SAN FRANCISCO — A man’s evidence in a take-home exposure case alleges possible exposure from asbestos-containing automobile parts but never crosses into the probable, a California appellate panel held Feb. 2 (Billy S. Johnson v. ArvinMeritor, et al., No. A131975, Calif. App., 1st Dist., 2017 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 762).
SEATTLE — An asbestos-insulation installer’s conduct and knowledge supports imposing a duty on it for take-home exposure of a woman who died on the eve of trial and a resulting $3.6 million verdict, a Washington appeals court on Jan. 23 (Estate of Barbara Brandes v. Brand Insulation Inc., No. 73748-1-I, Wash. App., Div. 1; 2017 Wash. App. LEXIS 111).
NEW YORK — A New York jury on Jan. 20 awarded $75 million to a husband and wife for mesothelioma he allegedly contracted as a result of asbestos exposure related to his love of cars and drag racing (Marlena F. Robaey and Edward Robaey v. Air & Liquid Systems Corp., et al., No. 190276/13, N.Y. Sup., New York Co.).
PHOENIX — The Arizona Supreme Court on Feb. 14 agreed to hear a woman’s case claiming that state law imposes liability for take-home asbestos exposures, according to the court’s docket (Mary Quiroz, et al. v. Alcoa Inc., et al., No. 16-0248, Ariz. Sup.).
NEW YORK — A plaintiff must agree to a reduced asbestos award of $7 million from $22 million and discontinue or drop his recklessness claim or face a new trial on those issues, a New York justice held Feb. 14 (Frank Gondar v. A.O. Smith Water Products Co., et al., No. 190079-2015, N.Y. Sup., New York Co.).
WILMINGTON, Del. — A judge properly granted five defendants summary judgment after finding insufficient evidence that either a father or husband worked in proximity to asbestos-containing products, the Delaware Supreme Court held Feb. 6 (In re Asbestos Litigation, Wayne Reed, et al. v. Asbestos Corporation Limited, et al., No. 387, 2016, Del. Sup.).
CHARLOTTE, N.C. — A North Carolina federal bankruptcy judge on Feb. 3 approved a settlement under which Chapter 11 debtor Garlock Sealing Technologies LLC and related companies will pay $20 million to Canada’s 10 provincial workers’ compensation boards to resolve the boards’ claims for payment on behalf of more than 1,300 Canadian workers suffering from asbestos diseases (In re: Garlock Sealing Technologies, LLC, et al., No. 10-31607, W.D. N.C. Bkcy.).
CHARLOTTE, N.C. — Asbestos personal injury claimants have until March 24 to file a claim in the new Chapter 11 case of Garlock Sealing Technologies LLC affiliate OldCo LLC, according to an order filed Feb. 3 in North Carolina federal bankruptcy court setting a bar date for certain asbestos claims (In re: OldCo, LLC, successor by merger to Coltec Industries Inc., No. 17-30140, W.D. N.C. Bkcy.).
COEUR D’ALENE, Idaho — The presence of genuine issues of material fact as to whether parties entered into a bankruptcy settlement with ASARCO LLC with the intention of barring the company from pursuing contribution claims under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act prevented a federal judge in Idaho on Feb. 16 from fully granting a motion for summary judgment filed by Union Pacific Railway (ASARCO, LLC v. Union Pacific Railway, et al., No. 12-cv-283, D. Idaho, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23199).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Congress’ latest measure aimed at requiring asbestos trusts to make claimant information public and provide the information to defendant companies in asbestos lawsuits was approved Feb. 15 by the House Judiciary Committee after being reintroduced by a Texas Republican a week earlier.
NEWARK, N.J. — A bankruptcy judge properly applied the law of indemnity and restitution to undisputed facts in rejecting the New York City Housing Authority’s (NYCHA) asbestos property damage claims against former Chapter 11 debtor G-I Holdings Inc., the company says in a Feb. 3 response brief in New Jersey federal court (New York City Housing Authority v. G-I Holdings Inc., No. 2:16-cv-7320, D. N.J.).
