Negligence Per Se Claims Against Defendant Passenger Railcar Manufacturer Denied; Strict Liability and Negligence Claims Can Proceed Under Federal Statutes U.S. District Court, D. Kansas, September 10, 2018

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...

Insulation Supplier Denied Summary Judgement Based On Residual Market Place Arguments United States District Court, M.D. North Carolina, August 8, 2018

NORTH CAROLINA — The plaintiff brought suit against a dozen entities alleging her decedent’s exposure in the tire curing room of the Firestone factory in Wilson, North Carolina from 1975 to 1995. The plaintiff alleged that Covil Corporation was the supplier of asbestos containing pipe covering that was used to insulate steam lines located throughout the curing room. Covil moved for summary dismissal arguing that there was insufficient evidence to conclude that it was the supplier of the asbestos containing pipe covering located in the…
Continue reading...

Plaintiff’s Deposition Testimony Presents Sufficient Evidence to Overcome Automobile Manufacturer’s Motion for Summary Judgment U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, August 15, 2018

DELAWARE — Plaintiffs John and Vicki DeCastro originally filed a personal injury action against multiple defendants in the Superior Court of Delaware, asserting claims arising from Mr. DeCastro’s alleged harmful exposure to asbestos. The case was properly removed to Federal Court under the federal officer removal statute. Mr. Castro alleged that he developed lung cancer as a result of his exposure to asbestos during his service in the United States Air Force, civilian employment with Pacific Bell Telephone and United Airlines, and personal automotive and…
Continue reading...

Summary Judgment on Civil Conspiracy Claims Reversed Appellate Court of Illinois, August 10, 2018

ILLINOIS — The plaintiffs, John and Debra Jones, filed suit against Pneumo Abex LLC (Abex), Owens-Illinois, Inc. (O-I) and others, alleging John suffered from lung cancer as a result of exposure to asbestos while employed in construction. The plaintiffs alleged that Abex entered into a civil conspiracy with Johns-Manville to suppress information about the harmful health effects of asbestos. They asserted the same claim against O-I with regard to an alleged conspiracy with Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corporation (O-C). The trial court granted summary judgment for the…
Continue reading...

Application of Statute of Repose Upheld for Material Supplier Court of Appeals of Wisconsin, August 7, 2018

WISCONSIN — The plaintiff Thomas Mohn alleged that he developed lung cancer from exposure to asbestos while working with insulated turbine blankets supplied by defendant Sprinkmann during the construction of the Genoa power plant in the 1960s. Sprinkman filed a motion for summary judgment on statue of repose grounds, which the trial court granted. The plaintiff appealed, and the Wisconsin Appellate Court affirmed. Wisconsin’s statute of repose imposed a time limit of ten years for bringing claims related to the improvement of real property. The…
Continue reading...

Clutch Manufacturer Cannot File Successive Summary Judgment Motions Based on New, Broader Expert Opinion United States District Court, N.D. Alabama, Eastern Division, August 1, 2018

ALABAMA — The plaintiffs Ray and Donna Franklin alleged that Mr. Franklin’s death from asbestosis-related respiratory failure arose from his work with clutches manufactured by defendant Dana Corporation. The action, originally filed in Calhoun County Alabama, was removed to federal court, and was transferred to the MDL in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. While in the MDL, Dana timely moved for summary judgment, arguing that there was insufficient evidence that Mr. Franklin had ever been exposed to asbestos from a Dana product, or that a…
Continue reading...

PA Superior Court Affirms Entry of Summary Judgment for Three Friction Defendants Pennsylvania Superior Court, July 23, 2018

PENNSYLVANIA — The plaintiff, Sharon Gilbert, filed suit as the executive of the estate of her husband, Guy Gilbert, and in her own right, alleging decedent was exposed to asbestos while working as an auto mechanic at Alray Tire in Pittsburgh, PA from 1975 to 1985.  The plaintiff alleged that such exposure caused decedent’s mesothelioma.  The decedent was not deposed before his death.  Two witnesses, decedent’s co-worker and manager at Alray, were deposed.  The manager testified that Alray purchased replacement parts from several automotive suppliers,…
Continue reading...

Delaware Supreme Court Affirms No Excess Coverage in GM Asbestos Cases Motors Liquidation Company DIP Lenders Trust v. Allstate Ins. Co. et al., No. 381, 2017, 2018 WL 3360976 (Table) (Del. July 10, 2018)

DELAWARE — The Delaware Supreme Court affirmed that several excess policies issues to General Motors do not provide coverage for asbestos-related and environmental claims against the company.  GM purchased primary coverage from Royal Insurance Company for more than 50 years ending in 1993.  Royal handled asbestos claims made under the policies during that period.  The claims at issue were filed after 1993.  Following declaratory judgment actions filed in both Delaware and Michigan, GM and Royal reached a settlement that released all of Royal’s policies from…
Continue reading...

Lack of Personal Jurisdiction over Talc Defendant Leads to Grant of Summary Judgment in Part U.S. District Court, M.D. Florida, July 10, 2018

FLORIDA — The plaintiff Susan Stevenson maintained suit against several defendants including Imerys Tac America Inc. (Imerys) alleging that her decedent, Judith Minneci, had developed peritoneal mesothelioma as a result of exposure to asbestos contaminated talc and talcum powder. Specifically, the plaintiff alleged that the plaintiff used Johnson and Johnson baby powder from 1942-1985. Imerys moved for summary judgment arguing that the Court lacked personal jurisdiction over it. The plaintiff responded that two contacts between Florida and the defendant established jurisdiction. First, its predecessor was…
Continue reading...

$650,000 Verdict Vacated Based on Lack of Evidence That Cement Manufacturer Was “Exclusive Supplier” to Boiler Company Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division, July 9, 2018

NEW JERSEY — The plaintiff’s Decedent William Condon and Plaintiff Debbie Condon originally filed suit in 2014 against 97 defendants, alleging that Decedent’s exposure to asbestos from their products caused his mesothelioma. On June 19, 2014, a Law Division judge denied Defendant Pecora Corporation’s motion for summary judgment. Of the defendants who settled with the plaintiff, nine did so before trial. At trial, the jury apportioned liability and damages between eleven defendants, including Pecora. Six of the eleven defendants went to trial; the others were …
Continue reading...