Reconsideration of Motion to Dismiss of Auto Parts Manufacturer Denied Due to No Manifest Error

Defendant National Automotive Parts Association (NAPA) filed the instant Motion for Reconsideration of the order denying the Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction, putting forth three arguments:

  1. The order appeared to have mistakenly cited to inadmissible and incompetent evidence
  2. The court may have overlooked a key distinction between branding or licensing a product and manufacturing or distributing a product
  3. The order did not rule on NAPA’s alternative request that an evidentiary hearing be held to resolve any factual conflict

Western District of Washington …

Continue Reading

Washington State Personal Jurisdiction Dispute Remanded to Trial Court for Further Findings of Fact

WASHINGTON – The plaintiff sued the defendant Special Electric and others on behalf of the decedent Donald Noll, and alleged that Noll’s fatal mesothelioma was caused in part by his work with asbestos-cement pipe in the 1970s that contained asbestos supplied by Special Electric. Special Electric moved to dismiss the matter for lack of personal jurisdiction, which the trial court granted. However, Washington’s Supreme Court remanded the case to the trial court for consideration of the facts in light of its decision in State v.

Continue Reading

Jury Verdict on Future Pain and Suffering Found to be Unreasonable Compensation Against Boiler Defendant

NEW YORK – A New York appellate court has vacated the trial court’s entry of judgement of $2 million for future pain and suffering in a recent mesothelioma case and has ordered the plaintiff to stipulate within 30 days to a reduction of future pain and suffering damages to $500,000 or face a new trial on damages.

The verdict included a $5 million award for the plaintiff’s past pain and suffering, which was untouched on appeal. Although the plaintiff presented evidence that their future condition …

Continue Reading

New York Talc Case Continued on Eve of Trial to Allow for Further Testing

NEW YORK – The plaintiff Beverley Alleyne filed suit against Revlon alleging she developed mesothelioma from asbestos in Revlon’s Charlie talcum powder product. Less than ten days before a May trial date, the plaintiff disclosed a report of Dr. William Longo, summarizing his testing of a Charlie product purchased on Etsy. Due to the late disclosure, the trial court continued the case to June 4, 2019 so that Dr. Longo could be deposed. Revlon moved to strike Longo’s report and for an additional continuance in …

Continue Reading

Directed Verdict Reversed for Floor Tile Defendant Based on Admissibility of Expert Opinion

CALIFORNIA – The plaintiff, Robert Friedman, alleged that he developed mesothelioma from exposure to asbestos through remodeling work undertaken in his home. He proceeded to trial against the defendant, American Biltrite, Inc. (ABI), a manufacturer of asbestos vinyl tile that was allegedly cut and installed in Friedman’s presence over three days in 1966. The plaintiff specifically testified that he observed the tile installers cutting the tile with a circular saw, which created dust.

ABI presented testimony from their corporate representative stating that vinyl tile was …

Continue Reading

California Jury Awards Twelve Million Dollars to Plaintiff in Talc Case

CALIFORNIA – A California jury found that asbestos in talcum powder products sold by two companies was the likely cause of the plaintiff Patricia Schmitz’s mesothelioma, awarding her two million dollars in economic damages and ten million dollars in noneconomic damages. The jury did not reach a conclusion as to whether to award punitive damages or on an intentional misrepresentation claim against one of the companies.

Read the case decision here.…

Continue Reading

Plaintiffs’ Post-Sale Failure-To-Warn Theory of Negligence Unpersuasive; Defendants’ Motions for Judgment as Matter of Law Granted

WASHINGTON – The instant matter arises from the decedent Patrick Jack’s alleged exposure to asbestos-containing products through his work as an automotive mechanic, a machinist in the Navy, and a machinist and inspector at the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard. Jack sued multiple companies, alleging that his exposure to asbestos caused him to develop mesothelioma. Jack passed away in October of 2017, and his wife and son proceeded as the plaintiffs. This case has previously been covered by the Asbestos Case Tracker.

The plaintiffs proceeded …

Continue Reading

Exclusive Remedy Defense Eliminated in Illinois for Latent Injury Claims

ILLINOIS – In 2015, the Illinois Supreme Court held in Folta v. Ferro Engineering, 43 N.E. 3d 108 (2015), that the state’s Workers’ Compensation Act and Workers’ Occupational Disease Act was the exclusive remedy for state employees who contract mesothelioma, or another latent disease or injury. May 2019 in enacting Illinois SB 1596, the Illinois legislature revoked the Illinois Supreme Court’s ruling and amended the state’s Workers’ Compensation Act and Workers’ Occupational Disease Act to permit civil tort actions by employees against their employers …

Continue Reading

Substantial Justice is Driving Factor in Decision to Transfer Mesothelioma Case to Colorado

NEW YORK – The plaintiff, Carl Lanz, filed suit in New York against the defendants alleging he developed mesothelioma as a result of his occupational exposure to asbestos. Specifically, Carl Lanz alleged he had been exposed to asbestos while working as an electrician apprentice and electrician for the Public Service Company of Colorado from 1969 -2008. Carl Lanz had never been to New York despite having filed his complaint in New York.

General Electric and Union Carbide moved to dismiss the complaint on the basis …

Continue Reading

Plaintiffs’ Claims Against Employer Barred Under Workers’ Compensation Grounds; May Plead Alternative Premises Liability Claims

LOUISIANA – The plaintiff, Victor Michel, filed a lawsuit in state court in July 2017, alleging that his work as a mechanic exposed him to asbestos which caused him to develop peritoneal mesothelioma. The case was removed to federal court on May 8, 2018 and the plaintiff passed away five days later. The court substituted his survivors as the plaintiffs on July 10, 2018, and as of January 25, 2019, Ford Motor Co. was the only remaining defendant. On February 20, 2019, the …

Continue Reading