Expert Testimony Archives - Asbestos Case Tracker

October 9, 2024 Expert Testimony / Louisiana

Plaintiffs’ Motion in Limine to Exclude Defendants’ Expert Denied

Jurisdiction: United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana

This case involves claims of asbestos exposure. Plaintiff Robert Stephen Sentilles initiated this action asserting negligence and strict liability claims against several defendants. Mr. Sentilles specifically claimed having asbestos exposure due to, among other things, working at various Navy shipyards involving insulation, asbestos blankets, and other related products from the 1950s to the 1980s. Plaintiff further claimed that he was diagnosed with mesothelioma as a result of the asbestos exposure on October 27, 2020.

Defendants …

Posted by: Kerry L. Jones

Pump Manufacturers’ Motion to Exclude Expert Causation Testimony Granted In-Part

Court: United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida, Tampa Division

In this asbestos action, defendants Atwood & Morrill Co. Inc. and Warren Pumps LLC filed a Daubert motion to exclude, or limit, certain causation testimony and opinions of plaintiff’s expert, David Zhang, MD.

Plaintiff Arnold Edmonds served aboard the USS Saratoga from 1962-1964. While on the ship, he was allegedly exposed to asbestos, which allegedly caused him to develop non-small cell lung carcinoma. Plaintiff filed suit against more than 20 companies and …

July 21, 2023 Arizona / Expert Testimony / Summary Judgment

Posted by: Asbestos Case Tracker

Partial Exclusion of Expert Opinion Leads to Summary Judgment for Talc Defendant

Court: Superior Court of Arizona, Maricopa County

In this asbestos action, plaintiff Jeffrey Weiss alleges that he developed mesothelioma as a result of his use of various brands of talcum powder products from 1979 to 2011. Plaintiffs assert that asbestos is an accessory mineral that may be naturally present in talc. Defendants recognize that some scientists claim to have identified asbestos fibers in cosmetic talc powders. Defendants further argue that, even if some fibers in talc are considered to be asbestos, it has not been …

April 24, 2023 Expert Testimony / Summary Judgment / Tennessee

Posted by: Asbestos Case Tracker

Railway Employer Obtains Summary Judgment Due to Exclusion of Plaintiff’s Experts

Court: Court of Appeals of Tennessee, At Jackson

Plaintiff Annie Dowdy is a former employee of defendant BNSF Railway Company. She filed suit against BNSF under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act (“FELA”), alleging that BNSF negligently failed to provide a reasonably safe work place, and claiming that occupational exposure to diesel exhaust and asbestos caused or contributed to her renal cancer. Plaintiff relief on the testimony of two expert witnesses: Dr. Hernando Perez, who was retained to testify regarding negligence and liability, and Dr. Ernest …

February 27, 2023 Expert Testimony / New Jersey / Summary Judgment

Posted by: Asbestos Case Tracker

Defendant Obtains Summary Judgment Due to Inadmissible Expert Testimony

Court: Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division

Decedent Joseph Murray worked for the defendant Consolidated Rail Corporation (Conrail) from 1976 to 2011 as a brakeman/conductor. His wife filed a wrongful death and survival action citing the Federal Employers’ Liability Act (FELA), 45 U.S.C. §§ 51-60, and the Locomotive Inspection Act, 49 U.S.C. §§ 20701-20703. The plaintiff alleged that decedent had been exposed to harmful amounts of asbestos and various fumes while working for Conrail and that his lung cancer, tongue cancer, and subsequent death …

December 20, 2022 California / Expert Testimony / Summary Judgment

Posted by: Asbestos Case Tracker

Valve Defendants Obtain Summary Judgment Due to Lack of Causation Evidence

Court: United States District Court for the Central District of California

In this action, the plaintiffs alleged that the decedent, John Carpenter, contracted and died from mesothelioma due to exposure to asbestos, which occurred in part during his service in the Navy. Before the court are two motions: defendant Nibco Inc.’s motion for summary judgment or in the alternative summary adjudication (the “Nibco Motion”); and defendant Asco Valve Inc.’s (“Asco”) motion for summary judgment (the “Asco Motion”).

Four of the decedent’s coworkers testified about the …