Category Archives: Alabama

Lack of Evidence Linking Decedent’s Asbestos Exposure to Defendants Leads to Summary Judgment for Pump and Valve Manufacturers and Contractor U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama, Northeastern Division, March 24, 2016

The plaintiff, George Holland, brought this action on behalf of the decedent, Owen Holland, alleging exposure to asbestos from his work at Monsanto Chemical Plant from 1967–2004. From 1974-2002, the decedent worked with external components of pumps and valves manufactured by Goulds and Crane. He also would sweep packing from around the pumps and fibers from around the valves. Both Goulds and Crane moved for—and were denied—summary judgment. Defendant Fluor Daniel preformed construction and maintenance work at Monsanto from 1967-1998. Its motion for summary judgment…

Continue Reading....

Alabama District Court Refuses to Enter MDL 875’s Grant of Summary Judgment to Defendants as Final Judgment U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama, January 12, 2016

The plaintiff brought an action in state court alleging defendants manufactured asbestos products, which caused her husband’s asbestosis and ultimate death. The defendants removed to federal court based on diversity, created after the state court severed the worker’s compensation and asbestos claims. The federal case contained only issues of asbestos injury and was transferred to MDL 875 in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.  Four years later, the case returned to the Northern District of Alabama. Rockwell and Eaton then moved to make the MDL’s grant…

Continue Reading....

Alabama Supreme Court Reverses Summary Judgment In Favor of Talc Defendant Based on Product Identification, Not Asbestos Content, of Talc Supreme Court of Alabama, September 30, 2015

In this case, the Alabama Supreme Court reversed and remanded the order granting summary judgment to defendant Vanderbilt Minerals. The Supreme Court included a large summary of facts in its opinion. The decedent, Dansby W. Sanders, died from mesothelioma; prior to his passing, he sued numerous defendants alleging he was exposed to asbestos while working for Mobile Paint Company. Vanderbilt supplied industrial talc under the brand name Nytal to Mobile Paint. Various witnesses testified as to the presence of Nytal supplied by Vanderbilt. Vanderbilt responded…

Continue Reading....

Federal Court Bench Trial Renders Verdict in Favor of Plaintiff in Take-Home Exposure Case and Awards Full Medical Expenses U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama, Northeastern Division, September 29, 2015

In this federal court case, it was alleged that the decedent, Barbara Bobo, had secondary take-home exposure to asbestos from laundering her husband’s work clothes. Her husband worked at the Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant, operated by Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) from 1975-1997. Following denial of TVA’s motion for summary judgment, the case went to bench trial, where the court’s findings of fact supported that Mr. Bobo was exposed to asbestos at the plant from items such as insulation, roofing cement, gaskets, and pump packing. In…

Continue Reading....

Applying Alabama Law In Two Cases, Federal Court Grants One Motion and Denies Another to Engine Manufacturers Under Bare Metal Defense U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Alabama, Northern Division, August 4, 2015

In one case, the plaintiff claimed that the decedent was exposed to asbestos while working on Cummins engines in the Navy and Coast Guard. Defendant Cummins moved for summary judgment, arguing that the engines were 17 years old and were overhauled at least once. There was no proof the gasket materials were original to the engine. The plaintiff also argued that the decedent was exposed to asbestos blankets and lagging on the engines. The court recognized that Alabama would recognize the bare metal defense and,…

Continue Reading....