a jury is with analogies. So, you have got a seat failure case, and the seat passed all the regulations. The defense is going to hammer this point. But you should still win, because those standards don’t even come close to measuring what a passenger is going to experience in a real wreck, which every manufacturer knows will happen. The product can, and should, exceed the standards. If they know a standard is inadequate to measure real-life consequences, then anything less than testing to those real-life consequences is negligent conduct. At least that’s what the law says.

It’s Warner’s belief that he needs to ask the jury about these arguments, and to do it through an analogy. Analogies, especially in voir dire, don’t need to be perfect. They just need to illustrate the point and get the jury talking about it. The side that wins the trial will be the side that successfully frames the facts in voir dire and opening. So, dealing with a “we passed all the regulations” defense, a plaintiff’s lawyer might ask the jury, “Does anyone here know, or has anyone here ever seen or dealt with, an unsafe driver?” Warner says he would expect many, if not every, hand to go up. No one will ever admit that they are a bad driver. But they generally have no problem believing everyone else is. 

Warner says to ask, “Did the unsafe driver you encountered have a driver’s license?” Again, almost all answers will be “yes.” Still talking to the jury, “I’m going to make a statement, and I want you to raise your hand if you agree with it: Everyone who has a driver’s license must be a safe driver because they passed all the government regulations to get their license.” Warner says he would expect a lot of disagreement on that one. 

Now we can talk about how minimum standards don’t reflect actual safety, in a way that everyone agrees with. Ask follow up questions and get the jury talking. Eventually, you can get to the question you want to ask, “This case is about a bad wreck where we are claiming a seatback failed. The defendant auto manufacturer mostly likely is going to say that it passed all government regulations to be approved for sale. Does anyone believe that just because the minimum safety regulations were met that the seat had to be safe? Or should we see what the company actually knew, and what it did to test it?” Warner adds:

Hopefully, at this point, the jury understands what you are talking about enough to answer that question honestly. If they disagree, get them struck for cause. If they agree, then you have come a long way in framing your case in a light that actually allows jurors to see the truth and not be fooled by wrong-headed, but facially reasonable, arguments. 

AVIATION LITIGATION

A Pattern Of Blame: Boeing Faces New Accusations

In a newly filed lawsuit, it’s said that Boeing tried to blame an Alaska Airlines captain for the January 2024 737 MAX 9 door plug blowout—despite federal investigators finding the failure stemmed from Boeing’s own manufacturing mistakes. Captain Brandon Fisher, who safely landed the aircraft after the panel tore away mid‑flight, is seeking $10 million in damages, saying Boeing’s statements falsely suggested pilot error and caused serious personal and professional harm.

NTSB Findings Contradict Boeing’s Claims

The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) has already determined what caused the door plug to blow out: four important bolts that were supposed to hold the panel in place were never reinstalled during manufacturing. In its 2025 report, the NTSB found that:

• Boeing did not give workers enough training or oversight when they were removing and reinstalling parts;

• The company’s internal systems failed to track whether bolts and hardware were properly removed and replaced; and

• The FAA did not catch Boeing’s ongoing and repeated safety problems. 

These findings directly challenge Boeing’s claim that the pilots were at fault.

The lawsuit also points to a 2025 letter from the FBI telling Captain Fisher that he “may have been the victim of criminally negligent conduct by Boeing,” highlighting how serious the situation is. 

A Pattern Seen Before: Link to Air India Flight 171

The allegations mirror issues uncovered in the Air India Flight 171 crash investigation, where missing documentation, oversight failures, and manufacturing lapses raised major concerns about Boeing’s safety culture. In both cases, Boeing has been accused of deflecting responsibility on to pilots or third parties instead of acknowledging its internal failures.

For the public, the message is clear: whether it’s a catastrophic crash or a mid‑air structural failure, the root problems point to the same breakdowns in accountability and safety practices. 

Our Commitment at Beasley Allen

Beasley Allen continues to investigate aviation defects and hold manufacturers accountable when preventable failures put passengers and crew at risk. Our Aviation Litigation Team is actively involved in the Air India Flight 171 investigation and continues to monitor developments involving the Boeing 787.

Beasley Allen Aviation Litigation Team

When tragedy strikes in the skies, victims and their families need more than sympathy—they deserve justice. Leading the charge in aviation litigation is Beasley Allen lawyer Mike Andrews. Mike, author of Aviation Litigation & Accident Investigation, is one of the Top 10 Aviation Attorneys named by the National Trial Lawyers Association. Mike has represented families impacted by some of the most devastating aviation disasters, including the Boeing 737 Max 8 crashes. Currently, Mike and the Beasley Allen Aviation Litigation Team are seeking justice on behalf of more than 140 families affected by the Air India Flight 171 crash. 

Aviation crashes often make headlines due to their devastating impact. But behind every incident is a story of preventable failure. Whether you are seeking answers after a catastrophic airline disaster or a loved one was injured in a helicopter or small plane crash, an experienced aviation accident lawyer can help navigate the legal complexities and fight for the compensation you deserve.

Mike Andrews, LaBarron Boone, and Dana Taunton, from our Personal Injury & Products Liability Section, compose our Aviation Litigation Team. Other Beasley Allen lawyers in the Section assist the team with individual cases as needed. 

EMPLOYMENT LITIGATION

New DOL Opinion Letter Program: A Strategic Tool In Sexual Assault Case Development

The U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) has relaunched and expanded its Opinion Letter program. These changes allow lawyers and their clients a practical way to secure formal agency interpretations from federal agencies including Wage and Hour (WHD) and Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). While opinion letters are not binding on courts, they can serve as persuasive authority and illuminate employer duties relevant to workplace sexual assault claims especially around prevention, reporting, and retaliation. 

Early, authoritative agency guidance can frame duties around reporting channels, antiretaliation, hazard recognition, and workplace safety planning. Even in jurisdictions where case law is unsettled, a DOL letter can be a compelling signal of what the federal regulator expects from employers.

What is it?

A DOL opinion letter is a formal, written interpretation applying federal labor laws to a specific fact pattern. Anyone—workers, employers, lawyers—can request one. Once issued, it is publicly posted and becomes part of the agency’s interpretive record.

What’s new?

In June 2025, DOL restored and broadened the program so that employers and practitioners can request guidance not only from WHD, but also from OSHA, EBSA, and VETS (with MSHA operating through its own platform). This marks a return to a compliance tool that has waxed and waned with different administrations, and it’s now positioned as a crossagency resource to reduce ambiguity and support proactive compliance.

Uses:

• Clarifying Employer Duties: Sexual assault in the workplace often intersects with federal obligations on safety (OSHA), hours and pay during leave or suspension (WHD), benefits impacts (EBSA), and protections for service members (VETS). Opinion letters can clarify preventive measures, reporting protocols, and anti-retaliation protections.
  
• Persuasive Authority and Litigation Strategy: Courts are not bound by opinion letters, but plaintiffs can use them to educate judges and juries about industry standards and regulatory expectations.

• PreSuit Leverage: Obtain clarity on employer obligations before filing, shaping demand letters and mediation posture.

• Discovery Roadmap: Use agency guidance to structure depositions and document requests.

• Settlement Pressure: Demonstrate that the employer’s practices diverged from published federal interpretation—raising exposure and the likelihood of punitive or enhanced damages under state law.

• Trial Narrative: Offer jurors a credible, nonparty reference point for employer duties. In sexual assault cases arising from workplace conditions, clarity is power. The DOL’s expanded Opinion Letter program equips referring and plaintiff lawyers with authoritative, practical interpretations that can frame employer duties, shape discovery, and increase settlement leverage – without revealing live litigation details.

Our Employment Law Litigation Team continues to monitor these important changes in employment law in an effort to provide better representation to our clients and referral lawyers who partner with our firm on employment cases. You can contact our firm about these employment issues. Lawyers on our Employment Law Litigation Team are set out below. 

The Beasley Allen Employment Litigation Team

Lawyers on our firm’s Employment Litigation Team continue to handle a number of employment-related litigation cases around the country. They also handle the firm’s Qui Tam Litigation (Whistleblower cases). Whistleblowers can also have a retaliation claim related to their False Claims Act (FCA) claim. Quite often, an employee as a whistleblower will be the “original source” of an FCA claim. 

Our Employment Litigation Team has had tremendous success in both employment cases and qui tam cases. Currently, the team is pursuing some high-profile cases in courts around the country. We will write more on the FCA litigation in the Whistleblower Section.

Whistleblower Litigation

DOJ Announces Record $6.8 Billion In False Claims Act Recoveries For 2025

The U.S. Department of Justice reported a historic $6.8 billion recovered under the False Claims Act (FCA) in fiscal year 2025—the largest annual total ever, and more than double the $2.9 billion recovered in 2024. This new record surpasses the previous high of $6.2 billion set in 2014.

Healthcare fraud remained the dominant driver of FCA activity, accounting for more than $5.7 billion in recoveries. DOJ highlighted major successes in managed care, prescription drug fraud, and medically unnecessary services. Beyond healthcare, the agency also pursued fraud involving government procurement, contractor cybersecurity violations, pandemicrelated fraud, and customs or tariff evasion.

Whistleblower activity reached unprecedented levels, with 1,297 qui tam suits filed—more than ever before—and 401 governmentinitiated investigations. By comparison, 2024 saw 979 filings, representing a 37% increase over 2023.

Significant verdicts in 2025 included a $1.6 billion judgment against Johnson & Johnson’s Janssen for illegally promoting HIV medications Prezista and Intelence, and a $289 million relatorsecured verdict against CVS Caremark for Medicare Part D overbilling.

Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche described combating fraud as a top priority, emphasizing that the record-setting year demonstrates the FCA’s continuing strength as a tool to safeguard taxpayer funds.

Source: Law360

$54.4 Million False Claims Act Settlement For Evading Customs Duties 

The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has announced that a Charlotte, North Carolina-based distributor of tungsten carbide products, agreed to pay $54.4 million to resolve allegations that the company violated the False Claims Act (FCA) by knowingly and improperly failing to pay duties owed on tungsten carbide products imported from the People’s Republic of China (China).

When goods are imported into the United States, an importer must declare the country of origin of the goods, the classification of the goods, whether the goods are subject to duties, and among other things the amount of duties owed. The U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) collect applicable duties, including Section 301 tariffs imposed by the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative. 

Section 301 tariffs protect U.S. industry by imposing trade sanctions on foreign countries that violate U.S. trade agreements or engage in other unreasonable acts that burden U.S. commerce. During the relevant time period, Chinese-manufactured tungsten carbide products were subject to Section 301 tariffs.

