In October 2010, the plaintiff, Thomasina Fowler, individually and as administrator of the estate of Willis Edenfield (the decedent), brought a wrongful death and product liability action in the Superior Court of New Jersey against various defendants. The plaintiff alleged the decedent passed away from mesothelioma caused by asbestos exposure associated with defendants’ products. The complaint was filed after the decedent’s death and he was never deposed. Therefore, during discovery, the plaintiff produced two witnesses to testify as to the decedent’s occupational history. The decedent …
Continue ReadingLATEST INSIGHTS
Multi-Million Dollar Jury Verdict Against Ford Vacated Based on Defective Jury Verdict Form
In this secondary exposure case alleging mesothelioma, defendant Ford Motor Company appealed after the jury rendered a verdict against it for $3.4 million. The appellate court vacated the trial court’s judgment on the jury verdict and remanded the case because the jury verdict form was defective, in that it omitted two necessary questions in product liability cases — that the product at issue was unreasonably dangerous or defective and that the plaintiff’s injuries were reasonably foreseeable.
Plaintiff Ronnie Stockton was an automobile mechanic since 1971. …
Continue ReadingDeere Granted Summary Judgment Based on Speculation Tractor Contained Asbestos Parts it Manufactured
The Superior Court of Delaware issued another ruling in a case reported in Asbestos Case Tracker on May 15, 2017. In this ruling, the court granted defendant Deere & Company’s motion for summary judgment. The decedent died from lung cancer. Counsel stipulated that his asbestos exposure occurred from 1955-79. Prior to his death, the decedent gave a deposition stating that he worked on “older” John Deere tractors from 1953-79. This work included grinding head gaskets once per year or every other year. Replacement parts came …
Continue ReadingNo New Facts Alleged in Plaintiff’s Motion for Reargument; Reargument Denied
On February 2, 2017 the Superior Court of Delaware granted defendant Georgia Southern University Advanced Development Center’s (Herty) motion for summary judgment. The plaintiffs since filed a motion for reargument and reconsideration of that order. Dorothy Ramsey alleged that Herty, a manufacturer of an asbestos paper product, negligently failed to warn her of the risks of take-home asbestos exposure due to her husband’s workplace exposure from 1976-80. The plaintiff alleged that Herty’s failure to warn of the danger was a proximate cause of the decedent’s …
Continue ReadingFord Granted Summary Judgement in Two Automotive/Tractor Cases in Delaware
Ford was granted summary judgment in two matters pending in the Superior Court of Delaware.
First, plaintiff Paul Norris brought suit against Ford Motor Company alleging that he developed an asbestos related disease as a result of his occupational and non-occupational exposure to asbestos while performing work on Ford brakes, clutches, and gaskets. The plaintiff started working on his father’s farm in 1960, which included work on a Ford tractor. The plaintiff testified that the new brakes and clutches used for his tractor work were …
Continue ReadingDecedent’s Work Falls Outside Wisconsin’s Statute of Repose; Summary Judgment Denied
This matter stems from a series of filings. In 2010, plaintiffs Daniel and Beverly Ahnert filed an asbestosis claim on February 25, 2010. That case was transferred to Multidistrict Litigation in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. Two and a half years later, Beverly Ahnert, as the executrix of the estate of Danial Ahnert, filed a new complaint in the Easter District of Wisconsin alleging that Daniel Ahnert passed away as a result of an asbestos related disease. This matter deals with defendant Sprinkmann Sons, Inc. …
Continue ReadingCompound Manufacturer’s Directed Verdict Reversed
The estate of decedent Ronnie Startley filed a complaint against multiple defendants, including Welco Manufacturing Company, alleging that the defendants’ products caused the decedent to contract mesothelioma. All defendants except Welco either were dismissed or settled with plaintiffs prior to trial. Welco proceeded to trial. After trial, the trial court directed a verdict in favor of Welco, holding that there was not sufficient evidence to create an issue of material fact as to whether the use of Welco’s products caused the decedent to develop mesothelioma. …
Continue ReadingPrior Maryland Rulings Relied Upon in Denying Remand
The plaintiffs moved to remand after defendant Crane Co. removed to federal court. The court denied the plaintiff’s motion without oral argument.
Decedent John Dugger served in the United States Navy during the 1960s and died of mesothelioma; the plaintiffs filed suit after his death. The plaintiffs alleged Crane manufactured and sold rope and valves to the Navy. Crane removed on the basis of the government contractor defense, and in support submitted affidavits from three individuals.
Defendants may remove to federal court if it establishes …
Continue ReadingCoke Ovens are Real Property and Not Subject to Product Liability Theories
Defendant Honeywell International, Inc., successor in interest to Wilputte Coke Oven Division of Allied Chemical Corporation, appealed from an order denying its motion for summary judgment. The plaintiff sought damages for injuries sustained by decedent Donald Terwilliger from asbestos exposure and coke oven emissions while employed at Bethlehem Steel in Lackawanna, New York. The court reversed and granted Honeywell’s motion.
Honeywell was sued as the successor to Wilputte Coke Oven Division of Allied Chemical, the designer and builder of five coke oven batteries at Bethlehem …
Continue ReadingMissouri Appeals Court Affirms $10M Punitive Damage Award Against Valve Manufacturer
Jeannette G. Poage, the plaintiff, filed a products liability suit against defendant Crane Co. in the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis, alleging that her husband, James E. Poage, suffered personal injuries and wrongful death from mesothelioma, which was caused from Mr. Poage’s work with the defendant’s products. Mr. Poage served in the U.S. Navy from 1954-58 as a machinist on the USS Haynesworth where he helped maintain the valves on the ship that required replacing gaskets and packing. The plaintiff alleged that …
Continue Reading