NEW JERSEY — Today, a central New Jersey jury determined that Johnson & Johnson (J&J) was not liable for the mesothelioma of the plaintiff Rosalind Henry, who alleged that she developed the disease in part from use of J&J’s baby powder. In closing arguments, counsel for J&J told jurors that Ms. Henry had told her doctors that she was exposed to asbestos while working for a company that serviced Naval vessels, and that Ms. Henry only used J&J’s talc product for a small number of …
Continue ReadingLATEST INSIGHTS
Lack of Personal Jurisdiction Leads to Dismissal for Industrial Supply Defendant
NEW YORK — The plaintiff filed suit in New York against Grainger Inc. (Grainger) alleging her decedent, Myron Miller, passed from mesothelioma as a result of exposure to asbestos for which Grainger was liable. Specifically, Mr. Miller was alleged to have been exposed to packing and gaskets while refurbishing and selling used equipment he bought from liquidation sales from 1980-1987. Mr. Miller resided in Georgia from 1973 but would travel to New York later to purchase used parts. Grainger, an Illinois corporation, moved to dismiss …
Continue ReadingBusiness Registration in Pennsylvania Confers General Personal Jurisdiction Over Talc Supplier
PENNSYLVANIA The plaintiff Ellen Kleiner filed suit in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas, alleging that she developed ovarian cancer through her use of Johnson & Johnson’s baby powder and Shower to Shower products. She named Johnson & Johnson and the talc supplier, Imerys Talc America, among other defendants. The case was originally removed based upon the fraudulent joinder of a non-diverse party, but the Eastern District of Pennsylvania remanded the case in October 2017. Imerys then filed preliminary objections to the complaint, arguing that …
Continue ReadingU.S. Supreme Court Set to Hear Bare Metal Defense Argument
PENNSYLVANIA — On October 10, 2018, the United States Supreme Court will hear argument in Air and Liquid Systems Corp. v. DeVries, a case involving the bare metal defense under maritime law. The case was originally filed in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas in December 2012. It was then removed to the Eastern District of Pennsylvania based upon the federal officer removal statute, due to the decedent’s work on Navy ships. Several defendants’ motions for summary judgment were granted on plaintiff’s negligence claims, based …
Continue ReadingChanel Obtains Defense Verdict from Oregon Jury in Living Mesothelioma Claim
OREGON — An Oregon jury delivered a defense verdict for defendant Chanel on September 17, 2018 after a four-week trial in a living pleural mesothelioma claim. Chanel asserted an spontaneous etiology defense and the jury unanimously found that (i) Chanel was not negligent and (ii) was no defect in the Chanel cosmetic talc product allegedly used by plaintiff in this case.…
Continue ReadingGeneral Denial Insufficient Objection to Personal Jurisdiction in NYCAL
NEW YORK — Wayne Gibson alleged that he developed mesothelioma in part from occasional work assisting mechanics with brakes, clutches and gaskets on Mack and Kenworth trucks while working as a driver for a Virginia based trucking company. With the exception of a six month stint in the Navy, Gibson never lived in the state of New York, nor was he exposed to asbestos in New York. The defendant Mack Truck, Inc., a Pennsylvania corporation with its principal place of business in North Carolina filed …
Continue ReadingDefendant Survives Dismissal of its Claims for Contribution and Indemnification
VIRGIN ISLANDS — Litwin Corporation (Litwin) filed suit against General Engineering Corporation (GEC) seeking contribution and indemnification related to over a hundred asbestos suits filed against Litwin in the United States Virgin Islands. Prior to suit, Litwin settled with the claimants. Litwin then sought contribution and indemnification to mitigate its settlement costs. GEC moved to dismiss the complaint and Litwin responded in opposition.
The case was reassigned because of its similarity with the claims pending with a case known as In re : Kelvin Manboth …
Continue ReadingLack of Exposure Evidence Leads to Grant of Summary Judgment for Railroad Defendant
IDAHO — The plaintiffs filed suit against Union Pacific Railroad (Union Pacific) alleging that Rollie Stephens had brought asbestos home on his work clothes which caused his son, William, to develop mesothelioma. Specifically, the plaintiffs argued that Rollie Stephens was exposed to asbestos from his work at the Weiser roundhouse working on steam locomotives that contained insulation. Union Pacific moved for judgment as a matter of law. The plaintiff moved for summary judgment as to affirmative defenses.
The court began its analysis with the standard …
Continue ReadingPlaintiff’s Request for Reconsideration of Granting of Summary Judgment Denied in Railroad Take-Home Exposure Case
WASHINGTON — In an update to a case previously reported by Asbestos Case Tracker, The plaintiff’s Motion for Reconsideration of the Court’s Order granting summary judgment for Union Pacific Railroad has been denied.
By way of background, the plaintiffs alleged that Mr. Jack was secondarily exposed to asbestos from the work clothes of his father who worked at Union Pacific Railroad. The plaintiffs argued that the court failed to properly review 1) information provided by the plaintiffs’ expert Dr. Barry Castleman; and 2) the court …
Continue ReadingNew York’s Highest Court Set to Hear First Asbestos Causation Challenge
NEW YORK — The New York Court of Appeals has set oral argument for October 16th, 2018 in Matter of NYC Asbestos Litig. (Juni v A.O. Smith). Since 2006, the Court of Appeals has weighed in three times[i] on the applicable causation standards in toxic tort cases, but Juni is the first asbestos related appeal to reach the high court. In this article, we provide a primer on the case and share a few thoughts about what to look for when …
Continue Reading