LOUISIANA — Plaintiffs-Appellants are the widow and surviving children of Raymond J. Lemieux, Sr.. Mr. Lemieux, Sr. worked for Johns-Manville in Marrero, Louisiana from 1956 to 1970 during which time he wore a respirator designed by American Optical, Defendant-Appellee. Raymond, Sr. developed asbestos-related lung cancer, which eventually caused his death in 2015; prior to his death, he filed suit in 2011 against American Optical stemming from his use of their respirator. Represented by his attorney, Raymond, Sr. entered into settlement negotiations with American Optical. The …
Continue ReadingLATEST INSIGHTS
Superior Court Affirms Five Post-Trial Rulings, Remands to Trial Court for Apportionment Under Pennsylvania Fair Share Act
PENNSYLVANIA — Appellee William Roverano initially filed suit in 2014 against multiple defendants, alleging that his lung cancer was caused by exposure to asbestos while employed by PECO between 1971-81. Appellee Jacqueline Roverano also made a claim for loss of consortium. More than a dozen of the named defendants had filed for bankruptcy, and only John Crane, Inc. and Brand Insulations, Inc. had not settled before the jury’s verdict. Prior to the trial, the court held that the Fair Share Act, 42 Pa.C.S. Section 7102, …
Continue ReadingPersonal Jurisdiction Defense Waived in Maritime Multidistrict Litigation
Appellants George Perdreauville and Joseph Blue, along with thousands of other seamen, initially filed lawsuits in the late 1980s in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio under the Jones Act, 46 U.S.C. Section 304 et seq., and general maritime law, alleging injury from exposure to asbestos while onboard the Appellees’ various ships. A lengthy and complex procedural course ensued, and, in 1991, the suits were consolidated in the Asbestos Multidistrict Litigation (MDL) in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern …
Continue ReadingClaire’s Removes Children’s Makeup Kits After Reported Positive Asbestos Tests
Claire’s Stores Inc. removed nine children’s makeup products from store shelves after a report by WJAR-TV that tremolite asbestos was found in various Claire’s kits. Claire’s released a statement, saying that initial testing found the cosmetics to be asbestos-free, but that “out of an abundance of caution, additional testing is underway.” Claire’s further stated that the talcum powder used in its products is from a certified asbestos-free European vendor.
A Rhode Island mother was the first to report the potential problem. Kristi Warner, an attorney …
Continue ReadingJury Verdict Against Construction Company Reversed in Premise Liability Case
FLORIDA — Appellant/defendant Bechtel appealed the trial court’s final judgment after a Florida jury found that plaintiff Richard Batchelor’s mesothelioma was caused in part by exposure to asbestos at Florida Power and Light (FPL) during the years 1974 to 1980. Bechtel built the plant at issue, and was responsible for ongoing maintenance services throughout the plaintiff’s six years at FPL, providing over a million contracted man hours during that time period, and having trailers on site for office space and storage. A three judge panel …
Continue ReadingSummary Judgment Reversed Against Gasket Defendant Despite Contradictory Declaration
CALIFORNIA — The plaintiffs filed suit against dozens of defendants, including Familian Corporation, alleging that Mr. Turley developed an asbestos related disease for which defendants were liable. Specifically, Mr. Turley alleged that he was exposed to asbestos containing cement pipe, pipe collars, gaskets and elbows made by Familian while working at various Pacific Gas and Electric Company locations.
Familian moved for summary judgment. The plaintiffs filed an opposition with a declaration from a witness, Paul Scott, who had not been deposed. The declaration implicated Familian …
Continue ReadingEmployer Successfully Asserts Constitutional Challenge to Worker’s Compensation Commission Award
MISSOURI — The plaintiffs brought this claim against employer E.J. Cody Company (defendant) alleging her decedent passed from mesothelioma as a result of his occupational exposure to asbestos for which the defendant was liable. Mr. Casey had worked beginning in 1984 as a tile installer for several companies including the defendant. He retired in 1990 and filed suit for mesothelioma in February of 2015. Mr. Casey passed away prior to hearing.
At the commission hearing, the plaintiffs agreed they sought claims under statute 287.200.4 (new …
Continue ReadingThird Party Negligence Found as New Proximate Cause in a Mesothelioma Claim
Plaintiff Erik Ross Phillips filed suit against a number of defendants after contracting mesothelioma allegedly caused by occupational exposure to asbestos in brake linings used in a machine at the facilities of his employer. The defendants, among others, included the manufacturers and distributors of the brake linings.
At trial, Phillips pursued a negligent failure-to-warn theory under North Carolina law against both defendants. As a defense, the distributor and manufacturer argued that even if they were negligent, they are not liable because of the intervening negligence …
Continue ReadingPlaintiff’s Testimony about Secondary Brake Exposure Sufficient to Overcome Summary Judgment
OHIO – Plaintiff Julia Alexander filed suit against multiple defendants after she was diagnosed with peritoneal mesothelioma in May of 2016. The plaintiff alleges that she was exposed to asbestos via Bendix brake products which were manufactured by Honeywell International. The plaintiff testified that she visited her fiancé, an automobile mechanic, two to three times per week for four hours a visit from 1987-91. Throughout this period, the plaintiff alleges she observed her fiancé performing brake work on a variety of vehicles one to three …
Continue ReadingSummary Judgment Granted for Ford on Strict Liability, Punitives, and Conspiracy Claims
DELAWARE — Asbestosis plaintiff Gerald Hickman alleged take home, bystander, and direct exposure to asbestos from, among others, defendant Ford Motor Company. Ford moved for summary judgment, which was granted in part and denied in part.
The plaintiff alleged exposure to Ford products during his work around others in garages and gas stations, from his father’s work in the family service station, and from his own repair work on his wife’s new Ford Mustang. Applying Delaware law, the court denied summary judgment as to the …
Continue Reading