Defendants General Electric, Ingersoll-Rand, and CBS Corporation moved to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. The plaintiff failed to respond to any of these motions. The court cited Local Rule 7.1(c) in using its discretion to construe this failure to file a timely response as an admission of the merits of the motion. “Here, Defendants are not incorporated nor maintain their principal place of business in Illinois. Further, Defendants’ affiliations with Illinois are not ‘so continuous and systematic’ as to render Defendants at home in Illinois. …
Continue ReadingCategory: Illinois
Valve Manufacturer Granted Summary Judgment under Maritime Law Based on Lack of Causation
In this federal court action, it is alleged that the decedent, Richard Bell, was exposed to asbestos during his service in the Navy where he served on the USS Franklin D. Roosevelt from 1961 to 1962. Velan Valve Corp. moved for summary judgment asserting maritime law.
The plaintiff did not oppose the application of maritime law. The court went on to analyze the application of maritime law and found it applied in the case. The court then went on to grant Velan summary judgment, stating …
Continue ReadingCourt Lacks Specific Jurisdiction Where Complaint is Devoid of Allegations that Injury Arose Out of Defendants’ Contacts with State
The plaintiffs’ complaint alleged that John Clark was exposed to asbestos from the defendants’ products while serving in the U.S. Air Force and during his employment at McDonald Douglas and Boeing. Multiple defendants made motions to dismiss, arguing that the District Court lacked jurisdiction over them. The plaintiffs failed to file timely responses to any of the motions and the court used it is discretion to construe the plaintiffs’ failure to do so as an admission of the merits of the motion. In granting the …
Continue ReadingRailroad Company Obtains Summary Judgment on Appeal Based on Inadmissible Expert Report
The plaintiff in this case brought a wrongful death action against the Illinois Central Railroad Company pursuant to the Federal Employer’s Liability Act (FELA) for the death of her husband, Charles Jackson, Jr., who had worked on the railroad. Illinois Central’s motions for summary judgment, to strike the plaintiff’s expert, Michael J. Ellenbecker, were denied. Illinois Central’s petition for an interlocutory appeal was granted.
In its review, the court found that Ellenbecker’s opinions submitted in opposition of the motion for summary judgment was inadmissible since …
Continue ReadingApplying Maritime Law, Plaintiff Unable to Provide Sufficient Evidence Linking Decedent to Any John Crane Product
In this federal court case it was alleged that the decedent, Richard Bell, was exposed to asbestos while serving on the USS Franklin D. Roosevelt from 1960-64. Defendant John Crane Inc. moved for summary judgment, arguing that maritime law applies and the plaintiff’s evidence fails to prove that decedent was exposed to any of its asbestos-containing products or that the products were a substantial factor in decedent’s lung cancer.
The plaintiff did not oppose the application of maritime law. The court spelled out that for …
Continue ReadingFederal Court Grants Remand to Madison County Based on Plaintiff’s Waiver of Any Claims Related to His Military Service
In this case, the plaintiff originally filed the action in the Third Judicial Circuit, Madison County, Illinois alleging exposure to asbestos as an aircraft mechanic, helicopter mechanic, and laborer at various locations throughout the United States between 1958 and 2006. The plaintiff’s work on helicopters was while he served in the U.S. Army. Defendant Boeing removed the case to federal court based on the federal officer removal statute. The plaintiff moved for a remand based on his previously filed waiver of all claims related to …
Continue ReadingIllinois Supreme Court Rules Workers’ Compensation Is Employees’ Exclusive Remedy for Asbestos Claims Against Employers, Even if Workers’ Compensation Claim is Time-Barred
The plaintiff was employed by Ferro Engineering for four years, and alleged that during this time he was exposed to products containing asbestos. Forty-one years after this employment he was diagnosed with mesothelioma, and sued Ferro under several theories including negligence. Ferro filed a motion to dismiss, arguing the plaintiff’s claims were barred by the exclusive remedy provisions of the Workers’ Compensation Act (820 ILCS 305/5(a), 11 (West 2010)) and the Workers’ Occupational Diseases Act (820 ILCS 310/5(a), 11 (West 2010)). The plaintiff replied that …
Continue ReadingCase Remanded Based on Dismissal and Settlement of Defendants with Federal Defenses
This case was originally filed in the Third Judicial Circuit in Madison County. The defendant, Crane Co., removed based on the Federal Officer Removal Statute 28 U.S.C. 1442(a)(1) and defendant General Electric Company (GE) joined in. The plaintiff moved to remand the case and GE was the only defendant to oppose. Prior to the court rendering a decision, GE was dismissed from the case and Crane settled. CBS Corporation then filed a notice of joinder or removal, which the court found untimely.
The court granted …
Continue ReadingWife’s Testimony on Decedent’s Use of Brake Product and Expert Causation Testimony Held Sufficient to Defeat Summary Judgment
In this federal court case, decedent Richard Bell alleged exposure to asbestos while performing car maintenance from 1964 through the late 1970s. Defendant Honeywell, as successor of Bendix, moved for summary judgment, arguing that the decedent’s wife’s deposition testimony that the decedent used Bendix brakes with the word “asbestos” on the packaging was hearsay; that the testimony could not be used against it to oppose summary judgment since it was taken prior to Honeywell becoming a party; and that the plaintiff failed to show the …
Continue ReadingDefendant Establishes Colorable Defense Under Federal Law, Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand Denied
The plaintiff filed this action in Madison County, Illinois, alleging injury due to asbestos exposure. The defendants, CBS and General Electric, removed the action to federal court under federal officer removal statute 28 U.S.C. 1442. The plaintiff filed a motion to remand, which the court denied. The court cited the United States Supreme Court in listing the three elements required to establish a colorable defense to the use-of-asbestos claim: (1) the United States approved reasonably precise specifications; (2) the equipment conformed to those specifications; (3) …
Continue Reading