Category: Summary Judgment

Pennsylvania / Summary Judgment
Posted by:

Estate’s Claims of Exposure from Steam Pipes That Were Not Connected to a Locomotive Survive Preemption Challenge

PENNSYLVANIA — The plaintiff’s decedent worked in Texas as an electrician from 1945 until 1989, and alleged exposure to asbestos from insulation that was incorporated into passenger railcars manufactured by Defendants from 1945 until the mid to late 1970s. Specifically, the plaintiff alleged that asbestos exposure from pipe insulation and “arc chute” insulation in the passenger cars manufactured by the defendants was a cause of decedent’s mesothelioma and subsequent death. The railroad manufacturing defendants moved for summary judgement under the theory that the plaintiff’s claims …

Continue Reading
Delaware / Summary Judgment
Posted by:

Meteorologist’s Opinion Insufficient to Support Environmental Claim to Asbestos; Summary Judgment Granted Superior Court of Delaware

DELAWARE — In Werner Rath v. 3M Company, et al., the court ruled on a defendant Oyj Partek Ab’s (Partek) motion for summary judgment. The plaintiff alleged occupational exposure to asbestos while working as a union carpenter at a number of industrial sites in Delaware and New Jersey. One week before the plaintiff’s deposition was scheduled to take place, the plaintiff’s counsel filed a motion for leave to amend to file an amended complaint joining additional defendants, including Partek. Partek was one, non-exclusive supplier …

Continue Reading
Summary Judgment / Washington
Posted by:

Date of First Purchase Creates Material Fact Dispute, Automotive Supplier’s Motion for Summary Judgment Denied

WASHINGTON — The plaintiff Eric Klopman-Baerselman originally filed suit in state court on behalf of the plaintiff’s decedent Rudie Klopman-Baerselman, alleging that his exposure to asbestos-containing products manufactured, sold, or distributed by the defendants substantially contributed to his mesothelioma. The defendants subsequently removed the case to federal court. The allegations against the moving the defendant, O’Reilly Automotive Stores, Inc. (O’Reilly) are that the plaintiff’s decedent was exposed to asbestos-containing brakes, clutches, and gaskets purchased at Schuck’s, an entity under the O’Reilly umbrella.

O’Reilly moved for …

Continue Reading
North Carolina / Summary Judgment
Posted by:

Lack of Evidence Against Premise Defendants Leads to Grant of Summary Judgment in Mesothelioma Case

NORTH CAROLINA — The plaintiff filed suit against multiple defendants including Farmers Chemical and Storage (Farmers) and Schlage alleging he developed mesothelioma from his occupational exposure to asbestos. Specifically, he claimed he was exposed to asbestos while working as a plumber and pipefitter from 1965-1982 for the local union. Farmers and Schlage moved for summary judgment.

The court began its analysis and stated that summary judgment is warranted “the movant shows there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is …

Continue Reading
Worn work gloves lying on concrete floor
Ohio / Summary Judgment
Posted by:

Summary Judgment Denied to Asbestos Clothing Manufacturer Based on Plaintiff ‘s Contradictory Affidavit

OHIO –The plaintiff Donald MacLachlan brought suit against several defendants including American Optical (AO) alleging he developed mesothelioma as a result of exposure to asbestos while working at the Weirton Steel plant from 1971-2008. He was deposed in 2015 and also alleged exposure to steam turbines manufactured by General Electric. As for AO, The plaintiff testified that he wore asbestos containing thermal gloves and coats manufactured by that defendant beginning in 1979 while working as a cast house helper. The plaintiff was adamant that the …

Continue Reading
Maritime/Admiralty Law / Pennsylvania / Summary Judgment
Posted by:

Summary Judgment Motions Denied for Four Defendants in Two Maritime Cases Filed by Same Plaintiff

PENNSYLVANIA — Shortly before his death, Obediah Walker, Jr., filed an action in Pennsylvania state court alleging he was exposed to asbestos while serving on the USS Plymouth Rock while enlisted in the Navy from 1969 to 1971. He served as an electrician onboard the Plymouth Rock and was later diagnosed with lung cancer. He was deposed six days after filing suit and was only cross-examined by one defendant before he passed. The defendants Ingersoll-Rand, Warren Pumps and Blackmer Pumps did not cross-examine Walker. Obediah …

Continue Reading
Summary Judgment / Tennessee
Posted by:

Failure to Establish Admissible Exposure Evidence Leads to Summary Judgment for Railroad Defendant

TENNESSEE — The plaintiff filed suit against Norfolk Southern Railroad Company (Norfolk) under the Federal Employer’s Liability Act (FELA) alleging he developed lung cancer as a result of occupational exposure to asbestos. Specifically, the plaintiff worked as a brakeman, trainman, and locomotive engineer from 1965-1999. The plaintiff passed from lung cancer in 2003 and his wife was substituted as the plaintiff. Of interest, the plaintiff’s decedent smoked beginning at age 13 and smoked up to one pack of cigarettes per day at times until 2000. …

Continue Reading
Ohio / Summary Judgment
Posted by:

Summary Judgment Granted for Crane Co. in Maritime Action

OHIO — The plaintiff sued Crane Co. and other defendants based upon his alleged exposure to asbestos while serving in the Navy from 1960 to 1967. Crane filed for summary judgment on plaintiff’s maritime law strict liability negligence claims. The court applied the Lindstrom standard. Despite the plaintiff’s urging, the court did not adopt a fact-specific standard with regard to the bare metal defense, instead applying the Sixth Circuit’s bright line rule.

The court found that the plaintiff failed to put forth any evidence of …

Continue Reading
Expert Challenges / Pennsylvania / Summary Judgment
Posted by:

Preclusion of Plaintiff Experts Leads to Defense Win in First Philly Talc Trial

PENNSYLVANIA – The plaintiff Charles Brandt (plaintiff), on behalf of the decedent Sally Brandt (decedent), commenced an asbestos-related action against, among other defendants, Colgate-Palmolive Company (Colgate), alleging that the decedent’s use of Colgate’s Cashmere Bouquet talcum powder exposed the decedent to asbestos, resulting in her mesothelioma diagnosis.

Following a Frye hearing, the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas precluded the expert opinions of the plaintiff’s geologist and pathologist, finding numerous methodological flaws in their research claiming asbestos was found in Cashmere Bouquet talcum powder. Colgate …

Continue Reading
Louisiana / Summary Judgment
Posted by:

Trial Court Did Not Abuse Discretion in Granting Plaintiff’s Motion to Dismiss Without Prejudice Prior to Ruling on Defendant’s Summary Judgment

LOUISIANA — The plaintiff James Sizemore filed suit in Louisiana State Court against multiple defendants, alleging that his diagnosis of mesothelioma was caused by exposure to asbestos while working as a welder, pipefitter, and boilermaker at numerous industrial facilities. The plaintiff’s alleged exposure to certain defendants products occurred exclusively in South Carolina, and those defendants moved for dismissal for lack of personal jurisdiction or forum non conveniens. In response, The plaintiff dismissed those defendants and filed a companion suit in South Carolina.  Viking Pumps …

Continue Reading