Alameda County Superior Court Judge Jo-Lynne Q. Lee set a hearing on nationally recognized plaintiff’s firm Maune Raichle French Hartley & Mudd. LLC’s motion for protective order in a pending asbestos case in which the defendants’ experts wanted to perform genetic testing. The case is John Lohmann and Suzanne Lohmann v. Aaon, Inc., et al. Alameda County Superior Court Case No. RG21098862. In this case, the plaintiffs filed their action in May 2021 in Alameda County against several defendants alleging that Mr. Lohmann contracted mesothelioma …Continue Reading
While trials and in person court conferences are starting to trickle in, some jurisdictions such as New York still managed to hold its position as a judicial hellhole in 2021. According to American Tort Reform Foundation 2021-22 Judicial Hellholes, California regained its position to the top of the judicial hellhole list. Following California, New York was named as the second judicial hellhole. Georgia, Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas and the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania followed. Cook, Madison, and St. Clair Counties in Illinois; Louisiana; …Continue Reading
The Asbestos Case Tracker has been following developing issues regarding hundreds of asbestos exposure cases involving plaintiffs who worked for W.R. Grace at the Libby, Montana mine and facilities. Recently, a Great Falls, Montana jury awarded $36.5 million dollars to Ralph Hutt, an Oregon man who worked at the Libby mine. Hutt’s matter is a bellwether case, which is the first of more than 800 cases filed against Maryland Casualty Company (MCC), provider of workers’ compensation coverage to Grace from 1963 until 1973, to go …Continue Reading
In July 2020, we reported on Iowa’s passage of legislation intended to significantly reduce or eliminate the over-naming of defendants in asbestos and silica litigation. Since then, three additional states have enacted similar legislation: West Virginia, North Dakota, and Tennessee.
On March 31, 2021, the West Virginia legislature passed House Bill 2495. The bill outlines the requirements with which a plaintiff must comply in an asbestos or silica action. Within 90 days of filing a complaint, a plaintiff with a nonmalignant condition must file a …Continue Reading
On Wednesday, December 29, 2021, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published the draft scope of the “Risk Evaluation for Asbestos Part 2: Supplemental Evaluation Including Legacy Uses and Associated Disposals of Asbestos”. While more than 60 nations have comprehensive asbestos bans, the United States is undergoing a lengthy asbestos “risk evaluation”. As Part 2 of the EPA’s Asbestos Risk Evaluation becomes open for public comment, the question is whether the eventual findings of the EPA’s risk evaluation will result in stronger asbestos regulations, …Continue Reading
Over the past six months, the Asbestos Case Tracker has reported on numerous summary judgment decisions throughout the country. The most active jurisdictions included New York, Pennsylvania, California, Texas, Illinois, Delaware, Mississippi and Washington. On review of the decisions we have discussed, Texas, Illinois, Mississippi, Washington and Pennsylvania appear to be the most defendant-friendly jurisdictions, with the courts granting all the summary judgment motions coming before them. New York continues to be the least defendant-friendly jurisdiction when it comes to summary judgment. Of the eight …Continue Reading
Johnson & Johnson currently has approximately 25,000 lawsuits pending against it related to its talc products, including talcum powder and baby powder
Reports have circulated that Johnson & Johnson is considering a strategic plan to move its liabilities from talcum litigation related to baby powder and other products into a newly created business that would later seek bankruptcy protection. Recently, lawyers for plaintiffs requested that the bankruptcy judge block the move of Johnson & Johnson. However, bankruptcy judge Laurie Selber Silverstein declined to prevent Johnson …Continue Reading
At the beginning of the year, the Asbestos Case Tracker published its 2020 Year in Review 2021 Judiciary Outlook. As we have just passed the mid-year mark, the Asbestos Case Tracker seeks to update its readers as to the status of the courts and the outlook of the judiciary into the second half of 2021.
Jury trials posed a unique set of issues to chief judges and court administrators throughout the country because of the amount of people needed to assemble in the courthouse. …Continue Reading
United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania, June 17, 2021
Plaintiff sued Defendant Yuba Heat Transfer, LLC and various manufacturers and distributors alleging that decedent developed mesothelioma from exposures to Defendant Yuba’s asbestos-containing products. Plaintiff alleged decedent was exposed to asbestos from Yuba’s feedwater heaters while working at the Niagara Mohawk Power Station.
Prior to decedent’s passing, he sat for a deposition during which he did not identify Yuba by name or feedwater heaters. Defendant Yuba filed a motion for summary judgment arguing …Continue Reading
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania, June 17, 2021
Plaintiff sued Defendant Honeywell Inc. and various manufacturers and distributors alleging that decedent developed mesothelioma from exposures to Defendant Honeywell’s asbestos-containing products. Plaintiff alleged decedent was exposed to asbestos from Honeywell’s controls, valves, and instruments while working at the SM-1 facility in Virginia and PM-1 facility in Wyoming.
Prior to decedent’s passing, he sat for a deposition during which he recalled Honeywell controls and equipment at the SM-1 and PM-1 facility. Defendant Honeywell …Continue Reading