Asbestos Case Tracker 2019 Mid-Year Compendium

We are pleased to provide the 2019 Asbestos Case Tracker Compendium containing all of the posts throughout the first half of 2019 to clients and friends of Goldberg Segalla. Goldberg Segalla’s Asbestos Case Tracker blog is the go-to resource for up-to-date asbestos decisions happening in courts throughout the United States. Ranked on the 2018 ABA Journal Web 100 for top legal resources, our blog reports on legislative updates, significant verdicts, and other critical developments in the asbestos area. We provide summaries of and access to…
Continue reading...

Court Denies All Post-Trial Motions of Valve Defendant and Plaintiffs New York Supreme Court, April 24, 2019

NEW YORK — In James and Lynn Stock v. Air & Liquid Systems Corp., et al, the Supreme Court of The State of New York, Eighth Judicial District, recently considered the defendant’s and the plaintiffs’ post-trial motions. At the trial of the original case, the plaintiffs James and Lynn Stock (plaintiffs) filed suit for James Stock’s (Stock) mesothelioma allegedly caused by exposure to asbestos while he was employed at New York Wire Mills in Tonawanda, NY from 1979 through 1986. The plaintiffs argued that…
Continue reading...

California Jury Finds Defendant’s Talc Did Not Contain Asbestos Superior Court of the State of California, April 5, 2019

CALIFORNIA — In Blinkinsop v. Johnson & Johnson, et al., a California jury found that a defendant’s talcum powder did not contain asbestos, and therefore rejected the plaintiff’s claims that his use of the defendant’s products caused his mesothelioma. The plaintiff’s case was filed in September 2017, two months after he was diagnosed with mesothelioma, alleging that his use of personal care products up through the 1980s caused his “likely terminal” illness. Following a five-week trial, a Long Beach jury deliberated for less than…
Continue reading...

Court Denies Talc Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss and Motion to Transfer U.S. District Court, E.D. Missouri, Eastern Division, March 15, 2019

In Shawnee D. Douglas v. Imerys Talc America, Inc., et al., Johnson & Johnson filed a motion to dismiss for improper venue, and in the alternative, motion to transfer. This involves a plaintiff alleging that she suffers from malignant peritoneal mesothelioma as a result of her exposure to asbestos from talc-based products. The lawsuit was originally filed in the Twenty-Second Judicial Circuit, City of St. Louis. Johnson & Johnson removed the case to federal court on the grounds that diversity of citizenship exists because…
Continue reading...

Plaintiff’s Motion for Entry of Final Judgment Denied in Wake of Appeal United States District Court, W.D. Washington. January 08, 2019

WASHINGTON — In the ongoing Leslie Jack litigation previously reported by Asbestos Case Tracker, the plaintiff’s Motion for Entry of Final Judgment in favor of Union Pacific Railroad (Union) was recently denied. The plaintiff moved for entry after Union’s motion for summary judgment was granted by the court and after a mistrial against remaining defendants DCo and Ford was declared. The plaintiff argued that entry of final judgment would lead to judicial economy predicated on the theory that if the plaintiff prevailed on its appeal…
Continue reading...

Asbestos Case Tracker 2018 Compendium

We are pleased to provide the 2018 Asbestos Case Tracker Compendium containing all of posts throughout 2018 to clients and friends of Goldberg Segalla. Goldberg Segalla’s Asbestos Case Tracker blog is the go-to resource for up-to-date asbestos decisions happening in courts throughout the United States. Ranked on the 2018 ABA Journal Web 100 for top legal resources, our blog reports on legislative updates, significant verdicts, and other critical developments in the asbestos area. We provide summaries of and access to decisions, along with insightful commentary…
Continue reading...

Asbestos Case Tracker Named Best Litigation Blog of 2018!

We are pleased to announce that the Asbestos Case Tracker blog has once again been named the best litigation blog in the country and 3rd place overall in The Expert Institute’s Best Legal Blog Contest for 2018! The Expert Institute — a leading legal service provider for identifying, verifying, and retaining expert witnesses — holds this annual contest to vet and recognize the best legal blogs out of the thousands that are on the web. In the 2018 Best Legal Blogs Contest — what the…
Continue reading...

On Reversal, Aircraft Manufacturer Successfully Obtains Removal on Federal Officer Grounds United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit, December 14, 2018

ILLINOIS – The plaintiffs Bruce and Barbara Betzner (plaintiffs) commenced a lawsuit in Illinois State Court (Madison County) against, among other defendants, Boeing Company (Boeing), alleging that, during the course of the plaintiff Bruce Betzner’s (Mr. Betzner) employment, he was exposed to asbestos-containing products, resulting in his mesothelioma diagnosis. With particular regard to Boeing, the plaintiffs allege that Mr. Betzner’s assembly of heavy bomber aircraft for the United State Air Force, which involved the installation of Boeing components, exposed him to asbestos. Boeing filed a…
Continue reading...

We Need Your Vote!

Attention blog readers! We are proud to announce that our Asbestos Case Tracker blog has made it to the voting round in The Expert Institute’s 2018 Best Legal Blog Contest! Over the past month, this contest received thousands of nominations, which were then narrowed to the “most exciting, entertaining, and informative legal blogs online today.” The polls are now open – if you like our blog, please consider voting. How it works: You can submit one vote per blog. In order to cast your vote,…
Continue reading...

First-of-its-Kind Epidemiology Study Establishes a Lack of Pleural Mesothelioma Risk From Ambient Asbestos Exposure Levels

In nearly every asbestos trial, the plaintiffs’ experts will invariably compare asbestos exposure levels from defendants’ products to airborne concentrations of asbestos in the ambient air. The apparent purpose of such a comparison is to provide a bare semblance of quantitative rigor to otherwise unsupported causation opinions. However, such an argument depends in part on taking a position that the risk from exposure to ambient asbestos levels caries some minute, but unquantifiable, level of risk. The plaintiffs’ experts correctly note that because every living human…
Continue reading...