Real-Time Court Decisions and Other Developments in Asbestos Litigation.
Plaintiff Richard Delisle filed suit against multiple defendants alleging he developed mesothelioma as a result of exposure to sheet gaskets manufactured by Crane Co. and from the asbestos fibers from Micronite filters from smoking Kent cigarettes. The jury found both defendants’ products were a substantial contributing cause (SCC) of the development of Delisle’s mesothelioma. Both …
The plaintiff brought his action on behalf of his decedent’s estate alleging that Howard Frankenberger developed lung cancer as a result of his work around asbestos containing insulation on turbines at various powerhouses in Illinois and Indiana. The turbines were alleged to have been manufactured by Westinghouse. Howard Frankenberger worked as a pipefitter at State …
The plaintiff, Kelan Unterberg, brought this action against multiple defendants for his alleged development of mesothelioma. His complaint lodged three separate causes of action including negligence under the Jones Act, breach of warranty of sea worthiness and reasonable fitness under U.S. Maritime law, and remedy of maintenance and cure. All of the counts were related …
Plaintiff Marci Jones filed suit claiming that, during the course of her employment, she suffered personal injuries from being exposed to asbestos, mold and dead animals. The plaintiff was employed by Noble Finance, who rented a commercial building from defendants Andy and Nancy Anderson. The plaintiff’s suit against defendants includes claims for her personal injuries …
The plaintiff sued several defendants alleging that he developed lung cancer as a result of exposure to asbestos products of the defendants while he served as a boiler tender in the U.S. Navy from 1976-79. Defendants Atwood and Morill (Atwood) and Carrier Corp. moved for summary judgment. The court’s analysis started with the standard for summary …
The plaintiffs brought this action against several defendants for alleged exposure to asbestos and development of mesothelioma while working as a ship fitter at several shipyards from approximately 1964 until 2014. Defendants Cummins, CBS, and Foster Wheeler moved for summary judgment. Specifically, the plaintiff alleged that he rolled out amosite and cut it with an …
In this case, the plaintiff Gaspar Hernandez-Vega alleges that he developed mesothelioma as a result of his alleged exposure to asbestos-containing products while working as a pipefitter. At his deposition, Hernandez-Vega testified interchangeably to work with “Edward valves,” “Vogt valves,” and “Edward-Vogt valves” that exposed him to asbestos through his changing of the packing and …
On August 25, 2016, the California Supreme Court, without a written opinion, declined to hear a petition to review an appellate panel’s decision to overturn a trial court’s grant of summary judgment to Hennessy Industries Inc. In this case, the plaintiff claimed that the decedent, Frank Rondon, worked as a mechanic using defendant Hennessy’s (Ammco …
The plaintiffs sued multiple defendants including several “citizens” of California. Four days before trial defendant John Crane Inc. removed the case to federal court on diversity. The plaintiff then moved to remand. The court began its analysis by stating the legal standard for removal which permits removal when the federal court could have “exercised original …
The United States Magistrate Judge recommended disposition on five summary judgment motions filed by various defendants in this mesothelioma case wherein plaintiffs alleged asbestos exposure during plaintiff Mark Hillyer’s employment with the U.S. Navy from 1967-1997. The only product identification witness was plaintiff Mark Hillyer, who testified that he was exposed to asbestos through his …