Subscribe
Alert
Jonathan Huber
Partner
Suite 900
Washington, D.C., 20001
Jonathan litigates and tries multi-party complex toxic tort cases in state and federal courts around the United States. He currently serves as a member of the national coordinating counsel team for a Fortune 200 consumer products company embroiled in talcum powder litigation, coordinating the company’s defense nationwide on a host of issues, including discovery, corporate...
Jonathan litigates and tries multi-party complex toxic tort cases in state and federal courts around the United States. He currently serves as a member of the national coordinating counsel team for a Fortune 200 consumer products company embroiled in talcum powder litigation, coordinating the company’s defense nationwide on a host of issues, including discovery, corporate designee witness testimony, experts, and trial workup. He also acts as local counsel in Maryland and the District of Columbia for a Fortune 100 company defending numerous lawsuits related to legacy asbestos liabilities.
Jonathan has represented Fortune 500 clients in mass tort and environmental disputes related to a variety of toxic substances, including dioxin, PCBs, asbestos, and silica. Jonathan has extensive experience managing complex litigation, investigating the underlying facts of a claim, defending and taking depositions of critical fact and expert witnesses, oral arguments, and motions practice in courts throughout the United States. He also represents clients in settlement negotiations and arbitration proceedings and advises in mediation procedures.
designee witness testimony, experts, and trial workup. He also acts as local counsel in Maryland and the District of Columbia for a Fortune 100 company defending numerous lawsuits related to legacy asbestos liabilities.
Jonathan has represented Fortune 500 clients in mass tort and environmental disputes related to a variety of toxic substances, including dioxin, PCBs, asbestos, and silica. Jonathan has extensive experience managing complex litigation, investigating the underlying facts of a claim, defending and taking depositions of critical fact and expert witnesses, oral arguments, and motions practice in courts throughout the United States. He also represents clients in settlement negotiations and arbitration proceedings and advises in mediation procedures.
Experience
Representative Matters
- Obtained summary judgment in D.C. federal court on behalf of a Fortune 100 manufacturer on all claims in a toxic tort products liability suit by applying Virginia’s “sufficient to have caused” standard. The plaintiffs had argued and had their experts prepare reports and testimony based upon a different causation standard, and the D.C. Circuit upheld the trial court’s conclusion that the plaintiffs were bound by their strategic decision and could not change their experts’ testimony mid-stream
- Prosecuted a cost recovery/allocation action against several potentially responsible parties related to the Providence, Rhode Island Superfund site on behalf of a large power tools manufacturer in the District of Rhode Island
- Obtained judgment on the pleadings on behalf of a Fortune 100 manufacturer on breach of warranty, fraud, conspiracy, market share liability, and punitive damages claims of toxic tort case pending in the District of Maryland, leaving only negligence and strict products liability claims
- Obtained summary judgment in the District of Maryland on behalf of a drug company on all claims in a products liability action involving off-label use of skin cream because claims were barred by the learned intermediary doctrine, Maryland’s three-year statute of limitations and because the plaintiff had sued the wrong party
- Served as a member of a toxic tort trial team on behalf of a Fortune 100 manufacturer in the Superior Court of California, Monterey County. The case was nearly in the jury's hands when, the day before closing arguments, the court granted our motion for nonsuit on the issue of punitive damages, ruling that the plaintiffs had not established the elements necessary to make out a prima facie case for such damages. The case was subsequently resolved on very favorable terms for our client
- Obtained a significant trial advantage in toxic tort action on behalf of a Fortune 100 manufacturer involving historic exposures to asbestos when the Circuit Court for Baltimore City ruled that the plaintiffs could not introduce state-of-the art evidence post-dating the decedent’s last alleged exposure to client’s product. The court reasoned that a post-sale warning would not make a difference because the plaintiffs alleged that the decedent’s mesothelioma was incurable and untreatable and that “each and every” exposure the decedent had to asbestos was a substantial contributing factor in the development of mesothelioma
- Obtained a partial summary judgment on behalf of a national paint manufacturer and retailer of negligent misrepresentation, Maryland consumer protection, and breach of warranty claims in a home construction defect case