The Ceratizit settlement resolves allegations brought by a whistleblower (Mark Stover) under the qui tam provisions of the False Claims Act (FCA). According to Stover’s complaint, from August 2020 through March 2024, Ceratizit knowingly misrepresented the country of origin on Chinese-manufactured tungsten carbide products. The qui tam complaint alleged that Ceratizit knew these products had been manufactured in China and transshipped to Taiwan before being shipped to the United States. 

Ceratizit allegedly misrepresented to CBP that the products originated in Taiwan rather than China to avoid paying applicable Section 301 tariffs. Additionally, the settlement also resolved allegations that from June 2015 through March 2024, Ceratizit knowingly misclassified tungsten carbide products using the incorrect Harmonized Tariff Schedule code to further reduce the duties owed to CBP.  

Equally as important, the settlement resolves allegations that certain merchandise imported by Ceratizit was not marked with the country of origin, and the company failed to pay marking duties owed to CBP before distributing the unmarked products to consumers within the United States. Assistant Attorney General Brett A. Shumate of the Justice Department’s Civil Division stated: 

Import duties are a powerful tool for protecting American industry. This settlement once again demonstrates that the Department of Justice will zealously pursue those who seek an unfair advantage in U.S. markets by evading customs duties.

Commissioner Rodney S. Scott of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), added: 

Attempts at duty evasion have always existed, regardless of the tariff environment. These schemes are vast and complex, but CBP professionals are well-trained and positioned to detect, deter, and disrupt tariff evasion schemes to ensure that duties are paid.

The Ceratizit settlement marks the successful collaboration of whistleblower involvement and government agency action. On August 29, 2025, the Department of Justice launched a cross-agency Trade Fraud Task Force to enhance efforts to combat and prevent trade fraud that deprives the government of vital revenue, threatens critical domestic industries, undermines consumer confidence, and weakens national security. 

The Task Force supplements existing coordination mechanisms within the Department of Justice and the Department of Homeland Security, to aggressively pursue enforcement actions against any parties who seek to evade tariffs and other duties, as well as smugglers who seek to import prohibited goods into the American economy. The Justice Department encourages whistleblowers to utilize the qui tam provisions of the False Claims Act to alert the government to credible allegations of fraud. 

Beasley Allen lawyers have been successful in many False Claims Act cases. They have successfully tried False Claims Act cases and obtained favorable verdicts. If you are aware of fraud, abuse or waste being committed against the federal government or a state government. You could have a whistleblower lawsuit claim. 

Source: Department of Justice

The Beasley Allen Whistleblower Litigation Team  

Beasley Allen lawyers continue to represent whistleblowers in litigation around the country. Claims continue to be made against multiple bad actors in the corporate world. The widespread Whistleblower litigation has been increasing nationwide at a rapid pace. However, there has recently been strong opposition to the litigation instigated and carried out by some powerful forces in Corporate America. Beasley Allen lawyers are watching this activity closely.

If you are aware of fraud being committed against the federal or state governments, you could be rewarded for reporting the fraud.  If you have questions about whether you qualify as a whistleblower or you need help with a case, a Beasley Allen lawyer will be glad to make a free and confidential evaluation of your claim at 800-898-2034 or by email.   

Lawyers on our Whistleblower Litigation Team are listed below. You can contact Michelle Fulmer, Director of our Consumer Fraud & Commercial Litigation Section. Members of the team include: Lance Gould, Larry Golston, Lauren Miles, Leon Hampton, Jessi Haynes and Tyner Helms.

SECURITIES AND ANTITRUST LITIGATION

“Bet The Company” Litigation

Antitrust cases and class actions are sometimes described as “bet-the-company” cases. Or they can be, depending on what is at issue.  It is a particularly apt description for antitrust claims, when the entire structure of the company/defendant is the basis for the anticompetitive allegations, a loss can mean the destruction of the company.  Because of this possible impact of a loss, company/defendants are rarely willing to risk trial. 

Despite the risk to the defendants, Michael Jordan’s case against NASCAR took eight days of trial and more than 50 hours of testimony to finally reach a settlement; one that the judge had prodded the parties to negotiate in their high-stakes antitrust battle. The risk in the case was losing NASCAR’s charter system, which started in 2016. According to trial testimony, charters offered the teams more stability in the form of guaranteed starting spots in all Cup Series races and a cut of NASCAR’s media revenue deals with major networks. 

But the teams—Front Row Motorsports and Jordan’s 23XI Racing—in the October 2024 lawsuit, accused NASCAR of using the charter contracts to maintain its monopoly. They sought more than $364 million in damages at trial, including lost profits, reduction in future market value and lost revenues from racing open in 2025. 

When informing Judge Bell of the mostly confidential settlement on Dec. 11, he quipped: “I wish we could have done this a few months ago, but I think it was the right thing to do.”

Antitrust trials were previously a rarity. However, experts say there has been an uptick in the number of antitrust suits that make it to a jury, particularly those involving sports leagues. For this one, between the celebrities and the high stakes, experts agreed the tensions of a trial may have been the final push the parties needed to compromise — no matter the impracticality.

ports leagues. For this one, between the celebrities and the high stakes, experts agreed the tensions of a trial may have been the final push the parties needed to compromise — no matter the impracticality.

Workplace Litigation

Beasley Allen Mobile Office settles On-The-Job Injury Case

On-the-job accidents are some of the most common causes of injuries we see in our practice. Workers injured on the job are usually entitled to workers’ compensation benefits. Workers’ compensation is referred to as an exclusive remedy, meaning that it is often an injured employee’s only option for recovering damages as a result of their accident. 

Simply put, an employee cannot sue their employer for negligence if they are subject to worker’s compensation. 

Workers’ compensation is a no-fault system, in that, the injured employee will receive benefits for lost wages, medical care and rehabilitation, even if the worker plays some role in causing the injuries. The no fault system provides a quick and easy remedy for minor on-the-job injuries. In minor injury cases, or when the employee may have contributed to their accident, it is likely the best remedy and only option. 

However, if the on-the-job injury is severe, workers’ compensation benefits will more than likely not adequately compensate the injured employee. For this reason, it is important to investigate severe on-the-job injuries and determine if there is a potential for any third-party liability.

After it is determined that an injury is severe, it is important to fully understand how the accident occurred. If the injured party played some role in their injury, workers’ compensation benefits may still be the best bet for recovering for those injuries. However, if the accident was the fault of others, one or more of the exceptions to the exclusive remedy principle may apply. 

One of the most common exclusions is third party liability. If some third party caused or contributed to the injured employee’s accident, the employee may have a cause of action in tort against that party. 

Third party liability is commonly seen in the form of products liability. When an employee is injured on the job by a defective or unreasonably dangerous product, the employee likely can bring a products liability action. 

Other common exceptions stem from injuries caused by third parties working on the premises of the employer. Because there is no employment relationship between the injured and the third party, workers’ compensation does not apply.

On-the-job accidents happen every day. Workers’ compensation can provide adequate remedies to those injured on the job in minor injury cases or when the employee may have contributed to their accident. However, there are many shortfalls in the workers’ compensation laws and oftentimes seriously injured employees do not receive adequate compensation. It is important to thoroughly investigate each on-the-job injury to ensure no viable claims or remedies are left on the table. 

Beasley Allen lawyer, Evan Allen in our Mobile, Ala., office, recently settled a severe on-the-job injury case involving third party negligence.

On-The-Job Injuries In Georgia

Under Georgia law, “[w]hen an employee is injured on the job, his recovery is normally limited to workers’ compensation benefits.” O.C.G.A. § 34-9-11; Bush v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 361 Ga. App. 475, 476 (2021). The workers’ compensation scheme is intended to quickly provide compensation for lost wages and medical bills, without requiring the employee to prove fault. However, “[w]orkers’ compensation has never been intended to make the employee whole – it excludes benefits for pain and suffering, for loss of consortium, and it provides a cap on wage benefits.” Doss v. Food Lion, Inc., 267 Ga. 312, 313 (1996). For that reason, it is important for lawyers who are bringing a workers compensation claim or evaluating an on-the-job injury to look for a third-party tortfeasor.

A key hurdle that all injured parties in Georgia must overcome when bringing a claim against a third-party tortfeasor for an on-the-job injury is the comparative fault rule. Under Georgia law, a plaintiff is not “entitled to receive any damages if the plaintiff is 50 percent or more responsible for the injury or damages claimed.” O.C.G.A. § 51-12-33 (g). Furthermore, even if the plaintiff is less than 50% responsible for their injury, their recovery will still be reduced by their proportion of fault. O.C.G.A. § 51-12-33 (a). The jury is responsible for determining the plaintiff’s percentage of fault. O.C.G.A. § 51-12-33 (a). 

Therefore, if a plaintiff is injured on the job, it is crucial to preserve all evidence because third-party tortfeasors will often argue that the plaintiff was responsible for their injury. Some key steps that can be taken to preserve evidence include obtaining police or internal reports regarding the incident, pictures and videos, witnesses’ names and contact details, contracts or other documents identifying subcontractors or third parties, and documents or information regarding rules and regulations on the job site.

Actual Or Constructive Notice Of The Hazard In A Premises Case

For a plaintiff to recover under a premises liability theory, the defendant must have superior knowledge of the hazard that caused the injury. Thus, courts analyze both parties’ knowledge of the specific hazard to assess liability. However, “specific” is not as narrow as it sounds. It refers to the hazardous condition itself, not every precise detail about its contours or location.

For example, in SMG Construction Srvs, LLC v. Cook, 922 S.E.2d 76 (2025), plaintiff Cook fell from an unguarded ledge while working on a construction project. Cook admitted he knew the ledge was exposed, but when he fell, “existing conditions affected his ability to perceive” the exact point of drop-off. Id. at 78. The trial court granted summary judgment to SMG, concluding Cook had actual knowledge of the hazard. The Court of Appeals reversed, noting that although Cook knew the ledge existed, he lacked actual knowledge of his proximity to it, creating fact issues regarding superior knowledge. Id. at 79.

The Georgia Supreme Court vacated and remanded, holding the Court of Appeals improperly conflated actual and constructive knowledge, and that “[a] plaintiff’s misapprehension of the precise details of a known hazard does not negate his actual knowledge of that hazard.” Id. at 82. Or, as the court discussed in footnote 5: “[A] plaintiff cannot negate his knowledge of a hazard by defining that hazard so narrowly that the defendant must show the plaintiff actually knew of each and every detail underlying the hazard that caused the harm.”

