In this case, the plaintiff, David Bergstrom, claimed exposure to asbestos while working as a contractor installing drywall for various companies between 1962 and 2011. The trial court granted the defendant, joint compound manufacturer Welco, summary judgment based on the plaintiff’s testimony that he did not have any exposure to joint compound after 1979 and was not exposed to Welco’s product, Welco, prior to 1979. In opposition to the motion, the plaintiff alleged that he did not make such a clear admission, that his testimony …
Continue ReadingCategory: Missouri
Court Provides Mixed Ruling in Applying Kansas Law and Granting Summary Judgment to One Defendant, but not the Other
In this case, the plaintiff, John New, alleged exposure to asbestos while working at various businesses in Kansas and Missouri. Defendants Hennessy Industries and Caterpillar Incorporated moved to apply Kansas law and for summary judgment.
The court granted in part Hennessy’s motion and dismissed the plaintiff’s complaint. The court found that Kansas law “possesses the most significant relationship to these parties and causes of actions.” In its assessment, the court reviewed four factors: the place of exposure and diagnosis, where the conduct causing the injury …
Continue ReadingState of The Art Experts Drs. Markowitz and Rosner Found Qualified to Testify
In this case, the plaintiff, John New, alleged exposure to asbestos while working at various businesses in Kansas and Missouri. Defendant Caterpillar Incorporated moved to strike the expert state of the art testimony of historians Dr. Gerald Markowitz and Dr. David Rosner, arguing that “…(1) their testimony will not assist the jury in deciding any issue in this case; (2) they fail to qualify as ‘experts’ under Rule 702; (3) their report was written solely for the purposes of litigation; (4) their report is unreliable …
Continue ReadingAppellate Court Reverses and Certifies an Asbestos Class Action for Medical Monitoring Costs
In 1983-84, it was alleged that during a retrofit project of the Jackson County courthouse, the contractors did not turn off the ventilation system, which allegedly caused asbestos to be circulated throughout the courthouse. “Dust containing asbestos fibers was blown and tracked throughout the Courthouse resulting in layers of dust accumulated throughout the Courthouse and described by one witness as an asbestos powder coating ‘that you could run your hands through,’ it covered ‘everything in various offices,’ and ‘it would be on the floors and …
Continue ReadingChallenges to Sufficiency of Asbestos Plaintiffs’ Pleadings Continue in Illinois and Missouri Federal Courts
In two decisions issued Thursday out of the Eastern District of Missouri and the Southern District of Illinois, the courts reached different conclusions as to whether the respective plaintiffs sufficiently pleaded causes of action against the defendants under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). In Campbell v. ABB Inc., the defendant Raypack moved to dismiss the plaintiff’s complaint or to compel a more definitive statement on the ground that the “Plaintiffs’ First Amended Petition fails to plead with sufficient particularity which of Raypack’s product(s) …
Continue Reading