- Defended a multi-family housing landlord in Baltimore City Circuit Court in a 40+ plaintiff personal injury and constitutional rights litigation related to allegations that the landlord’s security guards were harassing residents and that the guards were allegedly abusing their “Special Police” powers
- Obtained dismissal of breach of fiduciary duty claim on behalf of a drug company in Chancery Court of Delaware applying English law
- Pro bono representation of a prisoner in Section 1983 action against Maryland state prison guards in the District of Maryland
Education
-
University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law,
JD,
magna cum laude
(2012)
- Order of the Coif
- University of Pennsylvania, BA, cum laude (2007)
Admissions
- District of Columbia
- Maryland
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia
- U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland
Representative Matters
- Obtained summary judgment in D.C. federal court on behalf of a Fortune 100 manufacturer on all claims in a toxic tort products liability suit by applying Virginia’s “sufficient to have caused” standard. The plaintiffs had argued and had their experts prepare reports and testimony based upon a different causation standard, and the D.C. Circuit upheld the trial court’s conclusion that the plaintiffs were bound by their strategic decision and could not change their experts’ testimony mid-stream
- Prosecuted a cost recovery/allocation action against several potentially responsible parties related to the Providence, Rhode Island Superfund site on behalf of a large power tools manufacturer in the District of Rhode Island
- Obtained judgment on the pleadings on behalf of a Fortune 100 manufacturer on breach of warranty, fraud, conspiracy, market share liability, and punitive damages claims of toxic tort case pending in the District of Maryland, leaving only negligence and strict products liability claims
- Obtained summary judgment in the District of Maryland on behalf of a drug company on all claims in a products liability action involving off-label use of skin cream because claims were barred by the learned intermediary doctrine, Maryland’s three-year statute of limitations and because the plaintiff had sued the wrong party
- Served as a member of a toxic tort trial team on behalf of a Fortune 100 manufacturer in the Superior Court of California, Monterey County. The case was nearly in the jury's hands when, the day before closing arguments, the court granted our motion for nonsuit on the issue of punitive damages, ruling that the plaintiffs had not established the elements necessary to make out a prima facie case for such damages. The case was subsequently resolved on very favorable terms for our client
- Obtained a significant trial advantage in toxic tort action on behalf of a Fortune 100 manufacturer involving historic exposures to asbestos when the Circuit Court for Baltimore City ruled that the plaintiffs could not introduce state-of-the art evidence post-dating the decedent’s last alleged exposure to client’s product. The court reasoned that a post-sale warning would not make a difference because the plaintiffs alleged that the decedent’s mesothelioma was incurable and untreatable and that “each and every” exposure the decedent had to asbestos was a substantial contributing factor in the development of mesothelioma
- Obtained a partial summary judgment on behalf of a national paint manufacturer and retailer of negligent misrepresentation, Maryland consumer protection, and breach of warranty claims in a home construction defect case
- Defended a multi-family housing landlord in Baltimore City Circuit Court in a 40+ plaintiff personal injury and constitutional rights litigation related to allegations that the landlord’s security guards were harassing residents and that the guards were allegedly abusing their “Special Police” powers
- Obtained dismissal of breach of fiduciary duty claim on behalf of a drug company in Chancery Court of Delaware applying English law
- Pro bono representation of a prisoner in Section 1983 action against Maryland state prison guards in the District of Maryland
Media
Recognitions
- The Best Lawyers in America® Ones to Watch, Litigation - Construction (2021–2025), Litigation - Environmental (2024-2025), Mass Tort Litigation/Class Actions – Defendants (2021–2025), Product Liability Litigation - Defendants (2025)
- Maryland Super Lawyers® Rising Stars, Personal Injury – Products: Defense (2021)
- University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law William P. Cunningham Award (2012)
Professional Activities
- Editor–in–Chief, Maryland Journal of International Law
Jonathan litigates and tries multi-party complex toxic tort cases in state and federal courts around the United States. He currently serves as a member of the national coordinating counsel team for a Fortune 200 consumer products company embroiled in talcum powder litigation, coordinating the company’s defense nationwide on a host of issues, including discovery, corporate... designee witness testimony, experts, and trial workup. He also acts as local counsel in Maryland and the District of Columbia for a Fortune 100 company defending numerous lawsuits related to legacy asbestos liabilities.
