Photo of Alycenne Nguyen

Alycenne Nguyen

Alycenne enrolled in law school with a background in the field already: she’d worked first as a legal receptionist and then as a paralegal, giving her a solid foundation in the legal system. Her experience also provided her with a unique perspective on the “behind the scenes” of legal operations, as well as client service. As a paralegal, Alycenne had had extensive client contact and seen the importance of connecting with clients on a personal level.

Alycenne also had the opportunity to work closely with clients during her time as a summer associate. Not only did she work directly with firm clients on mass tort and product liability issues, learning as much as possible about their businesses and products, but she also served as an in-house summer associate with a large public utility company. Her in-house experience gave her a broader picture of clients’ world and how she can best support clients as outside counsel.

Now a fully qualified attorney, Alycenne represents clients in a variety of product liability and toxic tort matters, including asbestos litigation. As part of the Alliance Motions and Research Team, she has drafted motions for summary judgment, motions to dismiss and compel arbitration, and motions in opposition to plaintiff motions to vacate third party demand. Known for her strategic thinking and creative problem-solving skills, Alycenne is a diligent and analytical attorney who is dedicated to providing hands-on support and representation to clients.

Contact:Read more about Alycenne Nguyen

In May 2025, the Supreme Court of Washington overruled previous precedent regarding the deliberate intent to injure exception related to workers’ compensation immunity for employers, finding that an employee may sue its employer for latent disease injury if they can establish the employer had actual knowledge that latent diseases are “virtually certain” to occur. Cockrum v.
C.H. Murphy/Clark-Ullman, Inc., 569 P.3d 287, 289 (Wash. 2025). In Cockrum, the Plaintiff is a living mesothelioma claimant (“Plaintiff”), who filed suit against his employer as a premises defendant (“Defendant”), alleging that they deliberately intended to injure him by exposing him to asbestos without proper warnings or protections while he worked as a laborer at their facility from 1967 to 1997. He further argued that Defendant had actual knowledge that injury was certain to occur from asbestos exposure but willfully disregarded that knowledge by continuously exposing him to asbestos without proper warning or protection. Specifically, he alleged exposure to asbestos while working in the environmental lab, where he tested samples for asbestos without any protective gear.

McGinty v. Zheng, No. A-1368-23, 2024 WL 4248446 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. Sept. 20, 2024)

On March 31, 2022, a lawyer and her husband sustained personal injuries after their rideshare driver ran a red light and collided with another vehicle.[1] The lawyer underwent numerous surgeries and other procedures after sustaining cervical and lumbar spine fractures, rib fractures, a protruding hernia, traumatic injuries to her abdominal wall and pelvic floor, and other physical injuries.[2] She was unable to work for over 12 months after the accident, until April 23, 2023.[3] Her husband sustained a fractured sternum and fractures to his left arm and wrist, for which he underwent an operation and received a bone graft.[4]