In January 2013, this case was removed on the basis of federal question jurisdiction and assigned to MDL 875. The plaintiffs alleged asbestos exposure while serving in the Navy. Applying maritime law, the court granted summary judgments filed by Buffalo Pumps, CBS Corporation, Foster Wheeler, General Electric, IMO Industries, and Warren Pumps, based upon the bare metal defense. The plaintiffs appealed and the Third Circuit remanded the case to the MDL court to clarify whether it: (1) considered the negligence theory of liability; (2) concluded …
Continue ReadingLATEST INSIGHTS
Cause Remanded to State Court After Federal Officer Defendants Dismissed
The plaintiff filed an asbestos suit in Missouri; defendant Crane Co. removed to federal court based on federal officer jurisdiction, in which Warren Pumps and CBS Corporation joined. All three defendants were dismissed and the plaintiff moved to remand, which the court granted. “…[I]f the federal party is eliminated from the suit after removal…the district court does not lose its…jurisdiction over the state law claims against the remaining non-federal parties…Instead, the district court retains the power either to adjudicate the underlying state law claims or …
Continue ReadingSpecial Electric’s Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict Overturned on Appeal Despite Sale of Raw Asbestos Was to Sophisticated User Johns Manville
Plaintiff William Webb brought a claim against multiple defendants for his alleged development of mesothelioma as a result of his occupational exposure to crocidolite while working for Pyramid Pipe as a warehouseman and truck driver.
A supplier of raw asbestos, defendant Special Electric, was found liable for failure to warn and negligence. Special Electric supplied the Johns Manville Corporation with raw crocidolite asbestos to be used in the manufacturer of multiple Johns Manville products. The court noted that Johns Manville was a vast manufacturer with …
Continue ReadingDismissal of Third-Party Complaint Brought by City of Phoenix Against Contractors and Developers Upheld on Appeal Based Upon Statute of Repose
In 2013, Carlos Tarazon filed a lawsuit against the City of Phoenix, alleging that he developed mesothelioma as a result of asbestos exposure while performing pipe installation and other repairs for the city on projects that took place between 1968 and 1993. The city, in turn, filed a third-party complaint against the developers and contractors responsible for the planning, design and construction of the projects, seeking defense and indemnification pursuant to the construction contracts at issue and city ordinances incorporated within other development permits.
The …
Continue ReadingApplying Connecticut Law, Court Finds Existence of Duty in Asbestos Claim Against Sporting Goods Properties, Inc.
Surviving spouse and personal representative of the decedent filed a three-count complaint against multiple defendants, alleging failure to warn, loss of consortium, and conspiracy due to damages from alleged asbestos exposure. Defendant Sporting Goods Properties, Inc. filed a motion to strike all three counts for failure to state a claim, which plaintiff opposed. The court denied the defendant’s motion to strike as to counts one and two, but granted as to count three.
Sporting Goods argued a clear disconnect between the duty to warn of …
Continue ReadingPlaintiff’s Expert’s Testimony Precluded and Summary Judgment Granted Where Expert Disclosure Was Untimely, the Expert Opinion Lacked Sufficient Factual Basis, and Plaintiff’s Claims Were Legally Insufficient on Causation
In this case, the plaintiff sued numerous manufacturers and distributors of products allegedly containing asbestos, including Defendant General Electric Company (GE), following his diagnosis of mesothelioma.
The plaintiff designated Dr. Robert Vance, an industrial hygienist, to testify regarding the sources of the plaintiff’s asbestos exposure. As to GE, Dr. Vance noted in his report that the plaintiff claimed to have worked with GE generators and asbestos-braided wiring at various job sites. Dr. Vance did not offer an opinion in his report regarding the plaintiff’s alleged …
Continue ReadingCase Remanded to State Court as Defendants Could Not Use the Federal Officer Removal Statute Where the Plaintiff Expressly Disclaimed Any Naval Asbestos Exposure
Plaintiff Richard Batchelor, a former employee of Florida Power & Light Company who was diagnosed with terminal mesothelioma after he was exposed to and inhaled asbestos fibers from asbestos-containing products manufactured, sold, supplied, distributed, or controlled, by the defendants, sued in the Circuit Court for the 11th Judicial District in and for Miami-Dade County Florida alleging three causes of action; (i) negligence; (ii) strict liability; and (iii) loss of consortium. Following Batchelor’s deposition, during which he testified that he served in the U.S. Navy and, …
Continue ReadingSummary Judgment in Favor of the U.S. Government Reversed as Finder of Fact Could Reasonably Conclude Naval Facility Asbestos Exposure was Substantial Factor in Causing Plaintiff’s Mesothelioma
Plaintiff Roger Botts, a former deliveryman who developed mesothelioma after being around work which exposed him to asbestos, including the removal, installation, and fabrication of asbestos on board ships and around the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard between 1970 and 1976, sued the United States Government in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington. The government subsequently filed a motion for summary judgment asserting that the plaintiffs had not proven causation. In granting summary judgment, the District Court found that the plaintiffs failed …
Continue ReadingOregon Jury Finds Against Gasket Manufacturer, Awarding Plaintiff $5 Million
The plaintiff in this case, who was diagnosed with mesothelioma, maintained dry kilns and boilers with asbestos gaskets sold by Mar-Dustrial, which denied selling products to the mill where the plaintiff worked from 1969-2000. The jury disagreed with Mar-Dustrial, and awarded the plaintiff $3.25 million for pain and suffering and $1.75 million for loss of consortium. Mar-Dustrial was the only defendant left at trial, and was assigned 22 percent of liability. The plaintiff called Dr. Carl A. Brodkin as an expert; no experts testified on …
Continue ReadingDistrict Court’s Denial of Manufacturer’s Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction Reversed Upon Reconsideration on the Basis of Lack of Specific Jurisdiction
The plaintiff, who developed mesothelioma as a result of exposure to asbestos products while working in Massachusetts between the 1940s and 1970s, sued the defendant Union Carbide and others in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, where he later moved, seeking compensatory damages pursuant to causes of action for negligence, strict liability, and failure to use reasonable care. The defendant subsequently moved to dismiss the complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction. The District Court denied the motion. The defendant then filed …
Continue Reading