LATEST INSIGHTS

Case Decisions / Washington
Posted by:

Raw Asbestos Supplier to Transite Pipe Manufacturer Not Subject to Personal Jurisdiction

Plaintiff Donald Noll sued a number of manufacturers, sellers, and suppliers of asbestos and asbestos-containing products, including Special Electric. Noll alleged that he developed malignant mesothelioma from exposure to asbestos when he worked construction in Washington between 1977 and 1979 cutting asbestos-cement pipes. Those asbestos-cement pipes were manufactured by CertainTeed Corporation, and CertainTeed received most of its asbestos from Special Electric.

Special Electric moved to dismiss on the basis that the trial court lacked specific personal jurisdiction over it because its contacts were limited to …

Continue Reading
Case Decisions / Oregon / Summary Judgment
Posted by:

Successor Liability Decision Reversed in Oregon

The plaintiff appealed the trial court’s granting of the defendant’s motion for summary judgment on successor liability. This suit involves the plaintiff’s exposure to asbestos from his work in Portland shipyards during the 1950s. The defendant moved for summary judgment on the ground that any of its liabilities “that may have existed prior to 1965 were transferred to another company” and, therefore, it could not be held liable for the alleged injuries suffered prior to that transfer.

The plaintiff appealed this decision arguing that the …

Continue Reading
Case Decisions / Summary Judgment / Wisconsin
Posted by:

Plaintiff’s Mesothelioma Claims Barred by Wisconsin Worker’s Compensation Act

In a consolidated matter, three of the plaintiffs, Diane Jacobs, Katrina Masephol, and Janice Seehar (the Weyerhaeuser plaintiffs), filed claims against various defendants after developing mesothelioma.  Each had worked for Weyerhaeuser for years in close contact with asbestos.  As such, in order to get around Wisconsin’s Workers Compensation Act, Wis. Stat. § 102.03(2), which provides the “exclusive remedy against the employer” for work-related injuries, the plaintiffs argued that their asbestos-related injuries were not caused on the job, but at home and in the community, and …

Continue Reading
California / Case Decisions / Summary Judgment
Posted by:

Insulation Supplier Contracting with U.S. Navy Protected by Government Contractor Defense

Jay Wanlass filed suit against Metalclad Insulation Corp. (Metalclad) based on alleged exposure to friable asbestos. Metalclad moved for summary judgment, which the trial court granted. The plaintiff appealed that decision to the First District Court of Appeal for Division 2 in California.

In 1968, Metalclad entered into an agreement with the United States Navy to supply insulation for piping on four nuclear-powered submarines. Those submarines were all constructed at Mare Island Naval Shipyard in Vallejo, California. The plaintiff alleged he was exposed to asbestos …

Continue Reading
Case Decisions / Kentucky / Summary Judgment
Posted by:

Possibility of Exposure Not Enough to Overcome Summary Judgment Motions of Brake Manufacturers and Supplier

Decedent Bobby Vickery died of mesothelioma and his estate was substituted as a party to this action.  The plaintiff estate appealed the granting of summary judgment to defendants Eaton Corporation, ArvinMeritor, Pneumo-Abex, and Brake Supply Company.  The appellate court affirmed, with one judge dissenting.

The plaintiff alleged Mr. Vickery was exposed to asbestos from a variety of different sources.  He had fifty employers between 1966 and 2003, and alleged asbestos exposure during three of those jobs.  For purposes of this appeal, the court summarized his …

Continue Reading
Insurance Coverage
Posted by:

Asbestos Plaintiffs Too Late to Take Advantage of Expansive Maryland Coverage Ruling

A large group of asbestos plaintiffs failed to file claims seeking more expansive coverage within the applicable statute of limitations.  MCIC Inc. (formerly McCormick Asbestos Company, “MCIC”) sold and installed asbestos insulation products. By the early 1970s, it was clear that asbestos was hazardous, and MCIC ceased selling and installing asbestos-containing products in approximately 1973.  In the late 1980s, several law firms collectively filed several thousand lawsuits against MCIC asserting personal injury claims resulting from exposure to asbestos-containing products. The cases of 8,555 plaintiffs were …

Continue Reading
Case Decisions / Ohio / Summary Judgment
Posted by:

Summary Judgment Reversed in Finding Co-Worker Testimony Personal Knowledge, Not Hearsay

Plaintiff Ruth Williams filed suit against multiple defendants, including Akron Gasket, as a result of her late husband’s development of mesothelioma. Specifically, the plaintiff alleged that Mr. Williams was exposed to asbestos tape made by Akron while working at PPG Industries and Goodyear Tire and Rubber. Summary judgment was granted in favor of Akron. The plaintiff appealed, arguing that the trial court erred in finding that co-worker testimony was hearsay and that medical causation could not be proven.

The court began its analysis by reminding …

Continue Reading
Case Decisions / Federal Officer Jurisdiction / New York
Posted by:

Abandonment of Claims Alleging Asbestos Exposure at Government Facilities Eliminated Federal Jurisdiction

Defendant Crane Co. appealed the remand ordered by the district court to New York State Court. Crane had removed based upon the federal officer removal statute. The appellate court affirmed the remand without a summary of the underlying facts.

First, Crane argued remand was erroneous because the federal courts had original subject matter jurisdiction. The district court had concluded that the plaintiffs had abandoned any claims arising from asbestos exposure occurring at a government facility; thus, the basis on which this action was originally removed …

Continue Reading
Case Decisions / Maryland / Statute of Repose / Summary Judgment
Posted by:

Maryland Court Affirms Application of Statute of Repose in Asbestos Matter

On December 13, 2013, plaintiff James F. Piper was diagnosed with mesothelioma and filed suit in the Circuit Court for Baltimore City on March 26, 2014 for damages caused by his occupational asbestos exposure. Piper worked as a steamfitter at the Morgantown Generating Station in Woodzell, Maryland. In early 1970, defendant Westinghouse installed a turbine generator at this site to which the specifications called for the use of insulation containing asbestos. Piper testified that while he did not work directly on the installation of the …

Continue Reading
Case Decisions / Pleadings Challenge / Washington
Posted by:

Automotive Parts Manufacturer Granted Dismissal due to Lack of Personal Jurisdiction

In another decision out of the Hodjera suit in the Western District of Washington, the motions to dismiss of Dana Companies, LLC and Dana Canada Corporation (the defendants), were granted based on lack of personal jurisdiction.

Dana Companies is a Virginia corporation with its principal place of business in Ohio. Dana Canada is a Canadian corporation with its principal place of business in Ontario. The plaintiff alleged that he was exposed to asbestos in Toronto, Ontario, between 1986 and 1994. Neither company is registered to …

Continue Reading