Karen B. Goldberg is a Partner in Selman Breitman’s Los Angeles office and is a member of the firm’s Products Liability, Toxic Tort/Environmental, Trucking/Transportation, and General Liability practice groups. With a concentration in products liability and toxic tort litigation, she represents a broad range of clients in product liability cases, including premise owners, as well as manufacturers, distributors and suppliers of a wide variety of products. She represents companies in the manufacturing, petrochemical, construction, distributing, maritime contracting and automotive industries. Karen builds strong defense strategies by getting to know the products she defends and the people and companies behind them. By immersing herself in an understanding of the individual, product and company, she is better able to understand the business impacts of the outcomes she seeks to achieve.
Karen acts as local and national coordinating counsel for her clients. She also has experience in representing defendants in product liability cases where plaintiffs' alleged injuries were caused by exposure to asbestos, benzene, silica, mold and other toxic substances. Her vast experience and understanding of the law and the science often rooted in these cases enable her to successfully defend companies, and provides her a unique ability to handle and represent her clients. She has co-chaired several trials over the years, and obtained numerous summary judgments, dismissals and favorable settlements in cases where plaintiffs are seeking multiple millions of dollars in damages.
She will engage in early communication with opposing counsel in order to have her clients dismissed at an early stage of the litigation. Karen will work tirelessly in order to get her clients dismissed from the case, either prior to the start of major discovery planning or in advance of the trial dates. She works closely with insured, claim representatives, national counsel, general counsel, and private clients. Karen's organizational skills, strategy and litigation and trial preparation with clients, and supervisory support to local counsel on product liability and toxic tort cases have resulted in serving her client’s goals and interests.
Karen was born and raised in Los Angeles, California. When not helping clients with their legal needs, she spends time with her husband and three children. She is a member of the Greater Los Angeles Girl Scouts.
- Obtained dismissal with motion for summary judgment pending, based upon lack of medical causation, in a product liability case where plaintiff alleged his disease was caused by exposure to asbestos from products manufactured by client.
- Obtained summary judgments in multiple actions against naval decking contractor in asbestos litigation after establishing plaintiffs' inability to show causation between work performed by defendant and the plaintiff's ultimate development of disease.
- Supervised and provided support to local counsel on product liability toxic tort/asbestos cases.
- Obtained a Summary Judgment for two general contractor defendants in a toxic tort matter (mesothelioma case) in which the disease was alleged to be caused by the failure to maintain a safe work site.
- Dismissals and favorable settlements were obtained for several defendants on behalf of lumber companies in a product liability case in which plaintiffs alleged that decedent’s illness was caused by exposure to wood preservatives.
- Represented various manufacturers and suppliers of construction materials in cases alleging toxic exposure to asbestos. Many cases resulted in an early dismissal of the client after depositions were taken, while others resulted in favorable settlements well before trial.
- Represented an oven manufacturer in a wrongful death asbestos matter. Plaintiffs claimed that their decedent, who passed away from mesothelioma, was exposed to asbestos from performing maintenance on the ovens allegedly manufactured by client. Plaintiffs sought millions of dollars in damages, including punitive damages, against client. A motion for summary judgment was filed on client's behalf. Plaintiffs' opposition relied upon three separate declarations to support their case, one from a plaintiff, one from decedent's co-worker, and one from plaintiffs' counsel himself. Aggressive objections were made to all three declarations on client's behalf, on various grounds. After extensive oral argument, the judge entirely disregarded one of the declarations, sustained every one of the objections to the two other declarations, and granted the summary judgment motion.
Professional Associations and Memberships
- American Bar Association (ABA), Member
- Los Angeles County Bar Association, Member
- Rated AV Preeminent® by Martindale-Hubbell
- Southern California Super Lawyer: 2018-2020