Category: California

California / Damages
Posted by:

California Appellate Court Defines Scope of Damages Recoverable in Survival Action

CALIFORNIA — The First District of the California Court of Appeal addressed numerous issues in a case involving exposure to friction products used during personal automotive repair. The family of decedent, J.D. Williams, filed suit in January 2011 after his July 2010 death from mesothelioma. The plaintiffs asserted claims for wrongful death, strict liability and negligence. The defendant, Pep Boys, was not named in the lawsuit until an amended complaint was filed on December 6, 2012. The trial court granted Pep Boys’ motion for judgment …

Continue Reading
California / Other Asbestos News / Verdict
Posted by:

California Jury Returns Defense Verdict for Brake Arc Grinder Manufacturer

CALIFORNIA — on August 8, 2018, an Alameda County jury issued a defense verdict for Hennessey Industries, Inc. (AMMCO) in the plaintiff Donald Knutson’s mesothelioma case, which included allegations of exposures to asbestos from time in the United States Navy and from time working with various friction products.  While the jury found that Plaintiff’s mesothelioma was related to asbestos, and that he worked around an AMMCO brake arc grinder, they declined to find that AMMCO was negligent, or that they knew or should have known …

Continue Reading
California / Other Asbestos News
Posted by:

Talc Defendant Entitled to Costs after Favorable Verdict

CALIFORNIA — In 2016, a Los Angeles jury ruled in favor of defendant Colgate-Palmolive Company (Colgate), and against Plaintiff Elizabeth Alfaro, who alleged that her mesothelioma was caused by exposure to asbestos from talcum powder products. The jury returned a verdict in favor of Colgate on the exposure claims; this verdict was affirmed on appeal. Colgate then appealed the trial court’s denial of its request for $300,000 in costs and expert witness fees. This request was made pursuant to the California statutory law scheme which …

Continue Reading
California / Pleadings Challenge
Posted by:

Plaintiff’s Failure to Assert Elements for Fraudulent Misrepresentation Leads to Dismissal for Friction Defendants

NORTH CAROLINA — The plaintiff filed suit against 62 defendants including Ford Motor (Ford) and Hennessey Industries (Hennessey) alleging he was injured as a result of exposure to the defendant’s asbestos containing products or equipment. Ford and Hennessey moved to dismiss the plaintiff’s claims for fraud and fraudulent misrepresentation arguing that the plaintiff failed to state a claim with respect to those allegations. The plaintiff sought leave to amend his complaint and amended the complaint after the court permitted a more definite statement. Ford and …

Continue Reading
California / Case Decisions
Posted by:

Take Home Exposure Insufficient to Overcome Demurrer Based Upon Exclusivity Provision of Workers’ Compensation Act

CALIFORNIA — Plaintiffs, Allen and Pamela Rudolph, filed suit against Rudolph & Setten, Inc. (R&S), a general contracting company started by Allen Rudolph’s father, alleging that the plaintiff was exposed to asbestos as a child from take home exposure via his father, and also while employed by the company himself.  R&S filed a demurrer to the suit, alleging that the claims were barred by the exclusivity provision of California’s workers’ compensation act.  The demurrer was sustained by the trial court.  The plaintiffs filed an amended …

Continue Reading
Talcum powder on black background
California / Verdict
Posted by:

$21.7 Million Compensatory Verdict and $4 Million Punitive Awards in California Asbestos-Talc Case

CALIFORNIA — Sixty-eight year old Plaintiff Joanne Anderson sued Johnson & Johnson (J & J) and other defendants in state court in Los Angeles in 2017, alleging that her mesothelioma was caused in part by use of talcum powder that was contaminated with asbestos.  On Wednesday, May 23, 2018, a California jury returned a $21.7 million compensatory verdict for the plaintiff, assigning 67 percent to J & J.  The jury is still deliberating on whether to award punitive damages. Today, the jury awarded $4 million …

Continue Reading
California / Case Decisions / Summary Judgment
Posted by:

Defects in Chain of Custody Lead to Affirmation of Talcum Powder Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment

CALIFORNIA — The plaintiffs Barbara and John Wittman asserted claims for negligence, strict liability, breach of warranty, and loss of consortium against Defendant Coty, Inc. (Coty) alleging that Barbara’s exposure to asbestos in Coty’s talcum powder resulted in her developing mesothelioma.

Coty filed a motion for summary judgment, contending that Wittmans’ discovery responses and deposition testimony “demonstrated their inability to prove the claims.” Coty stated that the Wittmans could not show that Barbara was exposed to asbestos through the particular Coty product she had used, …

Continue Reading
California / Case Decisions / Summary Judgment
Posted by:

Claims Against Insulation Supplier Barred By Government Contractor Defense

CALIFORNIA — Plaintiffs Paula Tarjani, Phyllis Newman, and Patsy Rojo, daughters of the plaintiff’s decedent John Ball, brought claims against numerous defendants, alleging that the plaintiff’s decedent was exposed to asbestos while working as a joiner and shipwright from 1965 to 1972.  The plaintiff’s decedent worked at Mare Island aboard the USS Guitarro, USS Hawkbill, USS Pintado, and USS Drum.

Defendant Metalclad brokered Unibestos to the United States Navy, and filed a Motion for Summary Judgment, stating that the plaintiffs’ claims were precluded under the …

Continue Reading
California / Case Decisions / Summary Judgment
Posted by:

Summary Judgment Granted and Request for Continuance Denied Based Upon Lack of Evidence

CALIFORNIA — Defendant, Rohr, Inc., filed a motion for summary judgment based upon a lack of evidence demonstrating the plaintiff was exposed to a Rohr product. The plaintiffs opposed the motion, but failed to present any such evidence in support of their opposition. The plaintiffs also filed a motion to continue, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(d), for additional time to conduct discovery. To succeed on such a motion, the moving party must show: 1) an affidavit setting forth the specific facts to …

Continue Reading
Bare Metal/Component Parts / California / Case Decisions / Maritime/Admiralty Law / Summary Judgment
Posted by:

Boiler Manufacturer’s Summary Judgment Reversed; Question of Fact on Product ID and Denial of Bare Metal Defense

CALIFORNIA — In this federal court case, the plaintiffs commenced an action in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania alleging the plaintiff’s decedent, Robert Hilt, was exposed to asbestos from numerous products, including Foster Wheeler boilers, on Navy ships . Foster Wheeler moved for and was granted summary judgment based on the finding that the plaintiff’s expert, Dr. Charles Ay’s, opinion was speculative.  Subsequently all other defendants either settled or were dismissed from the case. The plaintiff appealed the order granting Foster Wheeler summary judgment and …

Continue Reading