Plaintiffs’ Evidence in Response to Two Defendants’ Summary Judgment Motions Insufficient to Infer Exposure to Lifetime Boilermaker

The plaintiffs filed a wrongful death and survival action in state court; shortly thereafter defendants removed to federal court. The plaintiffs asserted negligence and strict liability claims from the death of their father/husband from malignant mesothelioma; the decedent was a career boilermaker. Defendants Lamons Gasket Company and Parker-Hannifin Corporation moved for summary judgment; both were granted.

The plaintiffs alleged asbestos exposure during the decedent’s work on boilers and other equipment installed on naval, industrial, and commercial vessels. Lamons and Parker argued lack of exposure. In …

Continue Reading

Summary Judgment Granted in Favor of Defendant Company Pursuant to California’s Workers’ Compensation Act in Matter Involving 44 Years of Alleged On-The-Job Asbestos Exposure

The plaintiff filed a lawsuit in state court alleging that from 1956 to 1990, he was employed by the defendant and “spent a significant portion of that time ‘dealing with asbestos, fiber glass products and other hazardous products.’” The three causes of action were for: (1) premises liability; (2) negligence; and (3) negligent infliction of emotional distress. The defendant removed the case to the Northern District of California and then moved to dismiss it on the grounds that California’s Workers’ Compensation Act provided the exclusive …

Continue Reading

Plaintiff’s Motion to Consolidate Numerous NYCAL Cases into Six Trial Groups Granted

The plaintiff moved to consolidate numerous cases into six trial groups pursuant to CPLR 602(a) on the grounds that there are common issues of law and fact. Several defendants opposed the consolidation, arguing, among other things, that they are prejudiced by joint trials, which violate their due process and equal protection rights. They also argued that the plaintiffs consistently recover more in joint trials as juries are confused in joint trials and rely on testimony in one action to bolster their determination in another action …

Continue Reading

Court Sides with Insurers; Rules Pro Rate Approach Applies on Liability Costs

The case involves two consolidated lawsuits — one from the federal district court for the Southern District of New York, and another from Georgia state court. The Georgia state court action was removed to federal court and then transferred to the Southern District of New York.

This lawsuits concern insurance coverage for The Fairbanks Company for liability arising from asbestos-related personal injury actions. Prior to 1984, Fairbanks manufactured packings and gaskets that contained asbestos. Fairbanks entered into insurance policies with several insurers, including Liberty, between …

Continue Reading

Lack of Evidence Linking Decedent’s Asbestos Exposure to Defendants Leads to Summary Judgment for Pump and Valve Manufacturers and Contractor

The plaintiff, George Holland, brought this action on behalf of the decedent, Owen Holland, alleging exposure to asbestos from his work at Monsanto Chemical Plant from 1967–2004. From 1974-2002, the decedent worked with external components of pumps and valves manufactured by Goulds and Crane. He also would sweep packing from around the pumps and fibers from around the valves. Both Goulds and Crane moved for—and were denied—summary judgment. Defendant Fluor Daniel preformed construction and maintenance work at Monsanto from 1967-1998. Its motion for summary judgment …

Continue Reading

Federal Court of Appeals Remands Case for Determination of Colorable Federal Defenses Alleged by Shipyard

In this case, the plaintiffs’ decedent claimed exposure to asbestos containing thermal insulation while working at the Avondale Shipyard in Louisiana as laborer and painter from 1948-1996. The shipyard at issued worked on contracts for the federal government.

The defendants removed the case under federal officer removal and took the position that removal was proper since the government, through Navy inspectors, was involved in the building of the ships and had control of safety issues during construction. The plaintiffs, on the other hand, argued that …

Continue Reading

Even Applying Relaxed Product Identification Standards of New York Law, Plaintiff Fails to Establish Exposure to Five of Six Defendants Moving for Summary Judgment

The decedent, a lifetime electrician, passed away in 2014 of lung cancer. Prior to passing, he filed a lawsuit for asbestos exposure against numerous manufacturers.  Six defendants filed motions for summary judgment arguing lack of exposure — Rockwell Automation (Allen-Bradley); BW/IP International (Byron Jackson); Air & Liquid Systems (Buffalo); Gardner Denver; Schneider Electric (Square D); and Warren Pumps.  The court granted all motions, except that of Allen-Bradley.

The decedent claimed exposure to Warren pumps while serving as a civilian employee on board the U.S.S. Constellation.  …

Continue Reading

Summary Judgment Affirmed Where Plaintiff Failed to Produce Sufficient Evidence of Asbestos Exposure

In this case, the plaintiff Melvin Desin, an electrician, alleged that he was exposed to asbestos while working at various job sites in the 1960s and early 1970s, including on seven or eight occasions in the vicinity of painters employed by defendant Zelinsky, a painting contractor. At his deposition, the plaintiff testified that he worked in close proximity to the Zelinsky workers, who patched and sanded walls and joint compound in his presence. However, the plaintiff could not identify the brand name, manufacturer, or supplier …

Continue Reading

Summary Judgment Affirmed as Evidence of Asbestos Impurities in Auto Body Filler Only Equated to a Possibility of Asbestos Exposure

In this case, it was alleged that the plaintiff, John DePree, was exposed to asbestos from various products, including the use of Bondo auto body filler in the 1970s to repair dents in his cars.  BASF Catalysts, LLC moved for, and was granted, summary judgment based on its argument that the plaintiffs could not offer more than a mere possibility of exposure to asbestos from a BASF product since any asbestos in the Bondo talc was an impurity and not an intended ingredient. The plaintiffs …

Continue Reading

Plaintiffs’ Motion for Joint Trial Denied Since Individual Issues Between Plaintiffs Predominated Over Any Common Questions of Law and Fact

The plaintiffs, who had the same attorneys, commenced personal injuries actions in Nassau County Supreme Court, alleging personal injuries as a result of exposures to asbestos.  In support of the motion, it was noted that each plaintiff was still alive and suffering from lung cancer, were exposed to the same or similar materials during a similar time frame, that common defendants existed, and that the non-parties would overlap.  The defendants opposed on several grounds, including that the distinctions between the individual plaintiffs made joinder inappropriate …

Continue Reading