Category: State

Mesothelioma
Delaware / Summary Judgment
Posted by:

Brake Machine Defendant Summary Judgment Decision Reversed on Appeal

Superior Court of Delaware, March 28, 2022

In this asbestos action, plaintiff Shelley Droz alleged that her husband, Eric Droz, was diagnosed with mesothelioma as a result of his exposure to asbestos while using an arc grinding machine to resurface brake shoes. She alleged that Hennessy’s predecessor-in-interest manufactured the arc grinding machine, and further alleged that Hennessy knew that the grinding process generated asbestos-containing dust, and had a duty under Washington State law to warn Mr. Droz about the potential dangers of exposure to asbestos …

Continue Reading
Georgia / Summary Judgment
Posted by:

Summary Judgment Affirmed and Reversed for Three Premises Defendants Relating to Several Duty Issues

Court of Appeals of Georgia, Fourth Division, March 10, 2022

In this asbestos action, plaintiff Kevin Sinyard developed malignant pleural mesothelioma following a 25-plus year career as a pipefitter. Sinyard commenced an asbestos-related action against several defendants. Three of the defendants include premises defendants (Georgia Power, Ford Motor Company, and Piedmont Hospital), where Sinyard worked from 1975 until 1989. The trial court granted summary judgment to all three defendants. Following the plaintiff’s appeal, the Court of Appeals affirmed in part and reversed in part the …

Continue Reading
Appeal / California
Posted by:

Jury Verdict Overturned: “Mere Possibility” of Exposure to a Product Insufficient to Meet Plaintiff’s Burden

Court of Appeal of California, First Appellate District, Division One, November 30, 2021

The plaintiff, Amos Webb, was diagnosed with mesothelioma in 2018, and filed suit againstnumerous defendants, including General Cable Corporation, alleging that he was exposed to asbestos while working as an electrician for various employers throughout his career. Specifically, during his discovery deposition, Mr. Webb testified that he worked “quite frequently” with a product known as “Romex wire.” Romex was a popular brand of cable used for interior wiring, and General Cable acquired …

Continue Reading
Expert Challenges / Illinois
Posted by:

Plaintiff’s Expert Opinions on Causation, Historical Literature, and “Cumulative Exposure Theory” Precluded

U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, November 23, 2021

The plaintiff alleged that her late husband, Bruce Johnson, was exposed to asbestos between 1971 and 1984 while working with ceramics for different companies and schools. Mr. Johnson was diagnosed with mesothelioma in 2017 and died in 2020. The plaintiff filed suit against Vanderbilt, inter alia, alleging that Vanderbilt was liable under a negligent products liability theory for manufacturing, distributing, or selling asbestos-containing products used in the production of ceramics. …

Continue Reading
California / Personal Jurisdiction
Posted by:

Court Finds Plaintiff’s Affidavit Establishes Specific Jurisdiction

U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, September 9, 2021

Plaintiff Dennis A. Rockwell filed an asbestos action alleging he was exposed to asbestos from his work on two U.S. Navy ships and during his employment at Camp Pendleton, located in California.He alleged that such asbestos exposure ultimately resulted in his February 2021 diagnosis of mesothelioma.

Defendant Akron Brass Company moved to dismiss the case for lack of personal jurisdiction citing the plaintiff’s failure to provide facts connecting Akron Bass to California. …

Continue Reading
California / Damages
Posted by:

$4.4 Million Verdict Affirmed in Asbestos Bowling Ball Trial

California Court of Appeal, Second District, Division 8

The decedent, Donald Vanni, and his brother co-owned and operated Arcata Bowl bowling alley in California from 1957 to 1986. During this time, one of the decedent’s duties was to drill custom-fit finger holes in asbestos-containing bowling balls sold by Arcata Bowl. A press release issued by the Vanni family’s legal team stated, in part: “Asbestos, used as a filler in plastic Ebonite bowling balls, was supplied by Honeywell [International Inc.] in the form of discarded brake …

Continue Reading
California / Personal Jurisdiction
Posted by:

Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Granted as Specific Jurisdiction Not Established

U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California

In this asbestos action, plaintiff Frank Shelton alleged exposure to asbestos while serving in the U.S. Navy from the mid-1960s until the early 1970s. Defendant Superior Lidgerwood Mundy Corporation filed a motion to dismiss this matter, contending that the court did not have general or specific jurisdiction over the defendant. In support of its motion, the defendant submitted a declaration from its vice president and chief financial officer, setting forth that:

[Defendant] is not headquartered in …

Continue Reading
Appeal / California / Expert Challenges
Posted by:

Plaintiff Prevails on Defendant’s Expert Appeal; Court Affirms Seven-Figure Judgment

Court of Appeal of California, Second Appellate District, Division Eight, September 13, 2021

This matter was brought on behalf of decedent Donald Vanni in 2014, alleging two causes of action for negligence and strict product liability against defendant Honeywell International, Inc. among others. The plaintiff alleged that the decedent was exposed to asbestos from owning and operating a bowling alley from 1957 to 1986. Specifically, the decedent was responsible for drilling finger holes in plastic bowling bowls manufactured by Ebonite. The decedent was diagnosed with …

Continue Reading
Florida / Remand/Removal
Posted by:

Asbestos Action Remanded Based on Allegations Against Insulation Defendant

U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, August 31, 2021

Plaintiffs David and Dorothy Bateman commenced this lawsuit in Broward County, Florida, alleging that Mr. Bateman developed mesothelioma as a result of his exposure to asbestos-containing products while serving in the British Royal Navy from 1967 to 1975. The defendants filed a notice of removal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1332, 1441, and 1446. In response, the plaintiffs filed a motion to remand, alleging that the notice of removal was procedurally defective and …

Continue Reading
California / Remand/Removal
Posted by:

Remand Proper Without Evidence of Fraudulent Joinder

U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, September 3, 2021

Plaintiff John Rathbun was diagnosed with terminal mesothelioma on July 8, 2020, and on December 22, 2020, he and his wife filed suit in state court, asserting claims for negligence, strict liability, negligent misrepresentation, fraud by nondisclosure, and loss of consortium. On April 30, 2021, Chattem removed this action to federal court on diversity grounds, and the plaintiffs have filed a motion to remand to state court.

The defendants argue that the two …

Continue Reading