Category: California

California / Case Decisions / Expert Challenges / Summary Judgment
Posted by:

Expert Opinion on Asbestos Content of Insulation — Based in Part on Non-Party Witness Declaration — Sufficient to Create Question of Fact to Overcome Summary Judgment

In this case, it was claimed that the decedent, Michael O’Leary, was exposed to asbestos while working as a rigger at the Tosco Refinery in the 1970s to late 1980s near employees from the defendant, Dillingham Construction N.A., Inc., who were sweeping up insulation off the floor in his vicinity. The trial court precluded the opinion that the insulation contained asbestos as being speculative from the plaintiff’s expert, Charles Ay, and granted summary judgment to Dillingham.

On appeal, the court found the expert’s opinion to …

Continue Reading
California / Case Decisions / Expert Challenges
Posted by:

Daubert Challenge of Plaintiff’s Experts Denied in Career Boilermaker Case

The plaintiff in this case alleged that the decedent, Michael Walashek, was exposed to asbestos from various products while working as a boilermaker between 1967 and 1986 on various naval, commercial, and industrial vessels. The defendant, Foster Wheeler LLC, filed a motion to preclude the testimony of the plaintiff’s experts Dr. Edwin Holstein ad Dr. Michael Claude Fishbein on the grounds that their opinions do not satisfy the requirements of Fed. R. Evid. 702 and Daubert.

The court denied the motion. Regarding Dr. Fishbein, …

Continue Reading
California / Case Decisions / Remand/Removal
Posted by:

Federal Court Remands Case to State Court Based on Plaintiff’s Waiver of Federal Claims Against Removing Defendant

On June 15, 2015, plaintiffs Charles Ford and Carol Ford filed an action in the Alameda County Superior Court alleging state law claims for Mr. Ford’s exposure to asbestos from numerous defendants. Defendant Foster Wheeler Energy removed the matter to federal court in November 2015 following Mr. Ford’s testimony that he worked aboard the USS Oklahoma City while working for the Bethlehem Shipyards in the late 1960s. In December 2015, the laintiffs filed a notice of waiver, which stated that they waive any claims against …

Continue Reading
California / Case Decisions / Summary Judgment
Posted by:

In Fact-Intensive Unpublished Opinion, California Appeals Court Reverses Grant of Summary Judgment to Three of Four Automotive Defendants

In this unpublished opinion, the plaintiffs appealed after the trial court granted summary judgment to defendants Ford, Navistar, Gibbs International, and Kelsey-Hayes. The plaintiffs also filed motions for a new trial as to all four defendants, which the trial court denied. The decedent was a civilian employee at the Naval Construction Battalion Center; while he was not a mechanic, his visited the Construction Equipment Division (CED) where all vehicle repair work was performed. He died of mesothelioma. The appellate court reversed the summary judgments as …

Continue Reading
California / Case Decisions / Maritime/Admiralty Law / Summary Judgment
Posted by:

On Remand, Federal Court Again Grants Summary Judgment on Plaintiff’s Maritime and State Law Claims

In this federal court case, the court’s jurisdiction was based solely on the plaintiff’s assertion of maritime jurisdiction as set forth in in his fourth amended complaint. The plaintiff brought claims against 54 defendants that manufactured asbestos-containing products that the decedent, Christopher Curtis, was allegedly exposed to in three different situations: From 1955-58 while he served in the Navy, while employed as an electrician for 40 years, and while performing maintenance on his automobiles. The plaintiff settled against many of the 54 defendants, and other …

Continue Reading
California / Case Decisions / Damages
Posted by:

California Appellate Court Affirms All of Trial Court’s Rulings in Extensive Damages Case Against Kaiser Gypsum

The plaintiffs in the case were a married couple who filed a claim for personal injury due to bystander asbestos exposure after the husband was diagnosed with mesothelioma. After a lengthy trial against defendant Kaiser Gypsum, the plaintiffs were awarded $21 million in compensatory damages but the jury could not reach a verdict regarding punitive damages. A retrial was ordered on this issue, and the second jury awarded $20 million in punitive damages, which the court reduced to just under $4 million. Defendant Kaiser Gypsum …

Continue Reading
California / Case Decisions
Posted by:

Strict Product Liability Claim Reinstated Against Plastering Contractor for Construction Work on Building Complex in 1970s

In this case, the plaintiff, Joel Hernandezcueva, alleged he was exposed to asbestos while working as a janitor in the Fluor complex in the 1990s. It was alleged that defendant E.F. Brady was a subcontractor doing drywall and plastering work with asbestos-containing materials manufactured by Kaiser and Hamilton during the construction of the complex in the 1970s. During trial and following completion of the plaintiff’s case in chief, Brady’s motion for partial nonsuit dismissing the plaintiff’s claims of strict liability, misrepresentation, and intentional failure to …

Continue Reading
California / Case Decisions / Summary Judgment
Posted by:

California Court Relies on Absence of Evidence in Plaintiff’s Discovery Responses to Affirm Summary Judgment for Defendant Fluor

A husband and wife sued numerous defendants after the husband was diagnosed with asbestosis in 2011. Defendant Fluor moved for summary judgment, which the court granted, on the basis that the plaintiffs failed to establish a triable issue of fact that the plaintiff was exposed to asbestos from Fluor products. The appellate court affirmed.

The plaintiffs alleged the husband was exposed to a variety of asbestos-containing products during his work with Southern California Gas Company from the 1950s-90s. In response to discovery from Fluor, the …

Continue Reading
California / Case Decisions / Summary Judgment
Posted by:

California Court Holds Refractory Contractor Established Insufficient Evidence of Exposure and Grants Summary Judgment

The plaintiff commenced this wrongful death claim alleging the decedent was exposed to asbestos while J.T. Thorpe & Sons was performing refractory work around boilers. Thorpe moved for summary judgment on the ground that there was insufficient evidence decedent was actually in the vicinity of Thorpe employees working with refractory materials. The court concluded that the plaintiff has some threshold burden of establishing some factual basis for exposure and that Thorpe met it initial burden that there was insufficient evidence of exposure: “Thorpe has satisfied …

Continue Reading
California / Case Decisions
Posted by:

California Appellate Court Examines Entire Record, Not Just Expert Testimony, To Affirm Denial of Motions for Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict

The plaintiff in this case was diagnosed with mesothelioma and filed claims for negligence, strict liability, and loss of consortium against, among others, Union Carbide and Elementis Chemicals, as successor-in-interest of Harrison & Crosfield, Pacific, Inc., and certain related entities.  The plaintiff submitted three theories of liability: strict liability (design defect under the consumer expectations test); strict liability (failure to warn); and negligence (failure to warn). The jury returned special verdicts in favor of the plaintiff on the strict liability claim in that Union Carbide …

Continue Reading