Stay in touch and the networking takes care of itself. - Mark P. Loftus

September 26, 2025

Not particularly inclined to write about legal stuff over the course of the last 10 days. But while sitting transfixed, constantly checking the web and television for updates, stories started coming out, how, even in the light of horrible pain and grief, goodness prevails. Civilians, at the risk of their own safety, running toward the bomb blast to render whatever aid they could. Marathon runners, after running 26 miles, refusing to stop, but instead running to local hospitals to give blood. Medical workers refusing to leave hospitals while the injured needed care. Amazing and heartening. Here’s to Boston Strong.

Now that things have hopefully settled down, back to writing about things legal.

Recently, I was invited to two separate networking events. One of them was the equivalent of a cold call – someone who runs a local business professional group in my area invited me to the quarterly meeting at a local pub. I didn’t know the person who invited me, or anyone in the group. At the last minute, my schedule cleared and I decided to go. When I entered the private room there were 30 to 40 people there. The room was spacious with lots of tables and chairs. But no one was seated. Everyone was clustered in tight groups around two tables of appetizers. Several guests were actually clasping wads of business cards in their hands, determined to press at least one card into the palm of any person to whom they spoke. There were no name tags, no sort of welcome table no list of attendees. I didn’t know a soul, but since I had come that far, I decided to at least try to meet a person or two. I tried to strike up a conversation with one group of folks, but their conversation was ending and they all headed in different directions. I get the sense that people at these things have a need to spray the infield – make contact with as many people as possible. Whether that particular contact is meaningful doesn’t seem to matter. I then tried to strike up a conversation with a guy about my age standing nearby. We talked for a moment, but he saw a friend and excused himself. Strike two. I then struck up a conversation with another guy standing nearby. He turned out to be the manager of the pub. Nice guy. Big White Sox fan. I would have talked to him longer, but that keg he was carrying looked heavy. He seemed anxious to put it down. At that point, I decided to call it a night.

A day or two later, I got a call from a very good friend who wanted to take me as his guest to a semi-regular dinner put together by some people with whom we had attended law school. My friend goes to these things pretty regularly. I do not. Additionally, my friend was on Law Review. Meaning top 10% of our class. And lots of the attendees at these functions are Law Review as well. I was not Law Review. Numerically speaking, I was maybe top 65% of my class.

So I had some trepidation. I didn’t really spend much time with Law Review types during law school. They were in the library studying. I was in Game Room, playing Donkey Kong. I didn’t know any of them very well and was pretty confident I was in for a long, tedious event. I was wrong. It was a great event. Saw lots of people I had been friendly with in law school and caught up. To be sure, sharing 3 years of law school gave us a common bond, but there wasn’t too much talk about law school. Most of the talk was about family and children. There was even some talk about grandchildren. And there were lots of questions about what happened to Mr. Smith or Ms. Jones[which is how we were addressed by professors]. Of course there was some talk about practice areas. And more then one comment that “I didn’t know you handled litigation matters.” Cards were passed – but usually only after a specific need. The evening flew by.

The takeaways here? First, the “mashup” networking event – running around passing out cards to strangers – is overrated. I’ve been to dozens of them over the years and don’t recall ever making a meaningful contact. When I get back to the office I can’t even connect a face to a business card. And the cards get tossed. I’m not bashing any and all forms of networking. Bar association memberships, and small, focused professional groups have been and remain good ideas. But groups/events devoted solely to the concept of networking? I don’t see the point.

The second takeway – stay in touch. I don’t do it very well and need to do it better. First, old friends and classmates keep you grounded. They refuse to listen to all your bullshit. They remember when you ran through parties naked[allegedly] and couldn’t get a date to save your life. Secondly, it makes good business sense. Some of those stoners I hung out with[it was the 70’s] went on to do very, very well. They almost certainly needed a lawyer along the way, but they didn’t call me because I didn’t stay in touch. And even if your old friends/classmates don’t need you, if you make that occasional call you stay on their radar. And when someone asks them for a lawyer, they mention you.

Finally, I wasted lots of money on Donkey Kong.

