In the Spotlight
J&J Wins Second California Talc Bellwether - Split Verdicts Complicate the Path Forward
Johnson & Johnson secured an important victory in California's talc litigation on June 5, 2026, when a Los Angeles jury returned a defense verdict in the second bellwether trial involving claims that the company's talc-based products caused ovarian cancer.
The case was brought by the estates of Mary Owens, Bonnie Tienken, and Geneva Williams. Their families alleged that decades of Johnson's Baby Powder use led to ovarian cancer and argued that J&J had long concealed the risks associated with its products.
After weeks of testimony and competing expert opinions on both causation and corporate conduct, the jury sided with Johnson & Johnson. Ten of the twelve jurors found in favor of the defense, concluding that the company was not negligent. The result marks J&J's first bellwether win in California's coordinated ovarian-cancer talc proceedings. It also arrives at a critical stage in one of the largest and most closely watched mass-tort litigations in the country.
Read the full story →Mass Tort MDL Watch
Law & Order
Florida Supreme Court Draws the Line on AI in Filings
In re Amendments to Rule 2.515 | No. SC2026-0673 | Effective June 15, 2026
The Florida Supreme Court has ended the county-by-county maze of AI disclosure rules with one clean statewide amendment. Under the updated Rule 2.515(d)(2), every attorney who signs a court filing now certifies that all legal authorities cited actually exist and are accurately quoted - no exceptions. Sanctions for violations can range from reprimand to dismissal. The companion administrative order (AOSC26-12) strips individual circuits of the ability to layer on their own AI-specific requirements.
The message is clear: AI can assist, but the attorney signs the filing and owns every word in it. For PI firms using AI in drafting motions, demands, or briefs - your review process just became your most important risk management tool.
Read the full amendment →The Deep Dive
Monsanto Co. v. Durnell - The Roundup Case at the Supreme Court
Case No. 24-1068 | Argued May 2026 | Decision Expected: June/July 2026
The U.S. Supreme Court recently heard oral arguments in Monsanto Co. v. Durnell, a closely watched case that could reshape the future of Roundup litigation nationwide.
The dispute stems from a lawsuit brought by John Durnell, a Missouri resident and volunteer gardener who alleged that years of exposure to Roundup caused him to develop non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. In 2023, a Missouri jury found in his favor and awarded him $1.25 million in damages after concluding that Monsanto failed to provide adequate warnings regarding the product's alleged cancer risks.
Read more →The Tech Brief
Your AI Prompts Just Became Evidence: What Personal Injury Lawyers Need to Know
Artificial intelligence is no longer a futuristic concept in the legal profession; it is becoming part of everyday practice. From reviewing medical records and organizing large volumes of documents to helping experts analyze complex information, AI tools are allowing attorneys and experts to work more efficiently than ever before. However, a recent federal court decision serves as an important reminder that the use of AI in litigation may come with new discovery considerations. In certain circumstances, the prompts entered into an AI system may themselves become subject to scrutiny.
In Conservation Law Foundation Inc. v. Shell Oil Products US et al., a federal court ordered the production of AI prompts used by an expert witness while preparing an expert report. The court found that the prompts formed part of the expert's methodology and were therefore discoverable under Rule 26 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Although the case did not arise in the context of a personal injury claim, the decision has implications that personal injury practitioners should not ignore.
Read the full article →Mark Your Calendars
The Paralegal Docket
Your Name Isn't on the Brief - Until It Is
Generative AI has quietly found its place in the day-to-day operations of many personal injury firms. It helps with case research, citation checks, demand-letter drafting, motion support, and organizing case timelines. In most instances, the process appears seamless. Documents are filed, demands are sent, and cases move forward without incident.
Then a judge tries to locate four of the eight cases cited in a filing, and discovers they do not exist.
That is when the real problem begins.
Read the full article →From the DNC Desk
Draft n Craft has retrieved & summarized over 45 million medical records for U.S. personal injury firms, without firms adding a single in-house headcount. Operating since 2008, the team works seamlessly across platforms like Filevine, SmartAdvocate, LexisNexis, and Clio, offering everything complete paralegal support from intake to trial - all HIPAA and ISO 27001 compliant.
If your caseload is growing faster than your team, it may be time to talk.