Summary Judgment Archives - Asbestos Case Tracker

November 7, 2023 Motion to Exclude / Summary Judgment

Plaintiff’s Expert Precluded under Rule 702, Talc Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment Granted

4^th Circuit US District Court

Plaintiff Patricia McElroy claimed asbestos exposure via talc-based beauty products from varying brands and asserted a cause of action based upon negligence and product liability, including inadequate design, formulation, breach of implied warranty, willful and wanton conduct, and failure to warn. The plaintiff alleged that defendant Colgate-Palmolive Company developed, manufactured, marketed, and distributed Cashmere Bouquet, which the plaintiff claimed caused her to inhale mesothelioma-causing asbestos fibers. The defendant moved to exclude the testimony of expert witness William Ewing, …

Posted by: Susan R. Allen-Robbins

Gasket Manufacturer’s Motions for Summary Judgment Granted, in part, Pursuant to Maritime Law

Court: United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania

Plaintiff’s decedent, Joseph Pine, served as a fireman aboard the USS Constellation from 1965-1967. After he died from mesothelioma a month after his diagnosis, his widow Lydia Pine (plaintiff) brought suit against defendant John Crane Inc. and a number of other asbestos manufacturers. As the final remaining defendant, Crane moved for summary judgment and to strike plaintiff’s jury demand.

According to the pleadings, the decedent worked on auxiliary equipment including pumps, gaskets, valves, generators, and steam-driven …

November 1, 2023 Motion to Renew / New York / Summary Judgment

Posted by: Kerry L. Jones

Floor Tile Manufacturer’s Motion for Renewal Denied on Causation Ground

Court: Supreme Court of New York, New York County

Defendant Mannington Mills Inc. moved for renewal of its previously denied motion for summary judgment, arguing the New York Court of Appeals’ Nemeth decision has since changed the law regarding causation. Under New York law, a party may move for leave to renew a decision to assert “new facts not offered on the prior motion that would change the prior determination or . . . demonstrate that there has been a change in the law that …

October 27, 2023 New York / Summary Judgment

Posted by: Elizabeth M. Lautenbach

Pipe Manufacturer Denied Summary Judgment in NYCAL

Supreme Court of New York, New York County

In this asbestos action, decedent Rudolf Horvath alleged that he was exposed to asbestos from Bondstrand pipes manufactured by the defendant, Ameron International. Ameron moved for summary judgment, arguing that its pipes could not have caused or contributed to the decedent’s injury. Ameron points to the decedent’s testimony that he worked with chemical pipes at a chemical plant in the West Side area of New York City. Ameron contends that the decedent could not have worked with …

October 20, 2023 California / Summary Judgment

Posted by: Elizabeth M. Lautenbach

Talc Defendant Denied Summary Judgment and Summary Adjudication

Court: Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles

In this action, defendant Vanderbilt Materials LLC moved for summary judgment of the plaintiffs’ claim that plaintiff Roberto Gonzalez was exposed to asbestos in the defendant’s talc. Ultimately, the court denied the motion.

Under California law, “[a] defendant seeking summary judgment must conclusively negate a necessary element of the plaintiff’s case, or demonstrate that under no hypothesis is there a material issue of fact that requires the process of trial.” In response to a special interrogatory …

October 13, 2023 New York / Summary Judgment

Posted by: Jillian E. Madison

Cosmetic Talc Manufacturer Denied Motion for Summary Judgment Regarding Punitive Damages

Jurisdiction: Supreme Court of New York, New York County; October 5, 2023

Plaintiff filed a lawsuit alleging her asbestos-related disease was caused by her use of talcum powder products manufactured by, among others, Chanel. In the motion, Chanel moved to dismiss plaintiff’s punitive damages claim on the basis that Chanel did not exhibit the “level of malice and near criminal reckless disregard” necessary to justify such damages. Plaintiff opposed the motion, arguing that Chanel was aware of the presence of asbestos in its talc and the negative impacts …

October 13, 2023 New York / Summary Judgment

Posted by: Elizabeth M. Lautenbach

Valve Manufacturer Denied Summary Judgment in NYCAL

Court: Supreme Court of New York, New York County

In this asbestos action, defendant Crosby moved for summary judgment on duty to warn and causation grounds. Plaintiff Joseph Deroy opposed the motion.

Ultimately, the court denied the motion. The court first noted that “summary judgment is a drastic remedy and should only be granted if the moving party has sufficiently established that it is warranted as a matter of law.” In addition, “summary judgment is rarely granted in negligence actions unless there is no conflict at …

October 13, 2023 New York / Summary Judgment

Posted by: Elizabeth M. Lautenbach

NYCAL Judge Finds Jurisdiction Over Automotive Defendant and Denies Summary Judgment

Court: Supreme Court of New York, New York County

In this asbestos action, defendant Western Auto moved to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and for summary judgment. Plaintiff Winfield Frederick opposed both motions. Ultimately, the court denied both motions.

With regard to the motion for personal jurisdiction, the court set forth that the defendant “did not even allege that it does not have contacts with the State of New York, and it is undisputed that defendant Western placed products into the stream of commerce.” …

October 13, 2023 New York / Summary Judgment

Posted by: Elizabeth M. Lautenbach

Gasket Manufacturer Denied Summary Judgment in NYCAL

Court: Supreme Court of New York, New York County

In this asbestos action, defendant Goodyear moved for summary judgment, arguing that asbestos exposure from its sheet gaskets could not have caused plaintiff Robert Waldon’s lung cancer. In support, Goodyear submitted the expert reports of CIH John Spencer and Dr. Robert Sussman. In opposition, plaintiff submitted its own expert reports from CIH Kenneth Garza and Dr. Mark Ginsburg.

Ultimately, the court denied the motion. The court first noted that “summary judgment is a drastic remedy and …

October 12, 2023 New York / Summary Judgment

Posted by: Quincy Conrad

Boiler Manufacturer’s Motions for Partial Summary Judgment as to Punitive Damages Denied

Court: Supreme Court of New York, New York County

Defendant Burnham LLC filed motions for partial summary judgment with respect to punitive damages in two actions, DeRoy and Giuliano, on the basis that (1) asbestos exposure from Burnham boilers would fall below TLV or PEL/OSHA limits, and (2) Burnham’s lack of workers’ compensation claims for asbestos-related disease.

The court rejected both arguments, noting that the TLV/OSHA standards “have little bearing on plaintiff’s unequivocal and consistent testimony” regarding his exposure to asbestos from work involving …