The Cook case illustrates that conditions like lighting, obstructions, or even confusion may create fact issues about whether the hazard was open and obvious for constructive knowledge purposes. But they do not erase or defeat an admission of pre-existing actual knowledge. Plaintiff lawyers cannot avoid the consequences of an actual knowledge admission by slicing the hazard into finer details.

Class Action Litigation

What Is A Class Action?

We have written a great deal in prior issues about class action litigation. I realize that many lawyers do not handle class action litigation. So, it might be good to start with a basic description of what a class action actually is. This will help those who don’t handle this type of litigation.

A class action is a type of lawsuit where one or more plaintiffs file a case on behalf of a larger group of people (the “class”) who have suffered similar harm. Instead of thousands of individuals filing separate lawsuits, their claims are combined into a single case. This approach does the following:

• It levels the playing field against large corporations or institutions;

• Reduces legal costs by sharing expenses among many plaintiffs; and

• Ensures consistent outcomes for all affected parties.

Key Features

• Collective Representation: The class is represented by lead plaintiffs and lawyers who act for all parties in the group.

• Common Issues: All class members share similar legal or factual questions.

• Court Certification: A judge must certify the class under rules like Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, ensuring requirements such as:

• Numerosity: The group is large enough that individual suits would be impractical.

• Commonality: There are shared legal or factual issues.

• Typicality: Lead plaintiffs’ claims are typical of the class.

• Adequacy: Representation is fair and without conflicts.

Why It Matters

Class actions make it possible for individuals with claims that don’t justify a single case filing to have their day in court. These claims may include defective products, data breaches, or unfair business practices. Class fillings allow claimants to seek justice collectively. These cases often result in significant settlements and can drive industry-wide changes.

It’s important to know that in 2025, 1,761 class action lawsuits around the country were settled for $79 billion. That was nearly double the previous year’s total. This information is according to Duane Morris’ Class Action Review.

As stated above, an individual case with the potential for a large recovery won’t be suitable for class treatment. Those claims should be handled on their own in single party filings. However, the class action approach is still greatly important and that approach is clearly needed. I will mention some of the class action work done by our firm below. 

Record Results In Auto Defect And Consumer Class Action Cases

Beasley Allen has achieved some of the largest consumer protection results in the country during the past year. Lawyers in our Consumer Fraud & Commercial Litigation Section have obtained major victories for drivers, policyholders, and everyday consumers harmed by corporate misconduct. These results reflect our firm’s longstanding commitment to holding powerful companies accountable and protecting the public from dangerous products and unfair business practices. Many of the cases are in the area of class action litigation. 

Major auto defect settlements by Beasley Allen lawyers protect drivers nationwide. Our Auto Defect Class Action Litigation Team secured more than $860 million in settlements last year against some of the world’s largest automakers, including:

• $175 million GM settlement after the case was tried to verdict;

• $230 million Subaru settlement;

• $170 million Mazda settlement; and

• $289 million Toyota settlement.

These cases involved serious safety defects that put millions of motor vehicle drivers and passengers at risk. Working alongside law firms across the country, Beasley Allen lawyers helped ensure consumers received compensation and that automakers were held responsible for failing to provide safe, reliable vehicles.

A Record Setting Year for Consumer Fraud & Commercial Litigation

Beyond auto defect litigation, lawyers in our Consumer Fraud & Commercial Litigation Section achieved a historic $3.3 Billion last year in settlements and judgments. That includes:

• The $2.8 billion Blue Cross Blue Shield settlement, one of the largest antitrust settlements in U.S. history;

• Significant recoveries involving manufacturers of child safety products; and

• Major settlements against insurance companies and other corporate defendants.

These results demonstrate our firm’s ability to take on complex, high stakes cases and deliver meaningful outcomes for consumers, businesses, and communities nationwide. 

Leading More Than a Dozen Major Class Actions Across the Country

Beasley Allen is currently leading over a dozen major class action cases, including:

• Automotive defect litigation;

• Consumer fraud and deceptive practices;

• Data privacy and cybersecurity cases; and

• Commercial litigation involving large corporate defendants.

Beasley Allen continues to work closely with law firms across the United States to pursue justice in cases that have national impact. We are committed to partnering with lawyers who share our mission of protecting consumers and holding corporations accountable for their wrongdoing.

A National Leader in Consumer Protection

Beasley Allen’s work in class action litigation is driven by a simple goal: to make products safer, markets fairer, and corporations more accountable. If you have questions or need help with a case involving an auto defect, deceptive business practice, data breach, or other corporate wrongdoing, our lawyers are available to help. We welcome the opportunity to collaborate with firms nationwide on cases that can make a meaningful difference for consumers. 

Update On Honda Idle Stop Class Action Settlement

Beasley Allen lawyers represent plaintiffs and class members in a certified class action lawsuit against American Honda Motor Co., Inc. (Honda), filed in California Federal Court. The case is In re Honda Idle Stop Litigation, in the United States District Court for the Central District of California. 

Plaintiffs alleged that their vehicles’ Automatic Idle Stop (AIS) systems are defective, posing an unreasonable risk of shutting down and failing to restart as intended—a problem Honda internally labeled as “no-restart.” Honda developed a more durable starter motor (the A53 starter) to address this issue. However, Honda required Class Members to first complete a mandatory software update and, if the problem persists, demanded that the no-restart condition be reproduced at a dealership before qualifying for a warranty replacement. 

On October 3, 2024, U.S. District Court Judge Mark C. Scarsi, finding the requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 23 satisfied, granted class certification for the following 13 states: Alabama, California, Connecticut, Indiana, Louisiana, Maryland, New Hampshire, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Texas, Virginia, and Washington.  Our named plaintiffs represent current and former drivers of Honda’s model year 2015-2021 Pilot, Ridgeline, and Passport vehicles, and Acura TLX and MDX vehicles, equipped with a 3.5L NP0 engine, nine-speed automatic transmission, and an A52 starter motor assembly (the Class Vehicles).

On October 17, 2024, Honda subsequently entered a Notice of Appeal in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals regarding Judge Scarsi’s order certifying the 13 state classes. On January 31, 2025, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals denied Honda’s petition finding that Judge Scarsi’s ruling on Class Certification was proper. 

In July 2025, Class Counsel secured a nationwide class settlement for plaintiffs and class members. Importantly, the previous verification hurdle has been removed, so when class members report the no restart failure to their local Honda or Acura dealership, they will automatically qualify for free repairs, including valve adjustments and a new starter motor. 

The settlement also provides a 10-year warranty extension from the original lease or purchase date, and Honda will extend the claim period for 24 months for 2015 models and 18 months for 2016 models, starting from the date of preliminary approval. Additionally, customers who previously paid out-of-pocket for starter, starter relay, or valve adjustment repairs may be eligible for reimbursement by submitting timely claim forms and documentation.

Importantly, during the settlement process Class Counsel identified a discrepancy of 28,712 vehicles, which were not previously included as vehicles equipped with the Automatic Idle Stop system. Class Counsel is pleased to announce that the previously omitted vehicles have been included in the Class, and direct notice to owners and lessees of these vehicles is scheduled to be sent out shortly. 

Final approval will not be sought until notice has been sent to these class members and they have had adequate time to opt out or present objections. This ensures all eligible vehicle owners and lessees are appropriately informed and can obtain the direct benefits of the settlement.

The plaintiffs/class members are represented by Beasley Allen lawyers Dee Miles, Clay Barnett, Demet Basar, Rebecca Gilliland, Mitch Williams, Dylan Martin, and Trent Mann, along with the firm Andrew T. Trailor, P.A. and lawyers with DiCello Levitt, LLP.  We will keep our readers informed on developments in this important litigation.  

AdaptHealth To Pay Investors $35 Million To End Inflated-Sales Suit

Medical device provider AdaptHealth Corp. has agreed to pay $35 million to settle a lawsuit accusing it of deceiving shareholders about its revenue projections. It was alleged that the company “routinely engaged in improper and unethical tactics to inflate sales numbers.” 

The parties sought preliminary approval of the class action settlement, telling a judge in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania that the $35 million will be paid by the company’s insurance plans. The case is In Re: AdaptHealth Corp. Securities Litigation, case number 2:23-cv-04104, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. A memorandum filed by the lead plaintiffs stated:

The settlement obtains all of the company’s available insurance — before the most significant litigation costs began— and eliminates the real risks that protracted litigation might lead to a lesser or no recovery, and instead guarantees a substantial, near-term recovery for the settlement class. 

The settlement, if approved, would end two years of litigation over a multimillion-dollar write-down that suing investors alleged was caused by billing customers and government insurance plans for medical supplies they didn’t order or need. 

These practices occurred at the dozens of competitors that AdaptHealth was snapping up beginning in 2020, with the company gutting compliance practices at those newly acquired businesses, according to the lawsuit.

The investors claim in their lawsuit that the cracks started to show in 2023 with a series of company disclosures that eventually led to the multimillion-dollar write-down and caused the stock price to lose nearly 84% of its value compared with a class period high of $40.15 in August 2020.

The class includes those who purchased or acquired stock between Aug. 4, 2020, and Nov. 7, 2023. 

James Eubank and Paul Evans are the primary lawyers in our firm who handle our securities/investment litigation. Dee Miles, who heads our Consumer Fraud & Commercial Litigation Section, oversees this litigation. Our lawyers monitor changes in the law and the other activities that help them provide better representation of our clients.

Vanguard Investors Win Final Approved In $25 Million Tax Suit Settlements

A Pennsylvania federal judge has finalized a $25 million settlement to end a class action accusing Vanguard of triggering an asset sell-off that saddled investors with capital gains taxes. The case is In re: Vanguard Chester Funds Litigation, case number 2:22-cv-00955, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. Beasley Allen lawyer James Eubank was part of the class action team. 

The settlement is the “result of good faith, arm’s-length negotiations between experienced counsel” representing the parties’ interests, U.S. District Judge John Murphy said in a final order.

Judge Murphy approved the settlement after reviewing the terms. He preliminarily approved the $25 million payout in September. Lawyers for the investors then asked the judge for an $8.3 million award in December, saying it was a reasonable amount for the more than 6,100 hours they had spent litigating the action. Judge Murphy approved the award. 

The settlement stemmed from a March 2022 class action lawsuit against Vanguard filed by former investors who claimed the company had breached its fiduciary duty by failing to protect smaller investors in an attempt to lower fees. Investors of what are known as set-it-and-forget-it funds were forced to sell off as much as 15% of their assets, leaving those with taxable accounts holding the bag.

