Category: Case Decisions

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
Case Decisions / Pleadings Challenge / Wisconsin
Posted by:

Community Exposure Claims by Former Employees Not Barred by Wisconsin Workers’ Compensation Act

WISCONSIN — Two deceased Weyerhauser employees brought claims against their former employer for common law negligence, negligent nuisance, and intentional nuisance. In an effort to avoid the exclusivity provisions of Wisconsin’s Workers’ Compensation Act (WCA), both plaintiffs alleged that the defendant Weyerhauser’s activities exposed them to asbestos in the community, not during the course of their employment with the defendant, causing their mesothelioma. Weyerhauser challenged the pleadings on several bases, and the court granted and denied their motion in part.

The court denied Weyerhauser’s motion …

Continue Reading
Case Decisions / Pleadings Challenge / Wisconsin
Posted by:

Plaintiff Survives Motion to Dismiss Upon Adding Additional Allegations in Amended Complaint

WISCONSIN — The plaintiff filed suit against Weyerhauser and its insurer for alleged emissions of asbestos into the Marshfield, Wisconsin community. Plaintiff Michael Kappel moved to add additional allegations to his complaint. Weyerhauser moved to dismiss. The plaintiffs were substituted upon Mr. Kappel’s passing.

Weyerhauser sought dismissal on two separate grounds. First, the defendant argued the plaintiffs did not allege Mr. Kappel’s exposure from work at Weyerhauser in an effort to circumvent the exclusivity rules in the local worker’s compensation statute. The court disagreed as …

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
Case Decisions / Remand/Removal / South Carolina
Posted by:

Case Remanded Based Upon Lack of Fraudulent Joinder

SOUTH CAROLINA — The plaintiff filed a lawsuit in the Court of Common Pleas for Darlington County, South Carolina, alleging that Bertila Boyd-Bostic suffered from mesothelioma due to asbestos exposure in the 1980s. On March 2, 2018, a Third Amended Complaint was filed, alleging that Johnson & Johnson, Imerys Talc America, Rite Aid of South Carolina and others were liable for Ms. Boyd-Bostic’s mesothelioma, based upon her use of baby powder. The recently-joined defendants removed the case on April 6, 2018.

The plaintiff filed an …

Continue Reading
Case Decisions / Federal Officer Jurisdiction / Louisiana / Remand/Removal
Posted by:

Cases Remanded After Court Determines Defendant Shipbuilder Controlled Safety Procedures

LOUISIANA — The Eastern District of Louisiana granted motions to remand in two separate mesothelioma cases arising out of alleged exposure to asbestos through work for defendant Avondale Industries, Inc., a shipbuilder for the United States Navy. Each plaintiff originally filed their actions in state court, alleging that Avondale failed to warn of the hazards of asbestos and failed to implement proper safety procedures for the handling of asbestos. Avondale removed the matter to federal court on federal officer jurisdiction.

In remanding, the court focused …

Continue Reading
Bare Metal/Component Parts / Case Decisions / Delaware / Maritime/Admiralty Law
Posted by:

Motion for Reconsideration Based Upon Change in Law Denied as Untimely

DELAWARE — Plaintiffs Icom and Johanna Evans filed a lawsuit on June 11, 2015 in Delaware Superior Court relating to Mr. Evans’ alleged asbestos exposure. Foster Wheeler removed the matter to federal court on August 4, 2015, pursuant to the federal officer removal statute. Defendants Foster Wheeler and Warren Pumps filed motions for summary judgment in October 2016. Both motions were opposed. The district court issued a Report and Recommendation (R&R) on August 30, 2017, recommending that the motions be granted pursuant to maritime law, …

Continue Reading
Case Decisions / Maryland / Statute of Repose
Posted by:

Maryland’s Court of Appeals Rules on Applicability of Statute of Repose

MARYLAND — The Maryland Court of Appeals reversed the decision of the Court of Special Appeals in the matter of Duffy v. CBS Corporation, making two holdings relating to Maryland’s Statute of Repose. First, the court held that an injury related to asbestos exposure that underlies a cause of action for personal injury or wrongful death arises at the time of exposure. The court held that the “exposure approach,” as adopted by the Court in John Crane Inc. v. Scribner, 369 Md. 369, …

Continue Reading
Case Decisions / Maritime/Admiralty Law / Massachusetts / Statute of Repose / Summary Judgment
Posted by:

Federal Court Denies Summary Judgment Under Massachusetts Statute of Repose, But Grants Defendants’ Motions on Other Grounds

MASSACHUSETTS — The plaintiffs allege that the decedent, Wayne Oliver, developed mesothelioma from bystander exposure to asbestos during his work as a pipe inspector on the construction of two power plants in the 1970s. Defendant General Electric Company (GE) specified and produced steam turbine-generators for the power plants, and supervised their installation. Defendant NSTAR, formerly known as Boston Edison Company (NSTAR/BECO), owned one of the power plants during the time of the decedent’s work. The decedent worked for non-party Bechtel Corporation, who acted as the …

Continue Reading
Case Decisions / Expert Challenges / Washington
Posted by:

Proposed Testimony of Plaintiff’s Expert, Dr. Arnold Brody, Precluded as Being Cumulative

WASHINGTON — In this case, the plaintiff had already presented testimony from occupational and environmental medicine physician, Dr. Carl Brodkin, on the impacts of asbestos on the body. The plaintiff then was looking to call Dr. Arnold Brody to also provide expert opinion on this subject. The defendant objected, arguing that both experts testimony is substantially similar and should be precluded as cumulative. The court agreed.

In its decision, the court outlined the proffered testimony of Dr. Brody and stated that his testimony would have …

Continue Reading