By Mark Loftus February 17, 2026
German Conglomerate makes a bid to end Roundup litigation 
By Mark Loftus February 17, 2026
By Mark Loftus February 3, 2026
THE ILLINOIS GENDER VIOLENCE ACT - IN A NUTSHELL Under the Illinois Gender Violence Act (GVA) 740 IlCS 82/1, victims of sexual assault, domestic violence and other forms of gender related violence can bring civil actions against perpetrators even when criminal charges are not filed. The GVA defines two of the four acts of “gender violence” - though the definitions are a bit convoluted: One or or more acts of violence of physical aggression satisfying the elements of battery under the laws of Illinois that are committed, at least in part, on the basis of a person’s sex; A physical intrusion or physical invasion of a sexual nature under coercive conditions satisfying the elements of battery under the laws of Illinois, whether or nor the act or acts resulted in criminal charges, prosecution or conviction. Under the Illinois Criminal Code, a person commits a battery when he or she knowingly, without legal justification, causes bodily harm or makes insulting/provoking physical contact with another individual. 720 ILCS 5/12-3. The Criminal Code requires physical contact. AND EMPLOYERS MAY NOW FACE LIABILITY In July, 2023 an amendment made it explicit that the GVA does extend to the workplace. As set forth in the Act, an employer is liable for gender-related violence in the workplace by an employee when the interaction arises out of and in the course of employment. Liability will only arise however, if the (1) the employee was directly performing his or her duties and the violence was the proximate cause of the injury or (2) while the agent of the employer was directly involved in the gender-related violence and the performance of the work was the proximate cause of the injury. Liability will only extend to the the employer however if it can be shown that (1) the employer failed to supervise, train or monitor the offending employee or 2) the employer failed to investigate and respond to reports directly provided to appropriate management personnel. Damages under the Act may include injunctive relief, and actual damages, damages for emotional distress and punitive damages. And importantly, the GVA is a fee-shifting statute - so a successful plaintiff may seek to recover attorneys fees. So, in cases of sexual harassment, may a plaintiff, include a count for damages under the GVA? The answer is an unqualified yes. And the contact need not be excessive or dramatic or prolonged - so long as there was no consent nor any justification for the physical contact. In fact, the Act notes that a legitimate threat that the harasser will commit an nonconsensual act is sufficient.
Red Tesla sedan driving on a road.
September 26, 2025
According to online reports, Tesla ignored a $60 million dollar settlement overture in the wrongful death case that ultimately resulted in a $242 million dollar jury verdict against the car maker. The lawsuit grew out of 2019 crash where a Tesla Model S with Autopilot engaged, plowed through a Florida intersection and crashed into a Chevy Tahoe. Neima Benavides Leon and her boyfriend, Dillon Angulo were standing near the Tahoe when the Tesla crashed into it. Leon was killed and Angulo suffered serious injuries. A lawsuit was filed against Tesla, asserting that although the Autopilot feature was engaged, the vehicle did not brake. Florida law permits a monetary demand to be issued before trial. If the defendant fails to accept the demand within 30 days it is considered rejected. If the plaintiff then goes to trial and secures a verdict 25% greater than the offer, the defendant is on the hook for plaintiff’s investigative expenses and attorneys’ fees. Tesla is appealing the jury verdict, citing “substantial errors of law and irregularities at trial.”.
Johnson's baby powder container, white bottle, blue text, red seal, 400g.
September 26, 2025
This important ruling got kind of lost in the news cycle. A couple weeks ago, the United States Supreme Court refused to vacate a $2.2 billion dollar ovarian cancer verdict against Johnson & Johnson[“J & J”]. The verdict was originally returned by a Missouri jury in 2018 on behalf of 22 women. The original verdict was actually $4.7 billion but a Missouri Appellate Court reduced the award to $2 billion. Each of the women claimed that there was asbestos and asbestos-laced talc in J & J talcum powder products they used, and they developed ovarian cancer as a result. Asbestos is known to cause cancer. Talc, in its raw form is often found in close proximity to naturally occurring asbestos. When J & J mined talc, that talc sometimes contained asbestos. And that asbestos sometimes found its way into J & J personal hygiene products. [In 2019, J & J recalled 33,000 bottles of J & J products after FDA testing found asbestos in test samples]. J & J, has known of the risk of asbestos contamination in talc products since the 1970’s. Some 21,000 plus ovarian cancer cases are pending against J & J throughout the United States.