It should be noted that the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission and dozens of state regulators also targeted Vanguard over the same conduct. In that dispute, regulators said the investment company lowered the threshold for retail investors to switch from its Investor Target Retirement Funds to its Institutional Target Retirement Funds. The rebalancing of those funds when larger investors left for the Institutional Funds stuck ordinary investors with large capital gains tax bills.

In January of last year, Vanguard agreed to pay the SEC and state regulators to settle the asset sell-off dispute. That agreement also ordered Vanguard to make good on a then-pending $40 million settlement in the class action that Judge Murphy had initially approved in November 2024.

After the SEC settlement, Judge Murphy rejected the $40 million proposed class action settlement amount in part because the SEC settlement covered the same funds but would not incur attorney’s fees. The new class settlement secures additional relief for harmed investors, in addition to the 2025 regulatory settlement. 

As stated above, Beasley Allen’s James Eubank was part of the class litigation team. He specifically represented the interest of a Colorado investor who served as one of the class representatives. When Vanguard changed the Target Retirement Funds James’ client was hit with tax bills from the IRS and State of Colorado that totaled more than $100,000. Because of the class action, much of the investor’s losses were recovered.

MASS TORTS LITIGATION

Understanding Mass Torts: A Path To Justice For Many

The concept of mass tort litigation may not be fully understood by a lawyer when a case comes into their office. The lawyer may have a very good mass tort case and not realize it or its full impact. So, let’s take a look at mass torts litigation in some detail.

Mass torts litigation is a powerful legal mechanism designed to help individuals who have suffered harm from the same defective product, event, or corporate misconduct. Unlike class actions, where one lawsuit represents an entire group, mass torts allow each plaintiff to maintain their individual claim while benefiting from the efficiency of consolidated proceedings with other plaintiffs. This structure ensures that compensation sought reflects the unique circumstances of each case.

What is a Mass Tort?

A mass tort arises when a single negligent act or a defective product injures

numerous people. Common examples include:

• Consumer product failures leading to widespread injuries;

• Dangerous pharmaceuticals causing undisclosed side effects; and

• Defective medical devices such as implants or surgical tools.

These cases often proceed through Multidistrict Litigation (MDL) in federal courts. An MDL consolidates pretrial processes while preserving individual claims. This approach balances judicial efficiency with fairness for victims.

Why Mass Torts Matter

Mass torts empower individuals to stand against large corporations that might

otherwise evade accountability. The mass torts approach provides access to justice for those who lack the resources to fight alone, ensuring that companies are held responsible for negligence, inadequate testing, or failure to warn consumers.

Beasley Allen: Helps Lead the Charge in Mass Tort Litigation

Beasley Allen has earned national recognition for its commitment to helping those harmed by defective products and corporate misconduct. The firm’s Mass Torts Section, led by Andy Birchfield, has successfully litigated landmark cases involving pharmaceuticals, medical devices, and consumer products. From Vioxx and Xarelto to talc and social media-related claims, Beasley Allen has secured billions in verdicts and settlements, shaping industry standards and protecting public health. 

Our approach at Beasley Allen combines deep legal experience with compassion for clients, ensuring that justice is not just a principle but a practice. For a look at the full list of cases we are handling, visit our website: https://www.beasleyallen.com/recent-cases.

Infant Formula Litigation Update

Beasley Allen continues to aggressively litigate infant formula cases for children who have suffered from necrotizing enterocolitis as a result of being fed infant formula derived from cow’s milk as a newborn. Giving “cow’s milk” formula to premature, underweight infants dramatically increases their risk of getting this permanent, life-threatening condition. Virtually every pediatric health organization in the world encourages mothers to breastfeed their premature newborn if possible, or use human donor milk when breastfeeding is not feasible. Non-cow’s milk formulas are the third recommended option.

Federal court lawsuits against Mead Johnson (maker of Enfamil products) and Abbott Laboratories (maker of Similac products) are pending in an MDL established in the Northern District of Illinois, U.S. District Judge Rebecca Pallmeyer presiding. Most of Beasley Allen’s current cases are pending in Illinois state court in Madison County, IL.

Our lawyers recently received some good news from Illinois Appellate Court. The court upheld the trial court’s denial of defendants’ motions to dismiss for improper venue. The Illinois Supreme Court denied cert on the appeal. That should be the final remaining obstacle to advancing this litigation in Madison County. The trial court scheduled a tentative status conference last month. 

Hair Relaxer Litigation Update

The state court Hair Relaxer Litigation in Cook County, Illinois under Judge Sarah Johnson recently ruled in plaintiffs’ favor on several key causes of action, including design defect, failure to warn, and negligence. Beasley Allen’s hair relaxer litigation team is now set for trial in January of 2027.

The hair relaxer multidistrict litigation (MDL) in the Northern District of Illinois also received several key decisions from Judge Mary Rowland at the end of 2025. As part of the bellwether process, each of the 32 plaintiffs filed short form complaints against the various defendants, the defendants then jointly responded to these short form complaints with numerous boilerplate affirmative defenses that were not specific or tailored enough to any of the defenses such that plaintiff could meaningfully respond to them. 

Plaintiffs then filed motions to strike, at which point defendants followed up with amended affirmative defenses. Upon reviewing all these materials, Judge Rowland ruled that plaintiffs’ motions to strike as to failure to join a necessary party, assumption of risk, and intervening/superseding cause were denied. The motion to strike as to laches was ruled moot as the plaintiffs have withdrawn their motion to strike on this defense, and the motion to strike was granted as to waiver and unclean hands.

City Of San Francisco Sues Ultra-Processed Food Giants

The City of San Francisco has sued food industry giants Kraft Heinz, General Mills, and Nestle USA due to their aggressive marketing of dangerous ultra-processed foods (UPFs) as staples in the America diet despite knowledge of numerous adverse health consequences. The lawsuit alleges that the increased availability of UPFs coincides with a spike in type 2 diabetes, cancers, obesity, and other life-threatening chronic diseases such as non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD).

The lawsuit further alleges that these UPFs come with addictive qualities, with food giants well aware of these consequences and failing to make their foods safer. 

Instead, UPF manufacturers used similar tactics to that of the tobacco industry to market its products to children to addict them young and continue the cycle of addiction and unhealthy eating habits into adulthood. 

Ultimately the lawsuit alleges that UPF companies created an avoidable public health crisis, with claims rooted in California’s Unfair Competition Law and public nuisance theories.

This is yet another example of big business poisoning for profit. Beasley Allen lawyers are honored to be at the forefront of this litigation advocating for minors who have suffered harms from UPFs, including type 2 diabetes and NAFLD.

FDA Safety Alert Highlights Risks Associated With Popular Eczema Medication Dupixent

In late 2024, the FDA issued a statement warning against the potential for serious risks associated with the popular eczema medication Dupixent (dupilumab). The FDA safety alert pertaining to Dupixent highlights an increase in adverse events reported to the FDA through its Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) alleging a rise of cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL). CTCL is a rare group of blood cancers that fall within the purview of non-Hodgkin lymphoma. 

The FDA’s alert was published on its website soon after the Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology published a cohort study finding that there was a significant increased risk of CTCL in patients being treated for atopic dermatitis with Dupixent.

TOXIC TORT LITIGATION

What Is A Toxic Tort?

I have been asked many times this question – even by lawyers: “what is a toxic tort?” So I will give all of our readers a brief explanation. Hopefully, it will be helpful to all – even “veteran lawyers” like me – when a potential toxic tort case comes into the office.  

A toxic tort is a type of personal injury lawsuit that arises when the plaintiff suffers harm from exposure to a dangerous chemical or substance. These cases often involve claims that exposure to toxins—such as hazardous chemicals, pharmaceuticals, or environmental pollutants—caused serious health problems or injuries and even death.

Common Examples of Toxic Torts

Some common examples of toxic torts cases include the following:

• Water Contamination – Water contamination occurs when harmful chemicals or pollutants enter drinking water sources, often through industrial waste, chemical spills, or improper disposal. Exposure can lead to serious health issues, including cancer, birth defects, and neurological disorders. Beasley Allen has handled major water contamination cases, such as PCB groundwater contamination, securing a $700 million settlement, the largest private groundwater contamination settlement in U.S. history. The firm is also leading litigation under the Camp Lejeune Justice Act for victims exposed to toxic chemicals in water. 

• Occupational Exposure – Workers in industries such as manufacturing, agriculture, and construction often face exposure to hazardous substances like asbestos, benzene, pesticides, and industrial chemicals. These exposures can cause long-term illnesses, including respiratory diseases, cancer, and neurological conditions. Beasley Allen represents employees harmed by unsafe workplace conditions and fights to hold employers and manufacturers accountable.

• Environmental Exposure – Environmental exposure impacts entire communities when pollutants contaminate air, soil, or water. Common sources include industrial plants, chemical spills, and waste disposal sites. These exposures can lead to widespread health problems and property damage. Beasley Allen has been involved in landmark environmental cases, including the BP Oil Spill and coal ash contamination, recovering millions for affected individuals and communities.

Beasley Allen: Leaders in Toxic Tort Litigation

We have a proven track record at Beasley Allen of helping those persons impacted by toxic exposure. We understand the profound effects on a person’s health and finances. From small communities to entire regions, Beasley Allen is dedicated to seeking justice for those affected. Our lawyers are committed to protecting individuals, communities, local governments, and even states from the dangers of toxic chemicals and environmental pollution caused by negligence or intentional wrongdoing.

Roundup Cancer Claims: Who Qualifies and How to File

If a person has used Roundup weed killer and was later diagnosed with nonHodgkin lymphoma or another blood cancer, they may be eligible to file a Roundup lawsuit. Beasley Allen lawyers in our Toxic Torts Section have represented a large number of individuals harmed by Roundup exposure, and our lawyers are actively reviewing new cases.

Despite Bayer’s large settlement announcements, thousands of Roundup lawsuits remain unresolved, and new cancer diagnoses continue to surface on a regular basis. Ongoing litigation and jury verdicts continue to raise concerns about the safety of glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup.

Who Qualifies for a Roundup Lawsuit?

A person may be eligible to file a Roundup claim if they:

• Used Roundup at home, work, or on farms;

• Were later diagnosed with nonHodgkin lymphoma, Bcell leukemia, Tcell leukemia, or chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL); and

• Have not previously participated in a Roundup settlement.

