Asbestos, Breast Implants, Tobacco & Other Tort-Plagued Manufacturers

All in a Day's Work'

NEW YORK, July 2 /PRNewswire/ -- Dr. Fred Dunbar, a senior economist with National Economic Research Associates (NERA), is an expert in the economics of antitrust and trade regulation, and risk management including mass torts and claims estimation, securities and valuation, transportation. He is one of the most frequently retained experts in the nation on mass torts, securities, and antitrust litigation. Dr. Dunbar's work is often on behalf of controversial manufacturers targeted by large class action lawsuits.

Dr. Dunbar, who has testified dozens of times, is presently involved in lawsuits against U.S. tobacco companies. The government has just announced plans to move towards a settlement of its $20 billion tobacco lawsuit, a decision that has received backlash by anti-smoking groups.

In numerous cases, Dr. Dunbar's testimony has been cited as the influencing factor in a court's decision.

As a key participant in bankruptcy proceedings for Dow-Corning's highly publicized breast implant case, one of the largest mass tort bankruptcy actions ever filed in the U.S., he provided testimony forecasting the legal costs and settlement values of future claims. In its decision, the court noted that it was "very impressed" by Dr. Dunbar's estimates on the number of claimants who would elect to settle and the average award for each claimant, which he arrived at after careful study of prior proceedings.

And this past month, Dr. Dunbar provided testimony on behalf of tobacco company Santa Fe Natural, which helped overturn a New York statute banning the sale of tobacco products through catalogues and the Internet. The statute was struck down after U.S. District Court Judge Loretta A. Preska found that the statute failed two key tests under the Commerce Clause.

In a 76-page decision, issued in June, the judge cited Dr. Dunbar's testimony as a key factor in showing that the state's justifications for the restrictive actions, including prevention of tax evasion and youth smoking, would have little effect. For example, she credited Dr. Dunbar testimony that "all a youth has to do is go to five stores and the mathematics are they have gotten a 97 percent chance of acquiring a pack of cigarettes," noting "Dr. Dunbar's testimony and conclusion to the effect that closing down sales channels will not reduce smoking to any considerable degree. Accordingly, defendants have not carried their burden of demonstrating that Section 1399-11 will effect any material benefits."

Leveling the Playing Field for Controversial Manufacturers Highly charged issues such as public health concerns are catalysts for commercial and political interests and can be used to skirt difficult legal and political questions, Dr. Dunbar says. He believes that manufacturers of products such as tobacco, breast implants, and asbestos, already subject to negative public opinion, become "easy targets" in the legal system, from restrictive legislation to mass lawsuits brought by entrepreneurial plaintiff attorneys, who seize upon the negative publicity.

It is widely acknowledged by legal experts that mass torts such as asbestos, while still a relatively new phenomenon, have escalated to a crisis level and may victimize those becoming sick in the future whom they purport to help. Widespread litigation has driven companies to seek the counsel of economists like Fred Dunbar. As expert witnesses, economists testify on behalf of manufacturers, who Dr. Dunbar says have their backs against the wall in a 'broken' tort system. He believes that economic testimony allows jurors and judges to put difficult tort cases through the checks and balances needed to arrive at a fair decision.

Stemming courtroom hyperbole with objective analysis helps to bring perspective back into the cases. "Aggressive plaintiffs can bring any company to its knees by congesting the system with large numbers of tort actions. It's our job to see that any solutions arrived at are equitable to all involved," Dr. Dunbar says.

Dunbar says the need for objective economic analysis in such cases is essential to preserving the integrity of due process as guaranteed by the constitution, regardless of private interest or negative public perception of a manufacturer. The economist, ultimately, helps ensure fair hearings for those who are targeted by damaging lawsuits or legislation that can be extremely complex and subjective.

He points to part of the Court's concluding statements in the Dow-Corning case: "The United States' Constitution and the rules and laws governing the judicial system, although they may not be perfect, were enacted to ensure that all parties' due process rights are observed by the courts."

Dr. Dunbar holds a PhD in economics from Tufts University and is the chair of NERA's mass torts/product liability practice. He, along with his colleagues, blend economics, statistics, survey research, epidemiological modeling and computer programming in order to estimate the number and dollar of future claims as well as the effect of publicity and entrepreneurial activity by plaintiff attorneys and the likely rate of filing among potential claimants.

The work of this group also helps troubled companies craft claims strategies and provide the basis for testimony on claims forecasts in bankruptcy court. He has co-authored with another NERA economist, Dr. Denise Martin, what many in the industry consider the "textbook" on claims forecasting entitled Estimating Future Claims- Case Studies from Mass Tort and Product Liability (1996).

Call us if you are interested in speaking with Dr. Dunbar on his work as an economist and NERA's experience overall in some of the most highly charged court decisions in the nation.

Contact Allan Ripp, 212-721-7468, arippnyc@aol.com, or Elena Napravnik,

212-721-9979, elena73@earthlink.net both for National Economic Research

Associates