Jonathan has represented Fortune 500 clients in mass tort and environmental disputes related to a variety of toxic substances, including dioxin, PCBs, asbestos, and silica. Jonathan has extensive experience managing complex litigation, investigating the underlying facts of a claim, defending and taking depositions of critical fact and expert witnesses, oral arguments, and motions practice in courts throughout the United States. He also represents clients in settlement negotiations and arbitration proceedings and advises in mediation procedures.
Experience
The following is a selected sampling of matters and is provided for informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in any future matter.Representative Matters
- Obtained summary judgment in D.C. federal court on behalf of a Fortune 100 manufacturer on all claims in a toxic tort products liability suit by applying Virginia’s “sufficient to have caused” standard. The plaintiffs had argued and had their experts prepare reports and testimony based upon a different causation standard, and the D.C. Circuit upheld the trial court’s conclusion that the plaintiffs were bound by their strategic decision and could not change their experts’ testimony mid-stream
- Prosecuted a cost recovery/allocation action against several potentially responsible parties related to the Providence, Rhode Island Superfund site on behalf of a large power tools manufacturer in the District of Rhode Island
- Obtained judgment on the pleadings on behalf of a Fortune 100 manufacturer on breach of warranty, fraud, conspiracy, market share liability, and punitive damages claims of toxic tort case pending in the District of Maryland, leaving only negligence and strict products liability claims
- Obtained summary judgment in the District of Maryland on behalf of a drug company on all claims in a products liability action involving off-label use of skin cream because claims were barred by the learned intermediary doctrine, Maryland’s three-year statute of limitations and because the plaintiff had sued the wrong party
- Served as a member of a toxic tort trial team on behalf of a Fortune 100 manufacturer in the Superior Court of California, Monterey County. The case was nearly in the jury's hands when, the day before closing arguments, the court granted our motion for nonsuit on the issue of punitive damages, ruling that the plaintiffs had not established the elements necessary to make out a prima facie case for such damages. The case was subsequently resolved on very favorable terms for our client
- Obtained a significant trial advantage in toxic tort action on behalf of a Fortune 100 manufacturer involving historic exposures to asbestos when the Circuit Court for Baltimore City ruled that the plaintiffs could not introduce state-of-the art evidence post-dating the decedent’s last alleged exposure to client’s product. The court reasoned that a post-sale warning would not make a difference because the plaintiffs alleged that the decedent’s mesothelioma was incurable and untreatable and that “each and every” exposure the decedent had to asbestos was a substantial contributing factor in the development of mesothelioma
- Obtained a partial summary judgment on behalf of a national paint manufacturer and retailer of negligent misrepresentation, Maryland consumer protection, and breach of warranty claims in a home construction defect case
- Defended a multi-family housing landlord in Baltimore City Circuit Court in a 40+ plaintiff personal injury and constitutional rights litigation related to allegations that the landlord’s security guards were harassing residents and that the guards were allegedly abusing their “Special Police” powers
- Obtained dismissal of breach of fiduciary duty claim on behalf of a drug company in Chancery Court of Delaware applying English law
- Pro bono representation of a prisoner in Section 1983 action against Maryland state prison guards in the District of Maryland
Education
-
University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law,
JD,
magna cum laude
(2012)
- Order of the Coif
- University of Pennsylvania, BA, cum laude (2007)
Admissions
- District of Columbia
- Maryland
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia
- U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland
Practice Areas
- The Best Lawyers in America® Ones to Watch, Litigation - Construction (2021–2025), Litigation - Environmental (2024-2025), Mass Tort Litigation/Class Actions – Defendants (2021–2025), Product Liability Litigation - Defendants (2025)
- Maryland Super Lawyers® Rising Stars, Personal Injury – Products: Defense (2021)
- University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law William P. Cunningham Award (2012)
- Editor–in–Chief, Maryland Journal of International Law
Highlights from the Firm’s Insights