If a person developed cancer after Roundup exposure, they may still have time to pursue compensation. So, let’s review the Roundup litigation. 

What Is Roundup?

Roundup is one of the most widely used herbicides in the world. First introduced by Monsanto in 1974 and later acquired by Bayer in 2018, Roundup is commonly used in:

• Agriculture

• Landscaping

• Commercial groundskeeping

• Home gardening

The product’s active ingredient, glyphosate, kills weeds by blocking essential plant proteins. Roundup is sold in many formulations, including:

• Roundup ReadytoUse

• Roundup for Lawns

• Roundup Max Control

Glyphosate use has grown dramatically over the past several decades, especially with the rise of genetically modified crops designed to withstand the herbicide. Today, more than 1.4 billion pounds of glyphosate are applied worldwide each year.

Beasley Allen Is Still Taking Roundup Cancer Cases

If you or a loved one used Roundup and later developed nonHodgkin lymphoma or another related cancer, you may still be eligible to file a claim. Our lawyers have been involved in Roundup litigation from the very beginning, and we continue to fight for individuals harmed by this product. 

Paraquat Litigation Update

As of January 6, 2026, the Paraquat multidistrict litigation (MDL) has reached a total of 8,257 cases, with 6,476 still pending before the Southern District of Illinois. Notably, litigation saw a decrease of 499 cases last month, reflecting a trend where more plaintiffs are beginning to settle, indicating a shift in acceptance around the complexities of ongoing legal battles. Federal District Court Judge, Nancy Rosentengel has once again extended the stay on individual cases until March 2026, signaling the court’s focus on encouraging both sides to resolve and finalize a settlement.

The Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) recent announcement to reevaluate the safety of Paraquat, prompted questions about the rationale behind this sudden change. This reevaluation follows a recent settlement with Syngenta, a key manufacturer of herbicide. EPA Administrator Led Zeldin stated that decisive action will be taken if manufacturers cannot thoroughly prove that current Paraquat usage is safe in “real-world conditions”.

The Administrator’s commitment to high safety standards is said to align with the current administration’s “Make America Healthy Again” initiative. Zeldin emphasized that all pesticides must adhere to the “HIGHEST standards of safety, grounded in the best available gold standard science.” However, skepticism remains regarding the specifics of the standards and tests manufacturers will need to meet. This new agenda offers vague insight into what safety issues will be subject to review.

The irony of the EPA’s previous decisions raises critical concerns, especially given the rejection of several studies linking Paraquat exposure to increased risks of Parkinson’s disease. Is the agency’s renewed momentum linked to the increasing scrutiny it faces to uphold its public health responsibilities? A responsibility it’s always had and one that the American public has much reliance and great trust in? Time will tell if the EPA’s actions reveal its true priority.

CONSUMER CORNER

Pharmacy And PBM Enforcement: The Rise Of False Claims Act Scrutiny

The Department of Justice (DOJ) has intensified its use of the False Claims Act (FCA) to police fraud in the pharmaceutical supply chain. According to a December 2025 National Law Review analysis, pharmacies and pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) are now among the DOJ’s primary enforcement targets.

The shift reflects a broader recognition that PBMs and pharmacies act as gatekeepers for government drug spending, particularly in Medicare Part D. Regulators now view pricing submissions, dispensing practices, and contractual arrangements as areas ripe for FCA liability.

Several highprofile actions in 2025 demonstrate how aggressively the DOJ has been pursuing FCA theories against pharmacies and PBMs. For example, in April, DOJ announced its agreement with Walgreens, whereby Walgreens agreed to pay $350 million to settle allegations that it filled unlawful opioid prescriptions and submitted false claims by billing federal programs, such as Medicare, for the related claims. The DOJ used Controlled Substances Act (CSA) violations as a basis for FCA liability, demonstrating its willingness to frame regulatory failures as false claims, thus expanding the reach of the FCA. This case shows how retail pharmacies can face double exposure under the CSA and the FCA.

Additionally, in June, CVS Caremark faced one of the largest PBM-related FCA judgments in history—nearly $290 million—after a federal court found it knowingly submitted or caused the submission of inflated drug prices to Medicare Part D. The case centered on spread pricing and alleged concealment of profit-making strategies. In that same month, the DOJ also announced the largest healthcare fraud takedown in history—charging hundreds of defendants, including pharmacists, for schemes involving opioids and undispensed drugs. Taken together, these coordinated actions highlight a message of uniform enforcement across the market.

The DOJ’s 2025 creation of a new False Claims Act Working Group has signaled an enhanced focus on drug pricing, rebate structures, formulary placement, and price reporting. The government has also tied enforcement efforts to broader policy initiatives across CMS, HHS, the FTC, and Congress. PBMs are encountering heightened risk around pricing data submissions, reporting methodologies, and claims that rely on implied false certification theories—particularly when automated systems generate inconsistent or inaccurate pricing information.  

Federal enforcement in 2025 reflects a systemic shift: PBMs and pharmacies now face scrutiny comparable to that historically directed at drug manufacturers. The alignment of policy reform, whistleblower engagement, and DOJ enforcement tools suggests that this trend will not be shortlived.

Fighting against the unlawful and abusive practices of PBMs is something our firm has committed to pursuing. Our firm has represented states and municipalities regarding the various schemes committed by PBMs and we will continue the fight. 2025 represents a transformative moment in federal oversight of pharmacies and PBMs. FCA enforcement is no longer confined to manufacturers or large-scale national actors. Every point along the pharmaceutical supply chain—pricing algorithms, contract structures, dispensing decisions, audit trails, and redflag controls—is now fair game.

Source: The National Law Review     

THE STRUCTURE OF BEASLEY ALLEN AND CASES HANDLED BY THE FIRM

The Structure Of Beasley Allen Is Designed To Work For Clients 

Beasley Allen is organized in a structure that benefits the clients we represent. The firm operates in five separate sections: four litigation sections and one administrative section. The separate litigation sections concept has worked extremely well for the firm. It has definitely benefited Beasley Allen clients. Lawyers have also brought about needed national changes in product and workplace safety.  

Since our beginning over 45 years ago, Beasley Allen lawyers have handled all sorts of civil litigation for plaintiffs. The Administrative Section supports the four Litigation Sections that could be described as “mini-firms” within Beasley Allen. Those four Litigation Sections are the Mass Torts Section, the Toxic Torts Section, the Consumer Fraud & Commercial Litigation Section, and the Personal Injury & Products Liability Section.  

Each litigation section has a team of lawyers and support staff working closely together, creating efficiency and case proficiency within each section. Successful section performance leads to better firm performance overall, allowing us to expand our resources and enabling firm growth. We believe our approach has allowed us to help more of those who need it most, year after year.  

The Personal Injury & Products Liability Section 

Cole Portis heads our Personal Injury & Products Liability Section with Sloan Downes serving as the Director of the Section. The section handles Auto Accidents, Auto Products, Aviation Accidents, Defective Tires, Negligent Security, On-the-Job Injuries, Premises Liability and Truck Accident cases.  There are 26 lawyers in the Section.

The Mass Torts Section 

Andy Birchfield heads our Mass Torts Section. Melissa Prickett serves as the Section’s Director. With over 50 years of combined legal experience, Andy and Melissa lead the firm’s largest section in medical devices, medication, and other practice areas. The section currently handles cases involving Acetaminophen, Hair Relaxers, Kratom, NEC Baby Formula, Ozempic, Social Media, Roblox, Video Game Addiction, Ultra-Processed Foods, Dupixent, Depo-Provera and Talcum Powder. There are 40 lawyers in the Section.

The Toxic Torts Section 

Rhon Jones leads our firm’s Toxic Torts Section with Section Director Tracie Harrison’s assistance. The section focuses on toxic exposure cases. Recent cases involve Camp Lejeune Water Contamination and Paraquat.  There are 19 lawyers in the Section.

The Consumer Fraud & Commercial Litigation Section 

Dee Miles is the Section Head of our Consumer Fraud & Commercial Litigation Section. Michelle Fulmer is the Director of the Section. The section currently handles cases involving Business Litigation, Class Action, Consumer Protection, Social Media, Securities cases, Civil & Human Rights, Employment Law and Whistleblower cases. There are 16 lawyers in the Section.

The Administrative Section 

The Administrative Section consists of several departments: Accounting, Operations, Human Resources (HR), Information Technology (IT), and Marketing. Michelle Parks serves as the Director of Accounting, while Michelle Fulmer is the Director of Operations. Kimberly Youngblood holds the position of Executive Director, overseeing HR, IT, and Marketing. 

Since we reorganized the firm’s structure in 1998, Beasley Allen’s record speaks for itself. The revised structure – without any doubt – has contributed greatly to our firm’s success. Section Heads and Directors have been able to concentrate on the volume of cases in their section. They quickly recognize when additional resources are needed.  

Lawyers have been able to focus on cases within their sections. This has allowed them to achieve favorable results. There are major differences in each section, both as to the law, regulations and industry requirements.  

The efficiency and teamwork generated by the sections concept has resulted in our firm being recognized as one of the best litigation firms in the country. This has been for the benefit of the folks we represented.  

The Latest Look At Case Activity At Beasley Allen 

Our BeasleyAllen.com website provides the latest information on the current case activity at Beasley Allen. The list can be found on our homepage, the top navigation, or the practices page of the website (BeasleyAllen.com/Practices/). The following are the current case activity listings for the Beasley Allen Litigation Sections.  

Practices

• Business Litigation 
• Civil & Human Rights 
• Class Actions 
• Consumer Protection 
• Employment Law 
• Medical Devices 
• Medication 
• Personal Injury 
• Product Liability 
• Toxic Exposure 
• Whistleblower Litigation 

Cases 

The cases in the categories listed below are handled by lawyers in the appropriate Litigation Section at Beasley Allen. The list can be found on our homepage, on the top navigation, or on the Cases page of our website (BeasleyAllen.com/Recent-Cases/).

