Category Archives: Remand/Removal

Remand Denied Under Federal Officer Jurisdiction Analysis for Plaintiff Alleging Asbestos Exposure in U.S. Navy U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, Tampa Division, December 27, 2016

Plaintiff Marc Killiam served in the U.S. Navy from 1973 to 1977 aboard the USS McCandless while at sea and in the Philadelphia Navy Yard. He alleges that as a boiler tender he removed and replaced various asbestos containing products and that exposure to asbestos from those products caused his asbestosis. He filed suit in Hillsborough County, Florida on September 26, 2016 against various defendants, including Crane Co. Crane removed the case to the U.S. District Court on October 13, 2016 pursuant to 28 U.S.C.…

Continue Reading....

Take Home Mesothelioma Case Remanded After Plaintiff Adds Dismissed Defendant to Amended Complaint U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana, November 4, 2016

Charleen Guedry brought this action against multiple defendants for her alleged development of mesothelioma as a result of exposure through her husband’s work clothes. Mr. Guedry worked at International Maintenance/Turner from 1983-2005. The plaintiffs moved to dismiss claims without prejudice against defendant Arnco on May 12, 2016. Co-defendant Brock indicated to the plaintiffs its intent to remove the case on diversity since Arnco was being dismissed. On May 19, 2016, the plaintiffs withdrew the dismissal of Arnco and desired to conduct discovery based on receiving…

Continue Reading....

Affidavits Used in Other Cases Enough to Establish Removal Under Federal Officer Jurisdiction U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois, November 30, 2016

The plaintiff brought a wrongful death lawsuit after her husband died of mesothelioma, alleging asbestos exposure during her husband’s service in the Navy. Originally filed in Madison County, Illinois, defendant Crane Co. removed on the basis of the federal officer removal statute. The plaintiff filed a motion to remand, arguing that Crane waived its right to remove by first filing a motion to dismiss in state court, and that Crane failed to establish federal subject matter jurisdiction. The court denied the plaintiff’s motion. Regarding waiver…

Continue Reading....

Broad Interpretation of the Federal Officer Removal Statute Keeps Case Against Boeing in Federal Court U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, November 22, 2016

The plaintiff filed a failure-to-warn product liability suit against, among others, The Boeing Company, after his wife Mary became ill from alleged secondary asbestos exposure. Boeing removed to federal court based upon the federal officer removal statute. The district court remanded, and the appellate court reversed. The plaintiff alleged Mary suffered take home asbestos exposure through laundering the clothes of her first husband Robert Keck. While working for New Brunswick Plating Co. in the late 1970s, Keck sandblasted the landing gear of World War II…

Continue Reading....

Take Home Mesothelioma Case Remanded After Defendant Files Untimely Removal; Costs Denied U.S. District Court for Eastern District Of Louisiana, November 17, 2016

The plaintiffs brought claims sounded in negligence, intentional tort, fraud and strict liability for their decedent’s mesothelioma which was alleged to have developed after coming into contact with her husband’s asbestos laden clothes. Mr. Tregre was alleged to have worked for Avondale Industries, a predecessor to Huntington Ingalls, Inc. while onboard ship construction. Avondale removed the case to the U.S. District Court on May 16, 2016 under federal officer removal statute and argued that it built ships under contract for the U.S. who required the…

Continue Reading....

Federal Court Denies Remand on Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act Jurisdiction and Dismisses Fraud Counts of Complaint U.S. District Court for Eastern District Of Louisiana, November 17, 2016

The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana issued two opinions in the matter of Sheppard v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., et al. which denied the plaintiffs’ motion to remand and dismissed the plaintiffs’ fraud cause of action against the defendants. Plaintiff Jesse Frank Sheppard originally filed in the Civil District Court for the Parish of Orleans. Sheppard alleged that he developed lung cancer and/or mesothelioma as a result of exposure to asbestos while working for Freeport Sulphur Company. The plaintiff sued…

Continue Reading....

Various Cases Remanded to State Court After Joinder of Law Firm Alleged to Have Induced Plaintiffs to Accept Artificially Low Settlement Amounts Extinguished Diversity Jurisdiction U.S. District Court for the District of Hawaii, October 31, 2016

Various plaintiffs (Baclaan plaintiffs) filed a motion to remand and/or abstain and a motion for leave to name a new party defendant. Other groups of plaintiffs (Toro plaintiffs and Hopkins plaintiffs) filed similar motions in their respective cases.  Defendant Arter & Hadden LLP (A&H) filed a joint memorandum in opposition to all three motions, to which all three groups of plaintiffs replied. The court granted all the motions and remanded all cases to state court. Baclaan and Toro plaintiffs are class actions and Hopkins is…

Continue Reading....

Grant of Remand to State Court Reversed in Favor of Shipyard Defendants U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, November 1, 2016

The plaintiffs brought this action in state court against numerous defendants including Foster Wheeler LLC and Foster Wheeler Energy Corporation alleging Mr. Ripley developed mesothelioma while working as a boilermaker at Norfolk Naval Shipyard in Virginia from 1969-72 and again from 1974 until the late 1970s. Foster Wheeler removed the case based on the federal officer removal statute. Specifically, Foster Wheeler asserted the government contractor defense. The plaintiff moved to remand. Following “decades old practice of denying the government contractor defense in a failure to…

Continue Reading....

Identity of Navy Ship Where Plaintiff Served Enough to Trigger Federal Officer Removability Clock U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, October 27, 2016

Plaintiff Marvin Smith alleged asbestos exposure while serving as a fireman in the U.S. Navy from 1951-54, and while working as a fireman and warehouseman at various shipyards and warehouses. The plaintiff and his wife sued various defendants in state court after he was diagnosed with pleural mesothelioma. Defendant Crane Co. removed this mesothelioma case to federal court under the federal officer removal statute; the plaintiffs moved to remand, alleging untimely removal, which the court granted. The plaintiffs argued removability was ascertainable when Smith was…

Continue Reading....

Plaintiff’s Motion for Costs, Fees, Expenses, and Sanctions Denied but Granted as to Remand for Untimely Removal U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri, Eastern Division, October 27, 2016

The plaintiff brought this suit against numerous defendants including Ford Motor Company. She alleged that the decedent developed and passed from mesothelioma as a result of exposure to dust from products manufactured, sold, and distributed while Mr. Bristol worked as a mechanic at a Ford dealership from 1972-1989. Ford removed the case a day after trial began and well over a year from the date the complaint was filed. The plaintiff moved for sanctions and to remand stating that Ford failed to obtain consent of…

Continue Reading....