Real-Time Court Decisions and Other Developments in Asbestos Litigation.
WASHINGTON — The United States District Court, Western District of Washington addressed several expert challenges including the motion of the defendant Ford (Ford) to exclude Dr. Charles Cushing’s statements regarding the plaintiffs’ likely exposure to asbestos during automotive work. For a brief case background, this case centers around allegations that decedent developed mesothelioma, and ultimately …
DELAWARE — The United States District Court issued a Show Cause Order requiring the parties to show why this matter should not be transferred to the District of Delaware. The plaintiff opposed the transfer arguing that two of the defendants also known as “John Doe” defendants may not be subject to personal jurisdiction in Delaware. The …
FLORIDA — The plaintiff alleged he was exposed to products manufactured by the defendant or its predecessor from 1975-1977 in Florida. The defendant submitted an affidavit confirming it had no contacts in Florida before 1994. However, its predecessor ran an operations plant in Florida in the early 1980’s, after the alleged exposure. The plaintiff put forth no …
DELAWARE — The plaintiff moved for leave to submit a supplemental expert report after a change in substantive Ohio law. The court had previously granted summary judgment in favor of four defendants. Specifically, the defendants argued that summary judgment was proper based on the Ohio Supreme Court’s recent decision in Schwartz which found theories advanced on …
CALIFORNIA — on August 8, 2018, an Alameda County jury issued a defense verdict for Hennessey Industries, Inc. (AMMCO) in the plaintiff Donald Knutson’s mesothelioma case, which included allegations of exposures to asbestos from time in the United States Navy and from time working with various friction products. While the jury found that Plaintiff’s mesothelioma …
CALIFORNIA — In 2016, a Los Angeles jury ruled in favor of defendant Colgate-Palmolive Company (Colgate), and against Plaintiff Elizabeth Alfaro, who alleged that her mesothelioma was caused by exposure to asbestos from talcum powder products. The jury returned a verdict in favor of Colgate on the exposure claims; this verdict was affirmed on appeal. …
WISCONSIN — The plaintiff Thomas Mohn alleged that he developed lung cancer from exposure to asbestos while working with insulated turbine blankets supplied by defendant Sprinkmann during the construction of the Genoa power plant in the 1960s. Sprinkman filed a motion for summary judgment on statue of repose grounds, which the trial court granted. The …
On July 31, 2018, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court granted William Roverano’s petition for allowance of appeal from the Superior Court’s December 2017 ruling that the Pennsylvania Fair Share Act applied to asbestos strict liability claims. Specifically, the court accepted review of two issues: 1) Whether, under this issue of first impression, the Superior Court misinterpreted …
NEW YORK — The plaintiff’s Decedent Joseph Tolan allegedly worked with asbestos-containing gaskets, including sheet gaskets, manufactured by Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company (Goodyear) starting in 1977 at the United States Army’s Seneca, NY Depot. Goodyear filed a motion for summary judgment, stating that it ceased making asbestos-containing gaskets in 1969. Goodyear further argued that …
NEW JERSEY — The plaintiff, Arthur Whelan, worked as a plumber and auto mechanic and later developed mesothelioma. He filed suit against numerous manufacturers of boilers, valves, steam traps and brake drums. While the plaintiff did install original products, the bulk of his testimony concerned replacement components used with the products. Many defendants filed motions …