NEW ORLEANS — A Louisiana federal bankruptcy judge followed up his dismissal of the Chapter 11 case of Eagle Inc. with entry of an order Jan. 26 also dismissing the former debtor’s adversary action accusing four family members of fraudulently transferring Eagle’s noninsurance assets to companies the family created while knowing that Eagle faced liability for thousands of asbestos claims (In re: Eagle, Inc., No. 15-12437, [Eagle, Inc. v. Fred J. Schuber, III, et al., No. 2:16-ap-1040], E.D. La. Bkcy.).
CHARLOTTE, N.C. — A 70-year-old asbestosis sufferer will receive more than $200,000 from the Garlock Sealing Technologies LLC bankruptcy case to settle a Kentucky state court judgment entered against Garlock before it filed for bankruptcy, according to a stipulation and order filed Feb. 1 in North Carolina federal bankruptcy court (In re: Garlock Sealing Technologies, LLC, et al., No. 10-31607, W.D. N.C. Bkcy.).
CHARLOTTE, N.C. — A North Carolina federal bankruptcy judge on Feb. 3 added three asbestos claimants from the new Chapter 11 case of Garlock Sealing Technologies LLC affiliate OldCo LLC to the claimants committee in Garlock’s case after agreeing that the cases should be jointly administered (In re: Garlock Sealing Technologies, LLC, et al., No. 10-31607, In re: OldCo, LLC, successor by merger to Coltec Industries Inc., No. 17-30140, W.D. N.C. Bkcy.).
CHARLOTTE, N.C. — A North Carolina federal bankruptcy judge on Jan. 30 denied a request by five asbestos personal injury claimants to transfer the Chapter 11 case of former gypsum plaster and wallboard manufacturer Kaiser Gypsum Co. Inc. to another venue, finding that the filing meets U.S. Bankruptcy Code venue requirements and that transfer “would not be in the interests of justice or for the convenience of the parties” (In re Kaiser Gypsum Company, Inc., at al., No. 16-31602, W.D. N.C. Bkcy.).
PHILADELPHIA — A “free and clear” sale of assets in a bankruptcy court auction precludes holding the purchaser liable for pre-purchase take-home asbestos exposures, a Pennsylvania appeals court held Jan. 26 (Jacqueline S. Wagner and Thomas H. Wagner v. Standard Steel LLC, et al., No. 850 EDA 2016, Pa. Super.).
CLEVELAND — A Federal Employers’ Liability Act (FELA) settlement involving nonmalignant asbestos disease improperly attempted to extinguish future claims and does not bar a man’s lung cancer action, an Ohio appeals court held Dec. 22 (Richard C. Arpin v. Consolidated Rail Corp., et al., No. 104279, Ohio App., 8th Dist.; 2016 Ohio App. LEXIS 5168).
LOS ANGELES — A pipe manufacturer and its employees can properly be considered the ordinary consumers of asbestos fibers supplied for the use in the employer’s product, a California appeals court held Dec. 21 (David Baeza, et al. v. Special Electric Company Inc., No. B264220, Calif. App., 2nd Dist., Div. 4; 2016 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 9178).
NEW YORK — Experts in an asbestos case may make qualitative evaluations regarding exposure and need not precisely identify the quantity of exposure, a New York justice held in a Jan. 9 opinion denying defendants’ wide-ranging motion (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation, Geraldine Andrews, et al. v. A.O. Smith Water Products, et al., No. 190034/15, N.Y. Sup., New York Co.; 2017 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 12).
LOUISVILLE, Ky. — The state of Kentucky never clearly adopted the every-exposure asbestos causation theory, a divided Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel held Jan. 10 in affirming summary judgment for a joint compound maker (Carol Lee Stallings, et al. v. Georgia-Pacific Corp., et al., No. 15-6387, 6th Cir.).