• Acetaminophen 
• Auto Accidents 
• Auto Defect Class Actions
• Auto Products 
• Aviation Accidents 
• Camp Lejeune  
• Defective Tires 
• Depo-Provera 
• Dupixent
• Hair Relaxers 
• Kratom 
• NEC Baby Formula 
• Negligent Security  
• On-the-Job-Injuries 
• Ozempic 
• Paraquat 
• Premises Liability
• Roblox
• Roundup
• Social Media  
• Talcum Powder 
• Truck Accidents  
• Ultra-Processed Foods 
• Video Game Addiction

We will give a brief explanation below for each of the listed categories:

• Acetaminophen
  Beasley Allen lawyers handle cases of mothers who took acetaminophen while pregnant and gave birth to a child later diagnosed with autism or ADHD. Cases also include children treated with the drug during the first 18 months of life who developed autism or ADHD. 
• Auto Accidents
  Our lawyers handle life-altering and deadly automobile accident cases caused by defective products and driver negligence. Crashes may involve single vehicles, multiple vehicles, motorcycles, recreational vehicles, transit vehicles or trucks. 
• Auto Defect Class Actions
  Our team pursues auto manufacturers and their suppliers for vehicle defects that create safety risks for occupants and others on the road. We seek to correct defects not addressed by recalls or warranty extensions through class action litigation.
• Auto Products
  Our team will meticulously investigate your accident, examine vehicles for defects or product liability issues, identify responsible parties, file lawsuits, manage legal documents, and strive to maximize your compensation.
• Aviation Accidents
  Lawyers investigate aviation accidents resulting from mechanical failures, human error and other causes. Crashes injure hundreds, sometimes thousands, of victims onboard aircraft and on the ground every year.
• Camp Lejeune 
  Our firm handles cases of victims exposed to contaminated water supplies at U.S. Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune between 1953 and 1987. Exposure to toxic water caused serious injuries, including cancer, adult leukemia, Parkinson’s disease, major cardiac birth defects and others.
• Defective Tires
  Defective tires can lead to automobile accidents resulting in injury or even death. Beasley Allen lawyers investigate these accidents caused by blowouts, tread separation and other tire failures. 
• Depo-Provera
  We are investigating cases for individuals who were given Depo-Provera shots for at least 1 year and developed cerebral or spinal meningiomas.
• Dupixent
  We are investigating the link between Dupixent and Cutaneous T-Cell Lymphoma (CTCL)— a group of rare blood cancers that affects the largest organ in your body — your skin.
• Hair Relaxers
  Our lawyers handle cases for women injured by toxic chemicals in hair relaxers. Women who frequently use hair relaxers may develop uterine cancer, endometriosis, uterine fibroids or breast cancer.
• Kratom
  Beasley Allen is investigating cases of serious adverse effects experienced by individuals who have consumed products containing Kratom.
• NEC Baby Formula
  Our firm investigates cases of premature babies who developed necrotizing enterocolitis after consuming infant formulas manufactured by brands like Enfamil and Similac. Necrotizing enterocolitis is an intestinal disease that can lead to long-term complications and even death.
• Negligent Security 
  Establishment owners and managers are responsible for maintaining safe premises. When someone is injured or killed as a result of negligent security, Beasley Allen lawyers hold owners and managers accountable.
• On-the-Job-Injuries
  We investigate workers’ compensation cases, often finding that defective industrial products are to blame for workers’ injuries or deaths. Quite often, the incident results in a product liability case. Industrial products include manufacturing, farming, construction or other types of equipment.
• Ozempic
  We investigate cases of gastroparesis, intestinal obstruction, deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism related to the use of diabetes and weight loss drugs like Ozempic, Wegovy and Mounjaro.
• Paraquat
  Our firm handles cases for victims injured by paraquat, a popular herbicide linked to Parkinson’s Disease that has been banned or partially banned in at least 92 countries. Paraquat remains legal in the U.S., risking the health and safety of workers on over 2 million U.S. farms.
•  Premises Liability
  We investigate cases every day where negligence from property owners or occupiers has created dangerous conditions. Catastrophic premises cases involve serious injuries that occur on someone else’s property. These cases
• Roblox
  Online gaming has become one of the most popular forms of entertainment for children and teens. We are investigating claims involving child exploitation in gaming and predatory design that puts profits over children’s safety.
• Roundup
  We’re taking new Roundup cancer cases. If you used Roundup and later developed non-Hodgkin lymphoma or another blood cancer, you may be eligible for a claim.
• Social Media 
  Our youth are facing a mental health crisis caused by social media addiction. Beasley Allen advocates for these youth who have suffered harms, including anxiety, depression, eating disorders, body dysmorphia, ADD/ADHD, self-harm and suicide.
• Talcum Powder
  Beasley Allen handles cases for women diagnosed with ovarian cancer after regular use of talcum powder. For decades, companies like Johnson & Johnson knew that talcum powder might cause cancer but failed to warn consumers. 
• Truck Accidents 
  Our firm handles accident cases involving tractor-trailers, commercial vehicles and other large trucks. These cases often involve multiple, well-funded defendants and complex insurance issues.
• Ultra-Processed Foods
  We are actively investigating cases where ultra-processed foods are linked to type 2 diabetes and NAFLD, especially in individuals diagnosed before age 18.
• Video Game Addiction 
  We are investigating cases of video game addiction caused by companies intentionally designing games to be highly addictive, especially for minors, using psychological tactics.

Resources to Help Your Practice

The leadership team at Beasley Allen understands the importance of sharing resources and collaborating with our fellow trial lawyers throughout the country. We are committed to investing in resources that can help our other trial lawyers in their work. We have compiled a list of our most popular resources for those seeking to work with us or seeking information to help their law firm with a case. 

Co-Counsel E-Newsletter 

Beasley Allen sends out a Co-Counsel E-Newsletter specifically tailored with lawyers in mind. It features case updates, highlights key victories achieved for our clients, and informs readers about the firm’s latest resources. You can get it online by visiting our website, BeasleyAllen.com, and clicking the Articles link. 

Recalls Update 

We try our best to stay current on the latest significant consumer recalls. Contact our JLB Report Team at [email protected] if you have any questions or believe we may need to include a recall. 

The Jere Beasley Report 

We also consider The Jere Beasley Report a service to lawyers and the general public. We provide the Report at no cost monthly. Visit our website, BeasleyAllen.com and click the Articles link. 

TRIAL TIPS FOR LAWYERS

Suzanne Clark, a lawyer in our firm, has written for this issue on an important matter that all trial lawyers will have to deal with. It relates to matters involving Electronically Stored Information (ESI). Suzanne does an excellent job of explaining a complicated matter. The information she supplies will be helpful to all plaintiff lawyers. 

The Hidden Evidence in Collaboration Platform and Third-Party App Data: What Plaintiff Litigators Should Ask For

Gone are the days plaintiffs can ask for email and that is sufficient to obtain all the data that requesting parties are entitled to in litigation. Data sources are constantly changing. A big issue in discovery is that methods of requesting and obtaining data are constantly having to race to keep up with the technological tools that corporations and their employees are using to communicate and collaborate. 

Lawyers and law firms are the last entities that are using email communication and conferral. In modern corporations, the richest evidence—the candid conversations, realtime decisions, drafts, comments, and revisions—often lives in collaboration platforms and ephemeral apps. 

Not only do requesting parties need to know what platforms are officially approved of and used by employees at corporations but also need to consider what off-channel and unofficial platforms employees are using. If a corporate employee chooses to use their personal device and apps for work related topics, those platforms are fair game in discovery requests. 

That said, it is essential to consider what questions to ask early in litigation to ensure that the sources of ESI (Electronically Stored Information) that contain relevant information are preserved and searched for review and production in response to discovery requests.

It is officially a producing party’s responsibility to conduct a reasonable inquiry to identify, preserve, and collect ESI from their clients, but it is also very often a concern of requesting parties that they are not doing a good enough job. So, what can requesting parties do to ensure that they are getting the evidence they are entitled to?

Below is a list of sample questions that can be asked and addressed in conferrals between counsel. 

Questions Plaintiff Lawyers Should Ask Defendants Early:

1. Hyperlinked Documents

Hyperlink Definition: “A pointer in a hypertext document—usually appearing as an underlined or highlighted word or picture—that, upon selection, sends a user to another location either within the current document or to another location accessible on the network or internet.” (The Sedona Conference Glossary: eDiscovery & Digital Information Management, Fifth Edition, 21 SEDONA CONF. J. 263 (2020) at 318.) 

• Does the defendant you use cloudstored documents instead of attachments?
• Are hyperlinked documents being collected, and which versions (current vs. contemporaneous)?
• What tools are being used to collect hyperlinks (Forensic Email Collector, Microsoft Purview, vendor scripts)?
• Are you preserving the family relationship between message and linked file?

B. Ephemeral Messaging Policies & Practices

• Which platforms do employees use (officially and unofficially)?
• What are the retention settings? Who can modify them?
• When litigation was anticipated, what specific steps were taken to suspend autodeletion?
• Is there Shadow IT or BYOD usage that bypasses corporate retention tools?

C. Collaboration Platform Architecture

• Where are documents stored?
• How are versions tracked?
• Are private channels, chats, comment histories, and tasklevel annotations being preserved?
• What about thirdparty integrations (e.g., projectmanagement apps, shared drives, industryspecific systems)?

If any pushback is given when the above questions are asked, then refer to these rules:

Applicable Rules: 

• Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f)(3)(C) “Discovery Plan. A discovery plan must state the parties’ views and proposals on: … any issues about disclosure, discovery, or preservation of electronically stored information, including the form or forms in which it should be produced.”

• Fed. R. Civ. P. 26, Committee Notes on Rules—2015 Amendment: 

A portion of present Rule 26(b)(1) is omitted from the proposed revision. After allowing discovery of any matter relevant to any party’s claim or defense, the present rule adds: “including the existence, description, nature, custody, condition, and location of any documents or other tangible things and the identity and location of persons who know of any discoverable matter.” Discovery of such matters is so deeply entrenched in practice that it is no longer necessary to clutter the long text of Rule 26 with these examples. The discovery identified in these examples should still be permitted under the revised rule when relevant and proportional to the needs of the case. Framing intelligent requests for electronically stored information, for example, may require detailed information about another party’s information systems and other information resources.

Practical Tips for Requesting and Using This Data

Beyond conferring with opposing counsel under Rule 26(f), requesting parties may build collaboration and ephemeral sources of ESI directly into discovery requests. Make sure to check the latest platforms and apps each time new discovery requests are drafted. Also, request contemporaneous versions of hyperlinked documents and that the hyperlinked documents be associated back to the “parent” communication. If producing parties argue that this creates too high a burden, then (1) propose they produce a sample of hyperlinked documents and (2) demand technical explanations and do not accept boilerplate claims that it is too difficult or not feasible. 

Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 34(b)(1)(C), requesting parties “may specify the form or forms in which electronically stored information is to be produced.” Use this as a tactic for addressing ESI sources at the outset. Additionally, the topic of ESI Sources can be raised early through ESI Protocol negotiations, rather than midstream, which could lead to an argument by opposing counsel that they should not have to redo ESI collection and production.

