Defense Verdict for Johnson & Johnson in New Jersey Talc Meso Case Superior Court of New Jersey, Middlesex County, March 27, 2019

NEW JERSEY — March 27, 2019, a New Brunswick New Jersey jury found that Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc. (J&J) was not liable in causing the mesothelioma of 58-year-old plaintiff Ricardo Rimondi.  Rimondi alleged decades of use of J&J’s baby powder, which the plaintiff alleged contained talc that was contaminated with asbestos. J&J attorneys highlighted the fact that the plaintiff’s experts failed to acknowledge that the plaintiff grew up and lived in close proximity to an asbestos cement factory.…
Continue reading...

Multiple Actions Dismissed Against Brake Manufacturer Due to Forum Non Conveniens Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division, March 05, 2019

NEW JERSEY — Multiple deceased plaintiffs brought actions against Honeywell alleging they contracted mesothelioma as a result of exposure to asbestos from Bendix brakes while working as mechanics in the United Kingdom. The plaintiffs filed in New Jersey despite the alleged exposure oversees. Honeywell moved for dismissal based on the doctrine of forum non conveniens after discovery was conducted. Judge Cantor granted dismissal in the majority of the cases and Judge Viscomi also granted dismissal in the remaining case. The plaintiffs appealed arguing abuse of…
Continue reading...

$2.38 Million Dollar Verdict Reached in Action Brought on Behalf of Chemical Compounder New Jersey Superior Court for Middlesex County, February 12, 2019

NEW JERSEY — A New Jersey State case, Thomasenia L. Fowler v. Akzo Nobel Chemicals, Inc., et al., No. MID-L-4820-11AS (N.J. Super. Ct., Middlesex Cty.), which was previously covered by ACT, has ended in a plaintiff’s verdict against a raw fiber supplier. On January 22, a Middlesex County jury returned a $2.38 Million dollar verdict in favor of the plaintiff, Thomasina Fowler, individually and as administrator of the estate of Willis Edenfield, but declined to award any punitive damages during the trial’s second phase.…
Continue reading...

New Jersey Supreme Court Agrees to Review Duty to Warn Ruling New Jersey Supreme Court, January 18, 2019

NEW JERSEY — In Arthur G. Whelan v. Armstrong International Inc. et al, various defendants convinced the New Jersey Supreme Court to review a ruling that manufacturers may be held liable for failure to warn about the risks of asbestos-containing components or replacement parts in their products even if they did not build or distribute the parts. The question before the Supreme Court in the matter is, “In a products liability case arising out of exposure to asbestos, does a manufacturer have a duty to…
Continue reading...

New Jersey Supreme Court to Review Apportioned Asbestos Verdict in Meso Case

NEW JERSEY — The New Jersey Supreme Court will review whether a recent judgment reduced by allocation amongst 9 companies should be retried. The judgment was rendered in favor of a widow, Donna Rowe, whose husband died of mesothelioma. Mr. Rowe allegedly came into contact with asbestos products while repairing and installing heating equipment. Several defendants settled and therefore did not attend trial. As a result, the trial court admitted certified discovery answers and deposition testimony as the settling defendants’ witnesses were determined to be…
Continue reading...

Johnson & Johnson Secures Defense Verdict in Asbestos Talc Case Superior Court of New Jersey, County of Middlesex, October 11, 2018

NEW JERSEY — Today, a central New Jersey jury determined that Johnson & Johnson (J&J) was not liable for the mesothelioma of the plaintiff Rosalind Henry, who alleged that she developed the disease in part from use of J&J’s baby powder. In closing arguments, counsel for J&J told jurors that Ms. Henry had told her doctors that she was exposed to asbestos while working for a company that serviced Naval vessels, and that Ms. Henry only used J&J’s talc product for a small number of…
Continue reading...

District Court Remands Case Back to New Jersey State Court After Federal Defendant is Dismissed United States District Court, District of New Jersey, August 17, 2018

NEW JERSEY — On October 30, 2015, The plaintiffs Thomas Grimes and Estelle Grimes Estelle Grimes initially filed suit in the Superior Court of New Jersey, Middlesex County against a number of defendants alleging that Mr. Grimes’s mesothelioma was caused by exposure to defendants’ asbestos or asbestos-containing products. Shortly thereafter, the case was removed to the United States District Court, District Court of New Jersey, following Defendant Crane’s Notice of Removal relating to the federal officer removal statute, 28 U.S.C. Section 1442(a)(1). Pursuant to…
Continue reading...

Transfer Granted Where Severance of John Doe Defendants Aids Judicial Economy United States District Court, D. New Jersey. August 07, 2018

DELAWARE — The United States District Court issued a Show Cause Order requiring the parties to show why this matter should not be transferred to the District of Delaware. The plaintiff opposed the transfer arguing that two of the defendants also known as “John Doe” defendants may not be subject to personal jurisdiction in Delaware.  The defendants countered and argued that the plaintiff’s claims against those two defendants, RBC Sonic and Aetna Steel Products Corporation, could easily be severed. The court agreed that claims against…
Continue reading...

New Jersey Appellate Court Undermines Bare Metal Defense Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division, August 6, 2018

NEW JERSEY — The plaintiff, Arthur Whelan, worked as a plumber and auto mechanic and later developed mesothelioma.  He filed suit against numerous manufacturers of boilers, valves, steam traps and brake drums.  While the plaintiff did install original products, the bulk of his testimony concerned replacement components used with the products.  Many defendants filed motions for summary judgment, arguing that plaintiff had failed to demonstrate evidence of exposure to a product they sold, manufactured or supplied.  The trial court found the defendants were not liable…
Continue reading...

Shipyard Defendants Establish a Colorable Federal Defense in Mesothelioma Case; Remand Denied United States District Court, D. New Jersey. July 31, 2018

NEW JERSEY — The plaintiff filed suit on behalf of her decedent Robert Fish alleging he developed mesothelioma as a result of exposure to asbestos products of the defendants. Specifically, the plaintiff believed Mr. Fish was exposed to joiner panels while working onboard the USS Savannah for New York Shipbuilding and Drydock Company. The dfendants removed the matter to federal court asserting the federal officer removal statute. The plaintiff moved to remand. The court began its review by noting the standard for federal officer removal.…
Continue reading...