Real-Time Court Decisions and Other Developments in Asbestos Litigation.
In this federal court case, the court’s jurisdiction was based solely on the plaintiff’s assertion of maritime jurisdiction as set forth in in his fourth amended complaint. The plaintiff brought claims against 54 defendants that manufactured asbestos-containing products that the decedent, Christopher Curtis, was allegedly exposed to in three different situations: From 1955-58 while he …
In 2000, the plaintiff brought claims for non-malignant asbestos-related diseases, including ship owners represented by Thompson Hine LLP. In 2004, the plaintiff filed for bankruptcy, without listing his asbestos claims as assets. Three months later the bankruptcy case was closed. In 2007, the plaintiff brought claims for a malignant asbestos-related disease; in 2011 the MDL …
In this case, the plaintiff, Mark Denison, claimed exposure to asbestos from numerous products while working at his father’s hardware store from 1964-65 to 1969, Dunkirk Radiator from 1972 to 1987, and from his own automotive repair business from 1980 to the early 1990s. Defendants Bird, Inc., Euclid-Hitachi Heavy Equipment, Inc., F.E. Myers, Oshkosh Corporation, …
The district court reviewed the report and recommendations of the U.S. Magistrate Judge, which recommended granting and denying summary judgment to various defendants. The court applied maritime law in granting summary judgment to Electrolux, ABB, Velan Valve, GE, CBS, Foster Wheeler, and Owens-Illinois, and denying summary judgment to Buffalo, Ingersoll-Rand (denied in part), Aurora, IMO, …
In this federal court case, the plaintiff alleged he was exposed to asbestos in various products through the course of his employment in the 1960s and 1970s. He specifically alleged asbestos exposure from working with gaskets manufactured by Excelsior Packing & Gasket Company and Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company while serving in the Navy from …
In a follow-up to cases previously reported on in ACT, the plaintiffs in this case, Administrators of the Estate of Bjorn Dahl, alleged that the decedent, Mr. Dahl, was exposed to asbestos while working aboard various ships. The plaintiffs assert that the decedent developed two asbestos-related illnesses, a non-malignancy injury dating back to 1995 and a malignancy …
In this federal court case, it is alleged that the decedent, Thomas Dandridge, was exposed to asbestos while working as a pipefitter and coppersmith at the Charleston Naval Shipyard from 1965 to 1976. It was claimed that the decedent was exposed to asbestos from a variety of products, including flange gaskets used to link Crane …
In a follow-up to six cases previously reported on in ACT, two more cases were decided in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. Both cases had started in the Northern District of Ohio, and were transferred to the MDL 875 in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. In both cases, the …
In Holzworth v. Alfa Laval, et al. 12-CV-06088 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 21, 2016), Southern District of New York Judge John Keenan granted defendant Ingersoll-Rand’s summary judgment motion arising out of the plaintiff’s alleged exposure to asbestos aboard the U.S.S. Sheldrake. The plaintiff’s decedent had testified that he was exposed to pumps aboard the ship as a …
The plaintiff contracted mesothelioma and sued various defendants for asbestos exposure allegedly sustained as a child. Kuettel performed industrial and commercial insulation contracting work; the plaintiff’s father worked for Kuettel from 1961-65 and again from 1974-79. Kuettel moved for summary judgment, arguing it had no duty to warn the plaintiff because there was no special …