Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment Granted Due to Lack of Causation U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, September 19, 2019

In a case extensively covered by Asbestos Case Tracker, the Western District of Washington considered another defendant, Henry Company LLC’s, motion for summary judgment. The seminal products liability case in Washington, Lockwood v. AC & S, Inc., enumerates seven factors to consider when “determining if there is sufficient evidence for a jury to find that causation has been established:”
  1. The plaintiff’s proximity to an asbestos product when the exposure occurred;
  2. The expanse of the work site where asbestos fibers were released;
  3. The extent
…
Continue reading...

Summary Judgment Affirmed Due to Insufficient Service and Statue of Limitations Court of Appeals of Minnesota, September 16, 2019

MINNESOTA – The plaintiff’s decedent passed away from mesothelioma allegedly caused by his exposure to his father’s work clothes and Bendix (Honeywell) brakes. The decedent’s father was an insulator for Walker Jamar and A.W. Kuettel. The decedent also worked for four months in 1974 as a janitor at an Oldsmobile dealership. He was diagnosed with mesothelioma in December 2011. The decedent originally filed suit in North Dakota in 2013, naming Walker Jamar but not Honeywell. Walker Jamar was dismissed from the North Dakota action on…
Continue reading...

Court Grants Unopposed Motion for Summary Judgment for Pump Manufacturer United States District Court, S.D. Georgia, Brunswick Division, August 29, 2019

GEORGIA – In Sheila Carter, Individually and as Executrix of the Estate of James R. Carter v. 3M, et al., the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Georgia granted a pump manufacturer’s (the defendant) motion for summary judgment due to the plaintiff’s failure to oppose the motion. This action alleged that the decedent James R. Carter developed lung cancer as a result of his exposure to asbestos during his career at the ITT Rayonier Plant in Jesup, Georgia from 1968 through 2010.…
Continue reading...

Expert Testimony Insufficient to Create Issue of Fact in Take Home Exposure Case U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit August 28, 2019

The Ninth Circuit affirmed an Idaho district court’s order granting summary judgment for the defendant, Union Pacific, in a secondary exposure case filed by the plaintiff William Stephens. The plaintiff alleged that his father was exposed to asbestos at his job at a Union Pacific roundhouse in Weiser, Idaho, and carried asbestos home on his clothes, exposing his family and contributing to the plaintiff’s mesothelioma. The plaintiff had also worked for 20 years in lumber mills in Oregon, and brought suit against his former employers…
Continue reading...

Possibility of Exposure to Asbestos in Cosmetic Talc Not Sufficient to Survive Summary Judgment Courts of Appeals of Wisconsin, August 27, 2019

WISCONSIN – The plaintiff, Dale Chapp, filed suit against Colgate Palmolive arguing that his late wife, Ruth Chapp, developed mesothelioma from her use of Cashmere Bouquet talcum powder from approximately 1969-the mid-1980s. The plaintiff also alleged that Ruth Chapp was secondarily exposed to asbestos from laundering his work clothes. Colgate moved for summary judgment. The trial court found that Chapp had “not shown more than the mere possibility of causation” and granted summary judgment in factor of Colgate. The plaintiff appealed. On appeal, the court…
Continue reading...

Alaska’s Statute of Repose Upheld to Bar Claims Against Pulp Mill Defendant Court of Appeals of Washington, Division 2 August 20, 2019

ALASKA – A Washington state appellate court upheld the trial court’s motion of summary judgment for the defendant Ketchikan Pulp Company (Ketchikan) in a matter involving the plaintiff Larry Hoffman, and concluded that Alaska’s statute of repose barred claims against Ketchikan. Hoffman’s father, Doyle, worked as a welder and pipefitter at the Ketchikan mill in Alaska from 1954 until 1956, and Larry worked at Ketchikan himself as a plumber and pipefitter from 1968 to 1970. The plaintiff alleged that his own work and his father’s…
Continue reading...

Three Defendants Granted Summary Judgment in Maritime Case Pending in Washington U.S.D.C. for the W.D. of Washington, August 19, 2019

WASHINGTON – The plaintiff, Donald Yaw, filed a lawsuit against numerous equipment manufacturers alleging that he suffered injuries as a result of asbestos exposure. The plaintiff experienced his exposure while working as a shipfitter at Puget Sound Naval Shipyard from 1964 to 2001. The plaintiff was deposed before he passed away, but did not remember working on any particular product on any ship. The plaintiff’s expert, Captain Arnold Moore, opined that the plaintiff was exposed to asbestos while others were removing insulation, packing, and gaskets…
Continue reading...

Delaware Court Uses Ohio Law to Grant Summary Judgment for Asbestos Supplier Superior Court of Delaware, August 15, 2019

DELAWARE – The plaintiff, Marianne Robinson, brought failure to warn and strict liability claims against Union Carbide Corporation (UCC). She alleged that UCC sold its Calidria asbestos to Georgia Pacific (GP) for use in their joint compound products for a period of time. Finally, the plaintiff alleged that her late husband, Jack Robinson, purchased and used GP’s Ready Mix products in Ohio between 1971 and 1982, which caused or contributed to his fatal lung cancer. UCC moved for summary judgment. Applying Ohio law,…
Continue reading...

U.S. Supreme Court Decision Quells Disagreement Over Bare Metal Defense in Maritime Cases U.S. District Court for Western District of Washington, August 9, 2019

In the past few years, the bare metal defense has seen inconsistent and nebulous holdings around the nation. The bare metal defense vindicates an asbestos defendant that manufactured a product that was made of only metal without asbestos but later utilized asbestos components within its products. The defense is commonly seen amongst pump and valve manufacturers and also in United States Navy cases, thereby implicating maritime law. Examples of trial courts granting summary judgment for the defense only to be overturned on appeal are readily…
Continue reading...

Summary Judgment Granted for Brake Manufacturer Based Upon Lack of Product Identification U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, August 5, 2019

WASHINGTON – The plaintiff filed suit in Washington state court alleging that decedent, Rudie Klopman-Baerselman, developed mesothelioma from exposure to brakes manufactured by Standard Motor Products (SMP), which he used while performing maintenance on his vehicles from 1966 to 1997. The case was removed to federal court. SMP moved for summary judgment based upon a lack of product identification evidence. The plaintiff did not oppose the motion. Although the plaintiff alleged in the complaint that the decedent used SMP products, no witnesses testified as such.…
Continue reading...