Defendant’s Motion to Compel Settlement Agreements Granted

Court: United States District Court for the District of Kansas

In this action, plaintiff Dennis Dickenson filed suit after being diagnosed with mesothelioma and subsequently settled with two companies. Defendant Henkel moved to compel any, and all, settlement agreements and communications relating to those settlements. The plaintiff opposed the motion, arguing he should not be required to turn over the settlement agreements and communications as such information is not discoverable.

Ultimately, the court granted a portion of Henkel’s motion seeking settlement agreements. Henkel argued the …

Continue Reading

Court of Appeals Affirms District Court’s Judgment in favor of Plaintiff Against Railroad Defendant

Plaintiff Nancy Little (“Little”) filed suit against the Budd Company (“Budd”) alleging that decedent died from exposure to asbestos-containing insulation surrounding the pipes on Budd manufactured rail cars.  The parties went to trial and a verdict was returned in favor of the plaintiff. On appeal, Budd asserted that plaintiff’s tort claims were preempted  by the Locomotive Inspection Act (“LIA”) and  Safety Appliance Act (“SAA”). Budd’s theory on appeal was that the claims were preempted because all passenger rail cars are “appurtenances” to a complete locomotive.…

Continue Reading

Court Grants Third-Party Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss

In Jack Papineau and Holly Papineau v. Brake Supply Company, Inc., et al., the Court recently granted a third-party defendant’s motion to dismiss a third-party complaint. Plaintiff Jack Papineau (“Papineau”) alleged that he developed malignant mesothelioma from exposure to asbestos from his employment at Smith Coal, and sued four defendants. After the action was filed, one defendant filed a third-party action against Rudd Equipment for common law indemnity and apportionment under K.R.S. Section 411.182. In its motion to dismiss the third-party complaint, Rudd Equipment …

Continue Reading

Summary judgment by Railroad Defendant Denied; Attorney’s Fees Also Denied Based on Reasonable Grounds to Deny Discovery Admissions

KANSAS — The plaintiff filed suit against the Budd Company (Budd) alleging her decedent passed from mesothelioma for which the Defendant was liable. Specifically, the plaintiff contended that Budd had placed pipe insulation in rail cars which caused her father’s mesothelioma. The parties went to trial and a verdict was returned in favor of the plaintiff. However, the jury apportioned fault and found Budd to be at fault for only 7 percent. The plaintiff then moved for attorney’s fees arguing that Budd should pay $3,726.07 …

Continue Reading
judge with gavel

Defendant’s Motions in Limine to Exclude Common Plaintiff’s Experts Denied and Granted in Part in Railroad Case

KANSAS — Asbestos Case Tracker brings you the following development in the previously reported Robert Rabe case. Click to read the factual background.

The defendant, The Budd Company (Budd) moved in limine to exclude the plaintiff’s experts, Drs. Brody, Castleman and Frank. The court began its analysis with the standard for expert challenges: A witness who is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education may testify in the form of an opinion or otherwise if: a) the expert’s scientific, technical …

Continue Reading

Interlocutory Appeal Citing Federal Safety Appliance Act Denied

KANSAS — The plaintiff Nancy Little filed suit individually and as the personal representative of the estate of her father, Robert Rabe, against the defendant The Budd Company (Budd). The plaintiff alleges that her father was exposed to asbestos-containing pipe insulation that Budd placed in passenger railcars it manufactured; this exposure allegedly caused Mr. Rabe’s mesothelioma.

Defendant Budd asserted several defenses, including that the Federal Safety Appliance Act (SAA) preempts plaintiff’s state law claims.  Budd twice moved the court to dismiss plaintiff’s claims based on …

Continue Reading

Negligence Per Se Claims Against Defendant Passenger Railcar Manufacturer Denied; Strict Liability and Negligence Claims Can Proceed Under Federal Statutes

KANSAS — The plaintiff Nancy Little brought an action individually and as the personal representative of the estate of her father, Robert Rabe, against defendant The Budd Company (Budd). The plaintiff alleged that her father was exposed to asbestos-containing pipe insulation while working as a pipefitter for the Atchison Topeka & Santa Fe Railroad (ATSF) between 1951 and the mid-to-late 1970’s; she contends this exposure caused him to develop mesothelioma.  The plaintiff’s decedent passed away on December 28, 2012.

Budd allegedly manufactured passenger railcars and …

Continue Reading

Failure to Establish Good Cause Leads to Affirmation of Denial of Additional Expert Disclosure

KANSAS — The plaintiff sued the Budd Company alleging her father, Robert Rabe, developed mesothelioma as a result of occupational exposure to asbestos for which the defendant was allegedly liable. Specifically, Rabe claimed exposure to pipe insulation used on railcars built by the defendant.

A scheduling order was entered by the magistrate, which called for the disclosure of experts by June 23, 2012 amongst other deadlines. After that deadline passed, the defendant moved without objection for a modification of the expert disclosure deadline to September …

Continue Reading