Jillian E. Madison

All articles by Jillian E. Madison

 

Defendant’s Summary Judgment Upheld by Wisconsin Appellate Court Finding That the 10-Year Statute of Repose Barred Appellant’s Claims

WISCONSIN – In this appellate action, Jacqueline Nooyen, the plaintiff, sought to appeal the circuit court’s decision to grant summary judgment to the defendants, Wisconsin Electric Power Company, Madison Gas and Electric Company, Wisconsin Power & Light Company, and Wisconsin Public Service Corporation. The plantiff’s husband, the decedent, was a career pipefitter who, between 1970 and 1973, was involved in the original construction of two nuclear power plants owned by the defendants. On December 2, 2016, the decedent was diagnosed with mesothelioma as a result…  

California Appellate Court Upholds Defendants’ Summary Judgment Based Upon Appellants’ Failure to Create a Triable Issue of Material Fact

CALIFORNIA – In July 2016, Ann Patrice Gibbons, the plaintiff/appellant, was diagnosed with mesothelioma. A lawsuit was filed by the appellant and her husband in December 2016, alleging the appellant’s exposure to asbestos through her own use, from 1980 to 2000, of Shower to Shower talcum powder manufactured by Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc. (JJCI), as well as take-home exposure from the appellant’s current and former spouses, who worked in the construction industry from 1981 to 2000. JJCI, along with their supplier of talc, Imerys…  

Defendants Win Locomotive Inspection Act Preemption Argument on Summary Judgment Motion in Pennsylvania

PENNSYLVANIA – A personal injury lawsuit was filed in the court of common pleas of Philadelphia County in April 2016 on behalf of the decedent, Diane Shields. Thereafter, it was removed to federal court. The complaint alleged common law causes of action for negligence, wrongful death and survivorship claims due to the decedent’s exposure to asbestos through her employment at the Motor Coils Manufacturing Company in Braddock, PA. The decedent worked as a laborer at Motor Coils where she cleaned pinion gears as part of…  

Application of Seven Lockwood Factors Creates Issues of Material Fact; Summary Judgment on Product Liability Claim Denied

WASHINGTON – The latest development in a case extensively covered by Asbestos Case Tracker finds the Western District of Washington denying defendant Pneumo Abex LLC’s motion for summary judgment. This matter was filed on behalf of the decedent, Rudie Klopman-Baerselman, in the Pierce County Superior Court on October 27, 2017 and removed to United States District Court. The plaintiff alleged that the decedent was exposed to asbestos through his maintenance work on vehicles, including friction work, from approximately 1966 to 1997, as well as through…  

Evidence of Prior Asbestos Lawsuits Against Defendant Discoverable

KENTUCKY – The plaintiffs, Jack and Holly Papineau, filed a lawsuit against several defendants alleging damages suffered from exposure to asbestos. The plaintiffs filed a motion to compel the defendant Honeywell to supplement answers to interrogatories and requests for production, specifically regarding prior lawsuits. After oral argument, the court requested that the plaintiffs narrow the scope of their supplemental requests. The plaintiffs complied, requesting information and documents pertaining to all lawsuits filed against Honeywell wherein the claimant alleged an asbestos-related disease from exposure to Honeywell…  

Court Refuses Plaintiff’s Attempt to “Smuggle” New Discovery Requests through Motion Practice

PENNSYLVANIA – The plaintiff filed this lawsuit against several defendants alleging damages suffered from exposure to asbestos. The opinion did not provide any background into exposure, disease or procedural history, other than ongoing motion practice between the plaintiff and the defendant, Space Systems/Loral, LLC (SSL) regarding responses to discovery.The plaintiff filed a motion to compel SSL to provide more adequate responses to interrogatories, specifically Interrogatory No. 3, regarding company background information. On July 22, 2019, the court issued an order compelling the requested discovery from…  

Ten Motions for Summary Judgment Granted due to Lack of Identification

DELAWARE – The plaintiffs, Kent and Cathy Mosher, filed an asbestos-related action in Delaware Superior Court on January 25, 2018. The complaint alleged Kent Mosher contracted mesothelioma as a result of asbestos exposure during his employment as a boiler technician in the United States Navy from 1973 to 1977 and through his employment at the Henderson Mine in Denver, CO from 1977 to 1983. The defendant, Crane Co., removed this matter to Delaware District Court in March 2018 pursuant to the Federal Officer Removal Statute,…  

Delaware District Court Rules on Pre-trial Motions in Maritime Law Case

DELAWARE – The plaintiff filed this asbestos-related wrongful death action in Delaware on June 11, 2015. While the court does not explain the underlying case facts, motion practice regarding admiralty law and expert exclusion indicates that the decedent was exposed to asbestos while a member of the United States Navy. As trial is approaching for this case, the plaintiff and the defendant, John Crane, Inc. (JCI), both filed motions in limine. The plaintiff’s motion sought to exclude discussion or reference to collateral sources, including…  

Plaintiff’s General Statements of Defendants’ Alleged Successor Liability Insufficient to Withstand 12(b)(6) Motion

DELAWARE – The plaintiff initially filed her asbestos-related wrongful death lawsuit in New Jersey claiming the decedent Robert Fish suffered exposure to asbestos during his service as a civilian at New York Shipbuilding and Drydock in Camden, NJ. The court noted the plaintiff specifically alleged the decedent’s exposure from Arnot, a joiner contractor who cut paneling around the decedent at New York Shipbuilding and Drydock. Shortly after the plaintiff filed the complaint, the defendants removed the case to the U.S. District Court for the District…  

Asbestos Trust Transparency Update

Asbestos litigation has been consistently active throughout the United States since the first asbestos lawsuit was filed in the 1970s. As the population of asbestos plaintiffs has grown over the last 40 years, so have the funds paid by various asbestos defendants. This growing financial burden has caused numerous asbestos defendants to file for bankruptcy. In doing so, the insolvent defendants are required to create asbestos trust funds for the protection of future asbestos plaintiffs. To date, there are over 50 active asbestos bankruptcy trusts…