Category: Delaware

Case Decisions / Delaware / Summary Judgment
Posted by:

Expert Affidavit Does Not Create a Question of Fact for Nonmoving Party in Motion for Summary Judgment

On February 8, 2017, the United States District Court for the District of Delaware granted Defendants Crane Co., Warren Pumps LL, and Air & Liquid Systems Corporation (Buffalo) separate motions for summary judgment with regards to all causation counts of the plaintiff’s complaint.

The plaintiff asserted state law causes of actions against the defendants based on David MacQueen’s (the decedent) employment in the U.S. Navy. The decedent was aboard the U.S.S. Randolph and the U.S.S. Independence from 1956-60. The plaintiff alleged that Crane, Warren, and …

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

Plaintiff’s Inconsistent Testimony is an Issue for Trial; Summary Judgment is Denied

On January 17, 2017, the Superior Court of Delaware, New Castle denied RCH Newco II LLC’s (Newco) motion for summary judgment. The plaintiff, Jessie Hastings, alleged that he contracted colon cancer as a result of his exposure to Newco’s asbestos-containing product, Galbestos. Galbestos was a material that protected metal and roofing products. Mr. Hastings was the only product identification witness and testified in two depositions.

In his first deposition, Mr. Hastings testified that he began working at DuPont’s Chestnut Run facility in 1951-52. He testified …

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

No Error in Recommendation of Summary Judgment Where Plaintiffs Failed to Establish Causation

Summary Judgment was recommended by the magistrate for the plaintiffs’ failure to establish causation in this case. The plaintiff appealed and contended that his asbestos related disease was a result of exposure to asbestos from Foster Wheeler boilers while working onboard the USS Gridley.

The court noted that the standard of review of a magistrate’s report and recommendation is de novo. In this case, no party objected to the application of maritime law. Accordingly, the plaintiff had the burden to show: 1) The plaintiff …

Continue Reading
Bare Metal/Component Parts / Case Decisions / Delaware / Maritime/Admiralty Law / Summary Judgment
Posted by:

Defendants’ Motions for Summary Judgment Granted for Lack of Exposure Evidence and Opposition

The plaintiffs brought this action against multiple defendants alleging Mr. Evans developed an asbestos related disease as a result of his exposure to asbestos while serving in the U.S. Navy. Mr. Evans alleged that he worked as a fireman and boiler tender on-board the USS Kearsarge from 1957-61 and USS Bole in 1961. Mr. Evans believed that he had been exposed to asbestos from gaskets and refractory products while in the U.S. Navy. Mr. Evans also alleged that he had been exposed to brake dust …

Continue Reading
Bare Metal/Component Parts / Case Decisions / Delaware / Maritime/Admiralty Law / Summary Judgment
Posted by:

Defendants’ Motions for Summary Judgment Granted for Plaintiffs’ Failure to Establish Exposure Evidence

The plaintiff alleged he developed mesothelioma as a result of his exposure to asbestos while working with the U.S. Navy from 1961-64 and from 1961-78 with various employers. Defendant Crane Co. removed the case to the U.S. District Court on August 31, 2015. Defendants CBS Corporation, Goodyear Tire and Rubber, FMC Corporation, and Ingersoll Rand moved for summary judgment. The plaintiff filed no opposition to those motions.

The court began its analysis with the standard for summary judgment. Summary judgment is appropriate when there is …

Continue Reading
Case Decisions / Delaware / Federal Officer Jurisdiction / Maritime/Admiralty Law
Posted by:

Court Denies Defendant’s Motion to Apply Federal Maritime Law

Plaintiffs Ralph Elliott Shaw and Joan Sanderson Shaw initiated this action by filing a complaint in the Superior Court of Delaware on February 26, 2015 asserting various causes of action arising out of Mr. Shaw’s alleged exposure to asbestos throughout his employment. Specifically, the plaintiff’s allegations include Mr. Shaw’s occupational exposure as a sheet metal worker in Groton, Connecticut from approximately 1952 to 1954 and 1957 to 1967. Mr. Shaw alleged exposure to asbestos throughout his employment, at various submarine factories and shipyards with respect …

Continue Reading
Bankruptcy Trusts / Delaware
Posted by:

Bankruptcy Court Grants Asbestos Defendants Limited Access to Bankrupt Trust Exhibits

Honeywell International, Inc. who was joined by Ford Motor Company moved for an order authorizing “any entity . . . to access, inspect, copy and receive copies of … any and all of the 2019 Exhibits filed with the Court in compliance with the 2019 Order or Bankruptcy Rule 2019.” In other words, Honeywell and Ford were seeking an order allowing it access to the statements and exhibits which asbestos claimants submitted in the captioned cases pursuant to Rule 2019 of the Federal Rules …

Continue Reading
Bankruptcy / Case Decisions / Delaware / Other Asbestos News
Posted by:

Certification of Class for Unmanifested Asbestos Claims in Bankruptcy Court Denied

Debtors filed voluntary petitions for relief in the United States Bankruptcy Court; certain debtors’ subsidiaries have potential liability related to former employees’ alleged exposure to asbestos in power plants owned or operated by debtors’ predecessors. The bankruptcy court issued an order setting a bar date for all asbestos claimants, establishing requirements for proofs of claim for manifested and unmanifested asbestos claimants, and notice procedures. Appellants filed a motion seeking to have the court, among other things, certify a class of persons holding unmanifested asbestos claims. …

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

Court Grants Summary Judgment for Defendant Boiler Manufacturer Based on Lack of Causation Under Maritime Law

Plaintiffs Jimmy R. Mitchell and Connie Mitchell filed suit alleging that Mr. Mitchell developed lung cancer as a result of exposure to asbestos-containing products, in part during the course of his employment as a boiler fireman with the U.S. Navy from 1976-79.

Defendant Foster Wheeler filed for summary judgment and argued, among other things, lack of causation. To establish causation under maritime law (which both parties agree applied), plaintiffs must show that (1) Mr. Mitchell was exposed to a Foster Wheeler boiler; (2) the exposure …

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

Magistrate Judge Recommends Various Rulings on Five Summary Judgment Motions Filed by Defendants

The United States Magistrate Judge recommended disposition on five summary judgment motions filed by various defendants in this mesothelioma case wherein plaintiffs alleged asbestos exposure during plaintiff Mark Hillyer’s employment with the U.S. Navy from 1967-1997.  The only product identification witness was plaintiff Mark Hillyer, who testified that he was exposed to asbestos through his maintenance work on reactor plant systems, steam plant systems, engines, and turbine generators.  In deciding these motions, the court applied maritime law such that plaintiff must show that (1) he …

Continue Reading