In short, the evidence that matters most today often lives outside email and inside the collaborative and offchannel tools corporations and their employees use every day. By asking targeted questions early and insisting on transparency about platforms, retention settings, and collection methods, plaintiff litigators can ensure that critical ESI is preserved, searched, and produced—rather than lost in the shadows of modern data systems.

Beasley Allen Lawyer And Employee Spotlights

Kelli Alfreds

Kelli Alfreds, a lawyer in Beasley Allen’s Mass Torts Section, began her career with the firm in 2002 and has spent more than two decades developing deep experience in defective drug and medical device litigation, helping support clients impacted by unsafe products. Kelli shares that she became an attorney because of her lifelong interest in history and government. 

Law school felt like a natural step, and discovering the purpose that comes from helping others has been one of the greatest blessings of her career, she adds. Her favorite part of practicing law is driving meaningful change—holding corporations accountable, improving product safety, and securing justice for the individuals and families the firm represents.

Originally from Selma and now living in Montgomery, Kelli shares a busy and joy‑filled life with her husband, Matt Alfreds, an attorney, and their three children—Sebastian, an active athlete, and twins Rollie and Sloane, accomplished competitive dancers. Supporting her children’s pursuits is one of her greatest joys.

What Kelli believes makes Beasley Allen truly unique is the way its people come together—working tirelessly for clients while intentionally putting God first. That shared purpose, she says, is what sets the firm apart and makes it feel like home.

Kelli, who does excellent work, is a definite asset to our firm. We are blessed to have Kelli with us. 

Jacqueline Killough

This month, we highlight Jackie Killough, who celebrated her first anniversary with Beasley Allen in November 2025. Jackie serves as our Associate Director of Finance, a role in which she assists the Finance Director with maintaining accurate financial records, supporting budget efforts, and providing guidance and support to the team. Her steady leadership and willingness to jump in wherever needed make her an invaluable part of the finance team.

Family is at the heart of who Jackie is. She and her husband, Tim, will celebrate 35 years of marriage this March. They share three children and one granddaughter, all of whom bring tremendous joy to their lives. When she’s not working, Jackie loves spending time at Lake Martin—her family’s home away from home. She also enjoys camping trips to the beach or mountains, soaking up the quiet and beauty of the outdoors. 

When asked what she enjoys most about working at Beasley Allen, Jackie shared that it’s the genuine care shown by the people around her. During a year that brought illness to her family, she felt supported, understood, and encouraged every step of the way. That sense of genuine care is what she treasures most about being part of the Beasley Allen family.

Jackie is a valuable addition to our firm. She is doing a very good job in a very important position. 

ReNay Robertson

For the past 10 years, ReNay Robertson has served as a legal secretary in the firm’s Mass Torts Section, where she assists Melissa Prickett, the section’s director who is also a lawyer, with a wide range of assignments. ReNay’s responsibilities include communicating with referring attorneys, helping open new cases, and maintaining accuracy in the case management system. Because the Section’s needs continually change, ReNay’s duties often shift, and she enjoys the variety and challenges that come with such a dynamic role.

Family is at the center of ReNay’s life. She and her husband, Rick, have been married for 42 years. After 24 years in Prattville, they moved to Huntsville to be closer to their eldest son, his wife, and their five children. Their younger son now lives in California with his family, including the newest grandbaby. Their extended family—children, daughters‑in‑love, grandchildren, and ReNay’s “85‑year‑young” father and his new bride—brings immense joy to their lives. 

ReNay and Rick remain active in Grace Community Church, leading Bible studies, serving in the nursery, and staying connected with their community group. ReNay loves thrift shopping, antique treasure hunting, spending time with grandchildren, gathering with church friends, and traveling—from Mississippi visits to beach trips and Smoky Mountain getaways.

What ReNay says she loves most about Beasley Allen is the camaraderie she experiences daily. She values the supportive staff, fair and approachable lawyers, and the shared commitment to fighting for clients who might not otherwise have a voice.

ReNay is a very good employee who does excellent work. We are blessed to have her at Beasley Allen. 

Alexa Wallace

Alexa Wallace has been part of the Beasley Allen family since 2021, beginning as a law clerk before transitioning to becoming a lawyer in the firm’s Mass Torts Section where she works on the Johnson & Johnson Talcum Powder litigation and the Philips CPAP recall litigation. Becoming a lawyer wasn’t always Alexa’s plan, she says. Initially pursuing neuropsychology and intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring, Alexa realized early on that she wasn’t meant for the operating room. 

Still driven by a desire to do work that mattered and truly helped people, Alexa shifted to law—a path she describes as a “happy accident” and a reminder of God’s sense of humor. 

Alexa says her favorite part of practicing law is building genuine relationships with clients. She treasures the moments when clients call to share positive life updates unrelated to their cases. For her, the trust behind those conversations is the clearest sign that she’s made a meaningful difference in the lives of her clients.

A Jacksonville, Florida native, Alexa is the first lawyer in her family. Outside of work, she enjoys outdoor activities, exploring Florida’s natural beauty, and is slowly adding indoor hobbies like embroidery and cooking to balance out more intense pastimes like boxing.

Alexa says she believes what makes Beasley Allen stand out is its priorities. She deeply values the firm’s commitment to putting God first, then family, then work. For her, that foundation shapes everything—and it’s what makes Beasley Allen feel like home.

Alexa is a talented lawyer who is definite asset to the firm. Her relationship with her clients is an important factor. We are fortunate to have Alexa at Beasley Allen.

Dereth Wilson

For the past 2 and a half years, Dereth Wilson has worked in Beasley Allen’s Toxic Torts Section as a staff assistant. In her role, Dereth orders client medical records for litigation, reviews records as they come in, and works closely with clients to gather any additional documents needed. She especially enjoys interacting with clients, noting that she has the privilege of assisting many wonderful people each day.

Outside the office, Dereth’s life is anchored by a loving family. She and her life partner, John, share a blended family with four bonus daughters and nine grandchildren. Home is Jasper, Alabama, where they also live with Scout, their 14‑year‑old pit mix. Dereth and her family love to travel and spend as much time together as possible, creating lasting memories along the way. Dereth keeps her free time full of simple joys. Dereth loves to read, spend time outdoors, and nurture her gardening skills. She’s also learning to crochet—another creative outlet she is excited to master.

When asked what she loves most about Beasley Allen, Dereth says it’s knowing that the work she does helps clients obtain the justice they deserve. She also feels incredibly grateful to work alongside teammates she considers the very best.

Dereth has an important position at Beasley Allen. Her work is important to the development of a client’s case. We are fortunate to have Dereth with us. 

Special Recognitions

LaBarron Boone Inducted Into The National Black Lawyers Hall Of Fame

All of us at Beasley Allen are celebrating with LaBarron Boone, a talented and highly successful lawyer in our Personal Injury & Products Liability Section, on his induction into the National Black Lawyers Hall of Fame. This is one of the highest honors bestowed by the National Black Lawyers Top 100 organization. There are relatively only a few lawyers who have received this high honor. 

This recognition places LaBarron among an extraordinary group of legal trailblazers whose careers have shaped the landscape of American law. Induction into the Hall of Fame is reserved for lawyers whose work, leadership, and impact rise to the very highest level—and this year’s class reflects that remarkable standard.

To date, the National Black Lawyers Hall of Fame has inducted an unparalleled group of lawyers and public servants, including the legendary Fred Gray, the Honorable Dennis Archer, Barbara Arnwine, Ben Crump, Wade Henderson, Sherrilyn Ifill, Elaine Jones, Judge Charles Price, Hezekiah Sistrunk, Jr., Bryan Stevenson, Christina Swarns, and Ben Wilson.  These individuals represent a true who’s who of outstanding trial lawyers and legal advocates in America, each sharing powerful lessons drawn from their challenges, achievements, and commitment to justice. 

This year’s inductees continue that legacy, with LaBarron Boone, Ambassador Carol Moseley Braun, and Governor L. Douglas Wilder joining the ranks of the Hall of Fame—an honor that highlights excellence across both the legal profession and public service. 

LaBarron’s induction is a fitting recognition of a career defined by excellence, leadership, and meaningful impact. As a nationally respected trial lawyer, he has led groundbreaking litigation involving product liability, consumer fraud, and personal injury, while also serving as a trusted mentor and advocate within the legal community. His work has not only delivered justice for clients but has driven real-world safety changes in Corporate America that affect people across the country.

Beyond the courtroom, LaBarron’s commitment to service and education has remained central to his career, reflecting his belief in using the law as a vehicle to make the world a better place—an approach that aligns powerfully with the mission of the National Black Lawyers organization.

Being named to the National Black Lawyers Hall of Fame is more than an individual achievement; it is a recognition of sustained excellence and the lasting influence of a lawyer who has helped shape the profession. LaBarron’s inclusion alongside such a distinguished group underscores both the impact of his work and the respect he has earned nationwide. I close with this personal observation:

Congratulations, LaBarron, on this well‑deserved and prestigious honor. Your work continues to inspire the legal profession and exemplify the very best of trial advocacy. We are blessed to have you as a leader in so many ways at Beasley Allen. 

Celebrating Excellence: Beasley Allen Lawyers Honored By Lawdragon

We are proud to announce that several Beasley Allen lawyers have been recognized among the nation’s best by Lawdragon in its 2026 guides. These honors reflect their unwavering commitment to justice, exceptional advocacy, and the values that define our firm.

2026 Lawdragon 500 Leading Lawyers in America

Congratulations to the following lawyers for earning a place on this prestigious list:

Ben Baker LaBarron Boone Kendall Dunson Larry Golston

Ali Hawthorne Joseph VanZandt Navan Ward Parker Miller

This recognition is reserved for lawyers who exemplify excellence and innovation in the legal profession. Each of these lawyers has demonstrated an extraordinary ability to stand up for individuals, families, and businesses impacted by negligence and wrongdoing—delivering results that make a real difference in people’s lives.

2026 Lawdragon Hall of Fame Inductees

We are also pleased to celebrate two of our firm’s leaders who have achieved one of the highest honors in the legal profession:

• Cole Portis

• Andy Birchfield

Induction into the Lawdragon Hall of Fame is reserved for trailblazing lawyers whose careers have transformed the legal landscape. These two (2) honorees have pioneered new practices, advanced civil rights for millions, and set the standard for integrity and excellence. Cole and Andy embody the passion and leadership that define Beasley Allen and inspire our entire team.

