Meet our Scientific Director

Can you provide us with an overview of your experience?

As Scientific Director, I’ve developed and led KTB’s growing scientific practice since joining the firm in 2019. I routinely serve in court-appointed scientific leadership in federal and state pharmaceutical and medical device complex litigations, in which I work with experts to develop scientific and medical evidence that inures to the common benefit of hundreds of thousands of plaintiffs. Last year, I was elected to the prestigious American College of Epidemiology, in which I serve in leadership establishing ethics and standards of practice in epidemiology, and named a leading American scientist by Marquis Who’s Who in America for my significant and sustained contributions to the field of epidemiology and its application to the law. I hold a law degree with honors from Emory University, a graduate degree with honors in chronic disease epidemiology from Yale University, and an undergraduate degree in molecular cell biology from Duke University.


Tell me about KTB's science department and the successes the team has faced since its inception?

KTB’s scientific practice developed as a natural extension of our larger mass tort practice. Having worked as a scientist at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Center for Patient Safety, Dartmouth College, and Vanderbilt University, I’m used to collaborating with other scientists to answer complex questions and, upon my arrival at KTB, aspired to develop an in-house science team that I could trust with important expert work and to troubleshoot complex, technical issues. Our science team has experienced success in a few short years, having been appointed by the courts to scientific leadership in a number of complex litigations and collaborating with leading, national complex litigation firms including Keller Postman, the Lanier Law Firm, Watts Guerra, Holwell Shuster Goldberg, Tracey Fox and Walters, Dovel and Luner, and many more.


How has the role of epidemiology changed over the past few years in Mass Tort litigations? How do you think this will evolve given what you've experienced so far?

Epidemiology and its subdisciplines, e.g., pharmacoepidemiology and pharmacovigilance, have evolved considerably over the past two decades. Courts have generally been slow to adopt generally accepted, albeit newer, methodologies in support of causation, liability, and notice, although a number of jurisdictions and the Federal Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence have already embraced more modern interpretations of epidemiological data. As complex litigations grow even more scientifically and technically complex, litigants and judges will necessarily have to consider and evaluate new and different epidemiological lines of evidence. It will be up to lawyers and scientists to thoughtfully and diligently present this data and make the case for its admissibility at trial.

Why should other firms partner with Kershaw Talley Barlow’s science team?

The members of our science team proudly characterize ourselves as equal parts scientist and lawyer. Collectively, we’ve spent decades training and honing our science skills in the laboratory and on the field, which imparts a level of first-hand knowledge and experience that is critical to understanding every scientific and technical facet of even the most complex litigations. That complete understanding, combined with diligent preparation and legal creativity, has been the key to our success in the courtroom.