Real-Time Court Decisions and Other Developments in Asbestos Litigation.
Superior Court of Delaware, New Castle In this asbestos action, plaintiff Shelley Droz alleged that decedent Eric Droz developed mesothelioma after being exposed to asbestos from using an AMMCO brake arcing machine and grinder. Defendant Hennessey moved for summary judgment, arguing that the plaintiff had not established that the decedent was exposed to asbestos from …
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi, Southern Division, June 9, 2021 The plaintiffs, William and Karla Dickens, allege that William Dickens developed mesothelioma due to his exposure to asbestos-containing products during automotive mechanical work. The plaintiffs sued multiple defendants, including Ford Motor Co. (Ford). Ford moved for summary judgment in two motions, …
Supreme Court of New York, New York County, May 19, 2021 Defendant The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company filed a motion for summary judgment pursuant to CPLR 3212 arguing that the only product manufactured by defendant which matches plaintiff Pietro Camiolo’s (the decedent) description of the alleged asbestos product he worked with, never contained asbestos, …
Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division, Second Department, May 26, 2021 The plaintiff, Victoria Pistone, and her husband, suing derivatively, brought this asbestos action against American Biltrite, Inc. and Mannington Mills, Inc., among other defendants. The defendants moved separately for summary judgment based on a lack of causation. Judge George R. Peck granted summary …
As previously reported by the Asbestos Case Tracker, Judge Manuel Mendez, former NYCAL coordinating judge, denied defendant Mario & DiBono Plastering Co., Inc.’s (M&D) motion for summary judgment. M&D appealed this decision. The Appellate Division noted that the court properly denied M&D’s smmary judgment motion since it failed to unequivocally establish that the materials it …
Supreme Court of New York, New York County, May 11, 2021 The plaintiff alleged that the decedent, Alvin Smith, was exposed to asbestos from skinning, stripping, and pulling asbestos-containing wire and cable manufactured by the defendant, Ericsson, Inc.’s predecessors, Anaconda Wire & Cable Company and Continental Wire & Cable Company, at various locations throughout his …
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, May 20, 2021 In this asbestos action, the plaintiffs allege that Mr. Toy (the decedent) worked with asbestos-containing steam traps and strainers manufactured by Armstrong from 1974 until 1980. Defendant Armstrong moved for summary judgment on the causation issue, and the plaintiffs opposed the motion. Of …
Supreme Court of New York, New York County, May 10, 2021 Before the court is defendant National Grid Generation LLC d/b/a National Grid’s motion for summary judgment, pursuant to CPLR 3212, for a finding in favor of National Grid on the grounds that there is no merit to the allegations in the plaintiff’s complaint against National …
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, May 13, 2021 In this asbestos action, the decedent alleged asbestos exposure from pumps manufactured by defendant Warren at Hunters Point Naval Shipyard from 1962 until 1973, as well as at the Treasure Island Naval Base from 1974 until 1980. Warren moved for summary judgment, arguing …
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, May 14, 2021 In this asbestos action, the plaintiff alleges that the decedent Richard Nybeck developed lung cancer following occupational exposure to asbestos. Pertinent to the motions for summary judgment, the decedent alleged that he worked with Allen-Bradley electrical motors and starters which were mounted to …