Mealey's Asbestos

  • February 25, 2021

    United States Won’t Intervene In Libby, Mont., Asbestos False Claims Screening Suit

    MISSOULA, Mont. — The United States on Feb. 18 declined to intervene in a False Claims Act lawsuit in which a railroad alleges that a Libby, Mont., screening company crafted an asbestos-related disease only it can diagnose to certify thousands of patients as eligible for a special Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) Medicare program, all while lacking the expertise or tools required to render such a diagnosis.

  • February 25, 2021

    Louisiana Court Finds Asbestos Case Abandoned Except Where Answers Were Filed

    BATON ROUGE, La. — Years of stagnation warrant finding that a plaintiff abandoned his asbestos case against one defendant, but answers filed by three other defendants evidence a waiver of any such claims, a Louisiana appeals court said Feb. 22 in partially affirming dismissal of the suit.

  • February 24, 2021

    California Plaintiffs Appeal Asbestos-Talc Consumer Action Dismissal

    SACRAMENTO, Calif. — Class action plaintiffs on Feb. 19 appealed dismissal of their California unfair competition law (UCL) and other consumer action claims in which they allege that Johnson & Johnson and a second talc company portrayed consumer talcum powder products as safe despite knowing as early as the 1970s that the products contained asbestos.

  • February 24, 2021

    In SEC Filing, J&J Says It Spent $3.9B In 2020 On Talc-Related Litigation

    NEW BRUNSWICK, N.J. — Johnson & Johnson’s talc-related reserves and settlements were the largest driver of the company’s health care segment’s litigation expenses, which rose to $3.9 billion in 2020 compared to $400 million in 2019, the company announced in a Feb. 22 Securities and Exchange Commission filing.

  • February 23, 2021

    Judge: Bad Faith Delay, Lack Of Evidence Support Improper Joinder Finding

    NEW ORLEANS — A man acted in bad faith by providing a defendant with untimely notification of a settlement, and with discovery nearly complete, he likely cannot muster facts in a case against the last remaining nondiverse defendant, a federal judge said Feb. 4 in finding a defendant improperly joined and denying remand of an asbestos case.

  • February 23, 2021

    Plaintiff/Defense Experts Testifying Since Jan. 1, 2002

    The following is a listing of plaintiff and defense experts who testified in trials covered by Mealey's Litigation Report: Asbestos since Jan. 1, 2002.

  • February 23, 2021

    9th Circuit Affirms Post-Sale Duty, Take-Home Asbestos Rulings

    SEATTLE — A couple failed to show the presence of asbestos at a railyard, let alone exposure at levels sufficient to cause mesothelioma, and even if two other defendants had a duty to issue post-sale warnings, there is nothing in the record suggesting that any type of warning could have prevented the exposure, the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals said Feb. 22 in affirming summary judgment for three companies.

  • February 23, 2021

    Widow Says Evidence, Expert Create Triable Issue On Exposure, Causation

    SEATTLE — Evidence clearly established that miles of asbestos-containing insulation remained in a facility in 1984, and expert testimony cemented that work with it was sufficient to cause a man’s fatal mesothelioma, a widow told a Washington appeals court Jan. 15 in asking the court to reinstate her suit.

  • February 23, 2021

    Asbestos Evidence Falls Short Of Exposure Under Lohrmann, Federal Judge Says

    GREENSBORO, N.C. — North Carolina mesothelioma cases are not subject to a reduced causation standard, and plaintiffs in an asbestos action at best show that a man worked at a facility where various defendants’ products were present, but fail to allege proximity or frequent exposure, a federal judge in North Carolina said in granting three defendants summary judgment Feb. 16.

  • February 23, 2021

    Couple Says Court Improperly Excluded Third-Party Talc Testing

    SAN FRANCISCO — A trial court acknowledged that a plaintiff expert could rely on third-party testing of talc for the presence of asbestos, but it then “inexplicably” excluded that testimony as case-specific, a “hard to decipher” ruling that threatens a large swath of expert testimony, a couple tells a California appeals court in a Feb. 1 brief.