Congratulations to each of our honorees! These achievements reflect not only individual excellence, but also our firm’s mission: to fight for justice and protect those who need it most.

Beasley Allen Honors Travis Chin With Inaugural Pro Bono Award

Beasley Allen is proud to announce Travis Chin, a lawyer in our firm, as the recipient of our Inaugural Pro Bono Award for 2025. This award recognizes an attorney whose commitment to service reflects the highest ideals of our profession—ensuring access to justice for those who need it most.

Travis, who is in our Toxic Torts Section, joined Beasley Allen in 2024 and focuses on toxic exposure litigation, including cases involving Camp Lejeune water contamination, Roundup, Ethylene Oxide, Bisphenol S (BPS), and heavy metals. His legal philosophy is rooted in the belief that denying Americans access to basic legal assistance is equivalent to denying them their fundamental rights.

Pro Bono Leadership

Travis’ dedication to pro bono work is evident through his extensive involvement with the Montgomery Volunteer Lawyers Program, earning him the Medal of Samaritan (2022–2024) and the 2024 Volunteer of the Year Award for both MVLP and the Montgomery County Bar. He has represented numerous indigent clients in areas such as:

• Family law

• Housing

• Tort and consumer law

• Contracts

• Criminal expungements

• Immigration law

One particularly impactful case involved securing a five-figure judgment for a single mother and her three children who were being illegally evicted—a victory that set a precedent against unlawful landlord practices.

Advocacy Beyond the Courtroom

Before joining Beasley Allen, Travis served as Southern Legislative Director for Rise, championing civil rights for rape and sexual assault survivors. He helped draft and pass the Alabama Sexual Assault Survivors Bill of Rights (2021 HB 137), creating statutory civil rights for survivors.

Travis is also active in the legal community, serving on committees for the Alabama State Bar, co-chairing the Pro Bono Committee for the National Asian Pacific American Bar Association, and participating in local bar associations. Outside the courtroom, Travis enriches Montgomery’s arts scene as a board member and performer with the Montgomery Symphony Orchestra. He even walks the runway at New York Fashion Week to raise awareness for causes he supports.

Through his tireless efforts, Travis exemplifies the qualities of a Beasley Allen lawyer: compassion, integrity, and an unwavering commitment to justice. His work ensures that those without resources still have a voice in the legal system. We are blessed to have Travis with the firm. 

Congratulations, Travis!

Favorite Bible Verses

In this month’s issue, two of our staff members and one of our lawyers who are being featured share their favorite Bible verses with us.

Kelli Alfreds

Kelli shares two of her favorite verses with us.

So do not fear, for I am with you; do not be dismayed, for I am your God. I will strengthen you and help you; I will uphold you with my righteous right hand. Isaiah 41:10

I can do all this through him who gives me strength. Philippians 4:13

Jackie Killough

Jackie offers three of her favorite verses. The first helps her to focus on the important things and not her immediate circumstances.

But those who hope in the Lord  will renew their strength. They will soar on wings like eagles; they will run and not grow weary, they will walk and not be faint. Isaiah 40:31

The second verse reminds her that there can be good in all of our trials if we remain faithful.

And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose. Romans 8:28

Jackie says the following verse is a reminder to always be kind and patient.  Nothing is accomplished by responding with anger.

A gentle answer turns away wrath, but a harsh word stirs up anger. Proverbs 15:1

ReNay Robertson

ReNay’s favorite verse serves as a reminder that God knows everything before it happens and, good or bad, he allows it to happen for our GOOD — even though it’s sometimes a HARD lesson for us and we may not understand the “why” for a long time–if ever, this side of heaven.

And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose. Romans 8:28

MONTHLY REMINDERS

We continue to include this section of “reminders” in the Report. That’s because we believe each of the reminders is very important. The reminders are from key individuals and are for all of us at Beasley Allen. The reminders are to be applied in the workplace, in our social life, and at home. In addition to all of us at Beasley Allen, we send these reminders to all who get the Report each month. All persons in a leadership role, including those persons in government at every level, will benefit by reading the quotes and applying the lessons learned in their daily lives.  

If my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land. 

2 Chronicles 7:14

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.

Edmund Burke

Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.

There comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe nor politic nor popular, but he must take it because his conscience tells him it is right.

The ultimate tragedy is not the oppression and cruelty by the bad people but the silence over that by the good people.

Martin Luther King, Jr. 

Get in good trouble, necessary trouble, and help redeem the soul of America.

Rep. John Lewis speaking on the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, Alabama, on March 1, 2020

Ours is not the struggle of one day, one week, or one year. Ours is not the struggle of one judicial appointment or presidential term. Ours is the struggle of a lifetime, or maybe even many lifetimes, and each one of us in every generation must do our part.

Rep. John Lewis on movement-building in Across That Bridge: A Vision for Change and the Future of America

The opposite of poverty is not wealth; the opposite of poverty is justice.

Bryan Stevenson, 2019

I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country….corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed.

U.S. President Abraham Lincoln, Nov. 21, 1864 

Closing Observations

Pastor Ken Austin Spotlights LaBarron Boone: A Family Committed To Service And Justice

Recently, Montgomery Pastor Ken Austin shared an inspiring and very timely message about one of our own—LaBarron Boone and his family. Their story is one of faith, generosity, and a deep commitment to making the world a better place. Let’s see what Ken wrote about this lawyer and his remarkable family.

A Shout-Out to One of Montgomery’s Most Remarkable Families

Today, I want to pause and ask you to help me give a heartfelt shout-out to one of Montgomery’s truly remarkable, God-fearing families, the LaBarron and Lori Boone family.

LaBarron Boone began his career in engineering but soon realized that the law offered him the greatest opportunity to make a meaningful difference in the world. His legal career has been guided by one simple yet powerful mission: to make the world a better place. That commitment has resulted in record-setting verdicts and, more importantly, safer consumer products and stronger protections for families harmed by corporate greed.

LaBarron often credits the foundation laid by his mother, who demanded that he serve others and consistently reminded him to “make the world a better place.” He also points to his admiration for Thurgood Marshall as pivotal in shaping his desire to pursue law as a tool for justice. That same philosophy was later reinforced by Beasley Allen’s founding partner, Jere Beasley, who once told LaBarron—after a $581 million verdict—that if he wanted to remain a blessing, he must keep God first, family second, and work third. LaBarron embraced that counsel and believes it has shaped not only his life, but also the culture and continued success of the firm.

The Boone family includes LaBarron Boone, a graduate of the University of Alabama School of Law, now a partner at Beasley Allen and a member of the firm’s executive committee; his wife, Lori David Boone, a graduate of the University of Alabama School of Law, an attorney and managing broker at eXp HomeChaser Team; Micah, a college student pursuing a degree in chemical engineering, and Logan, a college student pursuing a degree in computer information systems and technology.

Family remains central to everything they do. Whether traveling together, supporting their children’s pursuits, or investing in the lives of others, the Boone family exemplifies a life lived with purpose.

On New Year’s Eve, this remarkable family didn’t simply stop by the Servant Maker House for a tour; they stepped into a vision. The Servant Maker House is a 15-bedroom home dedicated to building the next generation of servant leaders. This newly state-of-the-art, renovated, and furnished home by Mrs. Cathy Caddell and Mr. George Goodwyn Jr., provides each bedroom free of charge to a college student with a servant’s heart and a desire to grow spiritually and professionally while living, worshiping, serving, and mentoring children and families in West Montgomery.

But the Boone family went even further. Each member of the family personally sponsored a college student to live in the Servant Maker House and participate in the Servant Makers Program for 2026.

Every student they sponsor will mentor at least 15 school-age children in West Montgomery. Those children will, in turn, influence their families, classrooms, friendships, and faith communities.

What began as a single act of generosity will directly impact hundreds of lives in a disenfranchised community too often marked by poverty, crime and disinvestment.

The Boone family later shared how meaningful it was to spend New Year’s Eve surrounded by young people who represent hope, leadership, and possibility.

They expressed gratitude for a program intentionally designed to invest in the next generation of leaders. Their support is already making a lasting difference.

I have had the privilege of sitting with Attorney LaBarron Boone on many occasions and have even been welcomed into his home.

Our conversations always return to the same question: How do we make things better? Better for people. Better for our city. Better for future generations.

LaBarron genuinely loves Montgomery and believes without hesitation that education is one of the most powerful tools God has given us to break the cycle of poverty.

His giving, service, and commitments consistently reflect that belief.

LaBarron and Lori also established the Lori and LaBarron Boone Educational Foundation, which provides scholarships to college students who have the ability but not the financial means to pursue higher education. Their generosity reflects a belief that opportunity should never be limited by circumstance.

Last Saturday, I attended the Tim Lee Difference Maker Breakfast, where LaBarron shared a message about what he calls a “mob mentality,” the idea that our values, choices, and courage are shaped by the people we surround ourselves with.

His message was simple and clear: be mindful of your circle, because eventually, you become the group you associate with.

That principle is not just something LaBarron speaks about; it is something he lives. He chooses to associate himself with good-doers.  

I invite you to join the Boone family mentality and become part of this MOB, a bold and passionate movement committed to educating children in Montgomery who are born into poverty and helping them thrive in lives of purpose and success.

Poverty doesn’t stand a chance against this MOB family!

Montgomery is stronger, brighter, and better because of families like the Boones, and it will be even better when more of us join them, standing shoulder to shoulder with them in their efforts.

Please join me in celebrating and thanking the Boone family for their leadership, extraordinary generosity, unwavering commitment, and heart to lift the least among us out of poverty through the power of education. Follow this NOISE!!

Better Days are coming, I believe!

Source: Pastor Ken Austin

PARTING WORDS

The story of Indiana winning the National Championship is one that should inspire all Americans, especially those whose lives need a positive boost. Nobody expected the Hoosiers two years ago to be playing in the Championship game. That is, nobody but their new coach and the team’s leaders. 

The story has to be centered around the quarterback who won the Heisman Trophy along with many other awards and went on to lead the team to a 16-0 season and the national championship. It is a story that reaches outside the sports world. It applies to all aspects of life in our country. 

The American people – especially our young people – badly need role models in their lives who display strong moral character, an exceptional work ethic, and accountability. Fernando Mendoza is such a role model. He gives God all the credit for his success. 

Fernando is the type of role model that we all, including our leaders, badly need at this time. 

To access this publication online, update an address, 
or to contact us about this publication, please
visit BeasleyAllen.com.

This is an advertisement.