Site Search
Professionals 59 results
Capabilities 16 results
Practice Area
Product Liability & Mass Torts
Major multinational companies trust Winston to defend their products and reputations in high-profile, high-stakes product liability and mass tort claims. Our Product Liability & Mass Torts Practice is one of the industry’s most seasoned, with a deep bench of experienced lawyers and a unique combination of extensive trial experience and expansive technical knowledge.
Practice Area
Addressing a crisis in today’s climate requires both swift action and careful consideration of all potential risks. Winston & Strawn is a trusted business adviser to clients facing complex, fast-moving, high-profile crises.
Practice Area
Environmental Litigation & Enforcement
With today’s rapidly evolving rules of engagement, paired with the often contentious nature of environmental disputes, clients rely on Winston for our practical experience and substantive knowledge of the broad-ranging issues involved in environmental litigation, enforcement, and investigations.
Experience 91 results
Experience
|April 6, 2026
MLBPI’s Licensing Fight Ends in Victory and Settlement with DraftKings
Winston is representing MLB Players Inc. (MLBPI), which serves as the exclusive group licensing representative for all MLB (major league baseball) players. MLBPI sued several online sportsbook and mobile-betting platforms, including DraftKings, over their use of hundreds of MLB player images and likenesses without MLBPI’s consent.
Experience
|March 16, 2026
Winston & Strawn LLP Paris advised La Phocéenne de Cosmétique in connection with the acquisition of Laboratoires de Biarritz.
Experience
|March 4, 2026
End of the Line: Winston Wins Unanimous Supreme Court Victory Against NJ Transit
In a unanimous decision authored by Justice Sotomayor, the U.S. Supreme Court held that NJ Transit is not an arm of the State of New Jersey and therefore is not entitled to sovereign immunity. The ruling means that plaintiffs injured by NJ Transit outside of New Jersey—such as in Pennsylvania and New York—may pursue claims in the courts of the states where their injuries occurred. The court adopted Winston’s position that state-created corporations that are formally liable for their own judgments are not arms of the state, reversing the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s dismissal of Cedric Galette’s negligence suit while affirming the New York Court of Appeals’ decision allowing Jeffrey Colt’s case to proceed.
Insights & News 1,008 results
Life at Winston
|April 22, 2026
|1 Min Read
Winston For Good Heroes: Martha Huffman is a Beneficent Beekeeper, Community Member & Colleague
Giving back to Fate, Texas—the small community where she has lived on her “ranchette” for the past 28 years—is a way of life for Martha. Beekeeping and local politics are simply the latest ways in which she pays her good fortune forward within Fate.
In the Media
|April 16, 2026
|4 Min Read
Winston Secures Transformative Antitrust Verdict for States in Live Nation and Ticketmaster Trial
A Winston & Strawn team, led by Jeffrey Kessler, secured an antitrust verdict on behalf of more than 30 states and the District of Columbia, with a Manhattan federal jury finding Live Nation Entertainment and Ticketmaster liable for violating federal and state antitrust laws in a decision that has the potential to transform the concert, music, and ticketing industry. The jury concluded that Ticketmaster unlawfully maintained a monopoly in the primary ticketing market for major concert venues and that Live Nation unlawfully monopolized the large amphitheater market, compelling artists to use its promotion services to access its venues. Jurors further found that this conduct resulted in higher ticket fees, leading to an approximate $1.72 overcharge per ticket for consumers.
In the Media
|April 10, 2026
|1 Min Read
Ross Greenspan Discusses Private Equity Continuation Vehicles with Cash and Carried
Winston & Strawn’s Ross Greenspan was quoted in a Cash and Carried article examining the rapid growth of continuation vehicles (CVs) and their evolving role in private equity liquidity and GP‑LP alignment. Most CV transactions allow existing LPs to choose from several options, including a full sale for liquidity, a reinvestment into the CV, or a combination of the two through a partial option. A subset of deals extend a “status quo option,” permitting LPs to stay in the existing vehicle or roll into the CV on the same economic terms of the existing vehicle.
Other Results 11 results
Site Content
In the product liability context, general causation is the legal and scientific determination of whether the product in question has the inherent capability to cause the alleged injury under certain circumstances. Establishment of general causation is a critical aspect of a plaintiff’s case, and typically requires scientific evidence, such as epidemiology or toxicology, and expert testimony to establish a causal connection between the product’s design, manufacturing, or warnings and the injury or injuries at issue. As contrasted to specific causation, the focus in a general causation inquiry is on whether the product or exposure, as a general matter, can cause the type of injury claimed by the plaintiff. A general causation inquiry does not assess any facts unique to a particular plaintiff.
Site Content
Specific causation is the legal and scientific determination of whether the product in question was the direct cause of a plaintiff's specific injury. While general causation inquires whether a broader connection exists between a product and a type of harm, a specific causation assessment focuses on the unique circumstances surrounding a particular plaintiff's case. It typically requires expert testimony demonstrating that the alleged defect or issue in the product was responsible for the specific injuries suffered by the plaintiff. Alternative explanations for the plaintiff’s specific injuries must also be ruled out—typically via a differential etiology—for specific causation to be established.
Site Content
Generative AI tools can create new content, such as text, computer code, images, audio, sound, and video, in response to a user’s prompt, often in the form of a short written description of the desired output. Generative AI tools are based on machine learning, trained using enormous amounts of data.[1] Generative AI tools are built on a system of inputs and outputs. First, the tool goes through a machine learning period whereby it is trained to generate predictive models and creative outputs through a large data set, often varied and diverse but tailored to the goal of the tool (i.e., customer service, generating scientific or marketing models, etc.). For in-house tools, this can be done with the company’s own data; for larger tools such as ChatGPT, this is done with the creator’s data set.[2] Once the tool has been trained, the individual user “inputs” a short prompt for the tool to synthesize and produce an “output.” Inputs are often retained on the servers controlled by the company that supports the tool, for monitoring of the tool’s performance and, in some cases, continued learning. The “outputs” are created by combining the machine learning during the training period with the inputs to produce an output.[3]