Plaintiffs’ Motion to Sever Brake Defendant’s Third-Party Complaint Denied

U.S. District the court for the Western District of Kentucky, April 2, 2021

Plaintiff Jack Papineau and his wife sued manufacturers of products that allegedly contained asbestos following Mr. Papineau’s mesothelioma diagnosis. Remaining defendant Brake Supply sued three other manufacturers of products that Brake Supply claims are liable for some or all damages that the court may award the plaintiffs on theories of common-law indemnification and statutory apportionment. The plaintiffs, fearing that the third-party defendants will complicate and slow the plaintiffs’ case against Brake Supply, …

Continue Reading

Third-Party Defendant Not Responsible for Indemnifying Brake Supplier Prior to Existence

U.S. District Court for the Western District of Kentucky, Owensboro Division, November 12, 2020

Plaintiff Jack Papineau was employed by Smith Coal from 1984 to 1992. In his complaint against multiple defendants, including Brake Supply, he alleged that he contracted mesothelioma from exposure to asbestos-containing friction products during his employment at Smith Coal. The plaintiff alleged that Brake Supply purchased friction products from suppliers and resold the products by either using the products to reline brakes or reselling parts.

Brake Supply filed a Third-Party Complaint and …

Continue Reading

Court Denies Third Party Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss and Orders Jurisdictional Discovery

U.S. District Court for the Western District of Kentucky

In Jack Papineau and Holly Papineau v. Brake Supply Company, Inc., et al., the court recently denied a third-party defendant’s motion to dismiss a third-party complaint without prejudice. Plaintiff Jack Papineau alleged he developed malignant mesothelioma from exposure to asbestos from his employment at Smith Coal, and sued four defendants including Brake Supply.

Brake Supply then filed a third party action against Fras-le S.A. Fras-Le North for common law indemnity and apportionment under K.R.S. § …

Continue Reading

Friction Manufacturer’s Objection to Motion to Compel Denied Due to Untimely Submission of Affidavit

KENTUCKY – The plaintiff, Jack Papineau, alleged that he was diagnosed with malignant mesothelioma from exposure to Honeywell’s asbestos-containing brake products. The plaintiff sought an order from the magistrate judge to compel Honeywell to answer one interrogatory and respond to one request for production concerning lawsuits alleging exposure to Honeywell asbestos-containing friction products. Honeywell opposed.

Per the magistrate judge’s order, the plaintiff filed an amended request that limited the scope of the requested documentation. Honeywell responded to the supplemental request and attached the affidavit of …

Continue Reading

Evidence of Prior Asbestos Lawsuits Against Defendant Discoverable

KENTUCKY – The plaintiffs, Jack and Holly Papineau, filed a lawsuit against several defendants alleging damages suffered from exposure to asbestos. The plaintiffs filed a motion to compel the defendant Honeywell to supplement answers to interrogatories and requests for production, specifically regarding prior lawsuits. After oral argument, the court requested that the plaintiffs narrow the scope of their supplemental requests. The plaintiffs complied, requesting information and documents pertaining to all lawsuits filed against Honeywell wherein the claimant alleged an asbestos-related disease from exposure to Honeywell …

Continue Reading

Talc Verdicts Remain a Mixed Bag in Second Half of 2019

In May 2019, we reported on the state of talc litigation following eye-popping verdicts in Missouri in July 2018 that saw Johnson & Johnson hit with $550 million in compensatory damages and over $4 billion dollars in punitive damages in 22 consolidated ovarian cancer cases. With hundreds of mesothelioma cases pending, alleging exposure to asbestos-contaminated talc and enormous damages potentially at stake, a further update is warranted. The last five months have seen several verdicts, and while it’s clear that talc asbestos cases are defensible, …

Continue Reading

Summary Judgment Denial Upheld by Kentucky Court of Appeals Denying Application of Workers’ Compensation Bar

In Schneider Electric USA, Inc. v. Paul Williams, as Executor of the Estate of Vickie Williams, the court of appeals affirmed a trial court’s denial of the sole defendant’s motion for summary judgment. In this case, Vickie Williams’ father worked for Schneider Electric USA, Inc., formerly known as Square D Company (Square D), for several years. During that time, she allegedly encountered asbestos brought home on her father’s clothing. Ms. Williams also worked for Square D for a few months as a teenager. She …

Continue Reading

J&J Wins Defense Verdict in Kentucky Talc Case

KENTUCKY – A Louisville state court deliberated for approximately a half hour on August 2, 2019 before finding in favor of Johnson & Johnson in a talc case. The lawsuit alleged that Donna Ann Hayes died from mesothelioma caused by her use of talcum powder products. The plaintiff’s lawyers argued that the talc was contaminated with asbestos, but J&J disputed those allegations.


Continue Reading

Plaintiff’s Failure to Establish Causation and Lack of Opposition Leads to Grant of Summary Judgment

KENTUCKY — Rojelio Surita brought this action against several defendants alleging his decedent, Nancy Surita, developed mesothelioma from exposure to asbestos containing products for which Defendants were liable. Nancy Surita gave deposition testimony stating that she assisted in brake jobs on the family farm while growing up in Illinois. She also recalled maintenance on vehicles while serving in the National Guard. Later she testified as to working on military trucks. Although she recalled Caterpillar as the manufacturer of the transmissions, she testified that she did …

Continue Reading

Possibility of Exposure Not Enough to Overcome Summary Judgment Motions of Brake Manufacturers and Supplier

Decedent Bobby Vickery died of mesothelioma and his estate was substituted as a party to this action.  The plaintiff estate appealed the granting of summary judgment to defendants Eaton Corporation, ArvinMeritor, Pneumo-Abex, and Brake Supply Company.  The appellate court affirmed, with one judge dissenting.

The plaintiff alleged Mr. Vickery was exposed to asbestos from a variety of different sources.  He had fifty employers between 1966 and 2003, and alleged asbestos exposure during three of those jobs.  For purposes of this appeal, the court summarized his …

Continue Reading