  • February 23, 2021

    Amicus Says California Judges Can Rely On Other Verdicts For Excessiveness Analysis

    LOS ANGELES — A trial judge improperly concluded that he could not consider other verdicts when asked to determine the excessiveness of holding a company 60 percent liable for $25 million in asbestos damages, an amicus curiae tells a California appeals court in a Jan. 4 brief.

  • February 22, 2021

    Oil Company: Asbestos Settlement Offer Valid; Costs Properly Awarded

    LOS ANGELES — A widow knew that she would lose on summary judgment but still declined an offer to settle her asbestos case, and her interpretation of how that process should now play out would undercut the entire rationale to California’s settlement procedure, an oil company tells a California appeals court in a Jan. 21 brief.

  • February 18, 2021

    Gasket Maker: Late Answer An ‘Honest Mistake,’ Default Should Be Removed

    WOBURN, Mass. — An administrative oversight resulted in a missed deadline, and the court should remove entry of default judgment against an asbestos-gasket defendant because there is no evidence of willfulness or gross neglect and to give the parties a chance to present the merits of the case, a company told a Massachusetts judge on Feb. 11.

  • February 18, 2021

    Woman: Court Properly Concluded Frye Doesn’t Warrant Genetic Test

    CHICAGO — An asbestos defendant misframes a Frye v. United States ruling in a way that if adopted would permit its expert to perform genetic testing for any reason regardless of scientific support, a woman suffering from mesothelioma in Illinois told a state court judge on Feb. 16 in opposing reconsideration of the ruling.

  • February 17, 2021

    Bare Metal, Military Contractor Defenses Fail In California Asbestos Case

    SACRAMENTO, Calif. — Two defendants have not shown they cannot be liable for asbestos exposures, that they are entitled to the military contractor defense, that the sophisticated user doctrine applies or that the bare metal defense shields them from liability, a federal judge in California said Feb. 11 in denying them summary judgment.

  • February 17, 2021

    Judge: 2 Dozen Alleged Asbestos Exposures Fail Mississippi Causation Standard

    WOBURN, Mass. — Alleged exposures to asbestos on 25 occasions as a mechanic and isolated instances thereafter fall short of satisfying causation under Mississippi law, a federal judge in the state said Feb. 11 in granting summary judgment to a defendant on what he termed a “close question.”

  • February 16, 2021

    Magistrate Judge Rejects Challenge To Pennsylvania Consent-By-Registration Law

    PITTSBURGH — The majority of courts to have considered Pennsylvania’s consent-by-registration statute found it constitutional, and while it predates recent U.S. Supreme Court precedent on jurisdiction, it remains good law and contains no temporal limitation in this instance, a federal magistrate judge in Pennsylvania said Feb. 11 in recommending that the court deny two motions to dismiss filed in an asbestos case.

  • February 16, 2021

    Affiliate Cyprus Mines Joins Imerys Talc In Filing Asbestos Bankruptcy

    WILMINGTON, Del. — An affiliate talc mining company of Chapter 11 debtor Imerys Talc America Inc. filed its own bankruptcy petition Feb. 11 in Delaware federal bankruptcy court seeking to resolve all asbestos personal injury claims as part of a global settlement proposed in Imerys’ case.

  • February 11, 2021

    Magistrate Judge Says Evidence Doesn’t Support Bomber Asbestos Case

    WILMINGTON, Del. — While a man identified stamping on the clamps he used on military B-58 bombers, plaintiffs never link that testimony to asbestos exposure, a federal magistrate judge in Delaware said Feb. 8 in recommending that summary judgment be granted.

  • February 11, 2021

    Panel:  Expert’s Opinion Valid In Chemical Exposure Case; Dismissal Upheld

    LOS ANGELES — A California appellate panel on Jan. 29 issued an unpublished decision in which it affirmed summary judgment dismissal of a cancer victim’s chemical exposure case on grounds that the defendant’s medical expert’s opinion was properly admitted and the plaintiff failed to show that his injury was caused by exposure to numerous toxins during his employment with a railroad company.