Motion for Summary Judgment Denied for Fireproofing Contractor at World Trade Center

Supreme Court of New York, New York County

The plaintiff alleged that Arthur Shanahan (the decedent) was exposed to asbestos while employed as a carpenter at various commercial, residential, and industrial sites in Manhattan from approximately 1982 to 2016. During this time, the decedent worked at the World Trade Center framing walls where it is alleged he removed asbestos-containing fireproofing spray that had been previously applied on the ceilings. He removed the fireproofing spray with a claw hammer and then swept the dust off the …

Continue Reading

Pump Manufacturer’s Partial Motion for Summary Judgment Denied Under Jones Act

U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana

The plaintiffs alleged that James T. McAllister (the decedent) was exposed to asbestos while working as a machinist mate aboard various vessels while serving in the United States Navy. The plaintiffs claim the decedent was exposed to asbestos from a variety of products including pumps manufactured by Nash while working in engine rooms on submarines. The decedent passed away from mesothelioma and his surviving spouse and sons seek damages for the decedent’s pre-death pain and suffering, …

Continue Reading

Court Denies Third Party Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss and Orders Jurisdictional Discovery

U.S. District Court for the Western District of Kentucky

In Jack Papineau and Holly Papineau v. Brake Supply Company, Inc., et al., the court recently denied a third-party defendant’s motion to dismiss a third-party complaint without prejudice. Plaintiff Jack Papineau alleged he developed malignant mesothelioma from exposure to asbestos from his employment at Smith Coal, and sued four defendants including Brake Supply.

Brake Supply then filed a third party action against Fras-le S.A. Fras-Le North for common law indemnity and apportionment under K.R.S. § …

Continue Reading

Court Grant Plaintiffs’ Motion to Voluntarily Dismiss in Federal Court Under the Zagano Factors

U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, May 5, 2020

On February 25, 2020, plaintiffs Laura McDaniel and Edward McDaniel filed a complaint in the New York Supreme Court, New York County, against the defendants, Whittaker, Clark & Daniels, Inc. (WCD) and Revlon, Inc., for asbestos-related personal injury claims relating to Laura McDaniels’ mesothelioma. The next day, on February 26, 2020, WCD removed the case to federal court under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a) on the basis of complete diversity between the plaintiffs and defendants. …

Continue Reading

Louisiana District Court Grants Defendant’s Motion for Reconsideration, But Orders Re-Filing

U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana, May 6, 2020

The plaintiff’s decedent, Callen L. Dempster, was allegedly exposed to asbestos-containing products while employed at the Avondale Shipyards from 1962 to 1994. Before the case was removed to federal court, the state court denied the defendant, General Electric Company, motion to bar the plaintiff’s claims based upon res judicata, and to dismiss the plaintiff’s survival claim and the decedent’s wrongful death claim. Once the case was venued in federal court, General Electric sought …

Continue Reading

2019 Asbestos Litigation Trends

KCIC recently issued Asbestos Litigation: 2019 Year in Review, which complied statistics for 2019 and assessed them in comparison with the data from its previous Asbestos Litigation: 2018 Year in Review. Please note all data KCIC analyzed for their report was based on complaints received and processed through January 31, 2020, regardless of file year.

The overall takeaways from the update, each assessed at greater length below, are:

  1. As of January 31, 2020, the total asbestos filings reflect a slight decrease of 2
Continue Reading

Court of Appeals Affirms District Court’s Judgment in favor of Plaintiff Against Railroad Defendant

Plaintiff Nancy Little (“Little”) filed suit against the Budd Company (“Budd”) alleging that decedent died from exposure to asbestos-containing insulation surrounding the pipes on Budd manufactured rail cars.  The parties went to trial and a verdict was returned in favor of the plaintiff. On appeal, Budd asserted that plaintiff’s tort claims were preempted  by the Locomotive Inspection Act (“LIA”) and  Safety Appliance Act (“SAA”). Budd’s theory on appeal was that the claims were preempted because all passenger rail cars are “appurtenances” to a complete locomotive.…

Continue Reading

Court Recommends Granting Summary Judgment to Pump and Valve Manufacturer

On March 25, 2020, the U.S. District Court for Delaware “recommended” granting summary judgment to defendants Flowserve US, Inc. and Air & Liquid Systems Corporations. By way of background, plaintiffs Pietro Vocciante and Rosalba V. Assante filed a personal injury action against multiple defendants including Flowserve US, Inc. and Air & Liquid Systems Corporation alleging that Mr. Vocciante developed mesothelioma as a result of exposure to asbestos-containing materials during his career as a cadet engineer aboard various oil tanker ships. Mr. Voccinate (“decedent”) subsequently died …

Continue Reading

Railroad Case Remanded to Lower Court to Determine “Other Activities”

Supreme Court of Montana, March 11, 2020

MONTANA – The defendant BNSF Railway Company’s (BNSF) appealed the lower court’s decision arguing that the court erred in granting partial summary judgment in favor of the plaintiffs on the issues of preemption, strict liability, and non-party affirmative defenses.

As an overview, W. R. Grace acquired the assets of Zonolite Company, formerly known as Mineral Carbon and Insulating Company. W.R. Grace mined vermiculite seven miles outside of Libby, Montana. W.R. Grace’s operations produced approximately 80 percent of the …

Continue Reading

Court Grants Plaintiff’s Motion for Jurisdictional Discovery for Turbine Manufacturer

United States District Court, S.D. New York, March 3, 2020

NEW YORK – Eugene Paroni, the plaintiff’s spouse, was diagnosed with and died of mesothelioma. The plaintiff alleges that the decedent’s mesothelioma was a result of his asbestos exposure from his work with a turbine manufactured by Ruston Gas Turbines, Ltd. The plaintiff brought suit against Alstom SA, successor-in-interest to Ruston. The plaintiff originally filed suit in California where he resided. Shortly thereafter, service of the summons on Alstom was quashed for lack of personal …

Continue Reading