Mealey's Asbestos
-
February 07, 2024
Colgate, Asbestos-Talc Plaintiff Face Off About Genetics, Expert Testimony
OAKLAND, Calif. — After a plaintiff moved to exclude argument about why she didn’t undergo genetic testing and what her genetics might mean for her mesothelioma, an asbestos-talc defendant filed its own motion seeking to exclude what it termed unreliable non-witness expert testimony that it says the plaintiff hopes to introduce into the case through the “backdoor.”
-
February 07, 2024
5th Circuit Grants Summary Reversal Of Longshore Asbestos Case
NEW ORLEANS — The Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals granted a joint motion for summary reversal in a Longshore Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act (LHWCA) preemption “twilight zone” asbestos case.
-
February 05, 2024
Missouri Supreme Court Won’t Review Workers’ Comp Asbestos Ruling
KANSAS CITY, Mo. — The Missouri Supreme Court denied review of an asbestos case against an employer, leaving stand a lower court ruling that revived the case after the court concluded that an insurance broker lacked the knowledge to testify about whether the employer secured workers’ compensation coverage for mesothelioma and that there was insufficient evidence that a policy was in effect at the appropriate time.
-
February 05, 2024
Rail Company Defends Need For Testimony Of Former Libby, Mont., Clinic Director
GREAT FALLS, Mont. — A railway tells a federal judge in Montana in opposition to a motion to quash the railway’s subpoena that trial preservation testimony is the best way to secure potentially admissible evidence from an asbestos clinic’s former medical director and that his status as a former employee doesn’t matter since he can testify about how a clinic patient described her exposures to asbestos.
-
February 02, 2024
1st Circuit Agrees To Decide, Expedites Widow’s Asbestos Damages Case
BOSTON — The First Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals denied a motion to dismiss an appeal over the types of damages available in an asbestos maritime case and, in addressing a motion to expedite, gave the appellee 30 days to file a response to a widow’s pre-filed opening brief.
-
February 01, 2024
W.R. Grace Insurer, Former Employees Resolve Dispute Over Asbestos Payments
GREAT FALLS, Mont. — A W.R. Grace & Co. insurer and former workers resolved two cases accusing the insurer of profiting from the “float” created when it delays asbestos-related payments for which it was liable.
-
February 01, 2024
Paint Manufacturer Halts Operations, Citing Years Of Asbestos Litigation
IRVING, Texas — A paint manufacturing company closed its 157 retail stores, furloughed all 700 employees and announced that it is ceasing operations, due in part to its historical litigation for thousands of asbestos personal injury claims.
-
February 01, 2024
J&J Entities Want ‘Unhelpful’ Asbestos-Talc Complaint Allegations Stricken
SEATTLE — A Washington state complaint running nearly 100 pages is “replete with unnecessary and inappropriate accusations” immaterial to the asbestos-talc claims at issue in the action and prevents an accurate and fair response, two Johnson & Johnson entities argue in a motion seeking to strike the complaint in part.
-
January 31, 2024
Service Is Key Issue In Suit Against Reinsurer For Settlement Reimbursement
OMAHA, Neb. — Whether a Brazil-based reinsurer was properly served has become a key issue in a suit seeking reimbursement for a settlement reached with Montana regarding alleged asbestos exposure, with an insurer telling the Nebraska federal court in a reply brief that precedent supports its bid for default judgment.
-
January 31, 2024
Sanctions Sought In Asbestos Appeal Over Sanctions In Referral Case
RICHMOND, Va. — An appeal before the Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals over the appropriateness of sanctions in a case involving asbestos bankruptcy trust referral fees spawned its own briefing on sanctions, with the appellee calling the appeal frivolous and the appellant saying meritorious issues of first impression exist over whether a federal judge can sanction a party for conduct in a state court.
-
January 31, 2024
California Judge Denies Genetic Testing Motion With Trial Approaching
LOS ANGELES — A defendant seeking a medical examination and genetic testing from a plaintiff suffering from mesothelioma does not explain how such testing can be performed or how expert reports can be produced in the short period remaining prior to trial, a California judge said in denying the defendant’s motion among other rulings.
-
January 31, 2024
Judge: Offer Of Samples For Testing Largely Moots Protective Order Motion
SEATTLE — Plaintiffs’ ongoing offer to produce talc samples tested by asbestos expert William Longo moots the need for a protective order unless additional samples are found, a judge in Washington state said in denying a motion for protective order and spoliation finding in part.
-
January 31, 2024
Talc Packaging Company Wants 2nd Look At Jurisdiction Ruling
SEATTLE — Simply packaging talc in Missouri for a third party does not provide jurisdiction in Washington courts, an asbestos-talc defendant seeking reconsideration and appeal of a ruling denying its motion to dismiss argues. But in opposition, the plaintiffs say the contracts clearly indicate that the products would be distributed nationwide and the fact that the defendant didn’t own the trademark doesn’t preclude liability.
-
January 30, 2024
CARD Doctor Says Asbestos Subpoena Likely Seeks ‘Highly Improper’ Testimony
GREAT FALLS, Mont. — The former medical director of a Libby, Mont., clinic told a federal judge in a motion to quash a subpoena that because he never saw a woman when she went to the clinic and her diagnosis at the time differs from the mesothelioma from which she now suffers, any testimony he could offer at trial would be duplicative of evidence a railway already has.
-
January 26, 2024
Automaker Can’t Escape Possible Liability, Must Face Asbestos Suit, N.Y. Court Says
NEW YORK — A trial court judge properly denied an automaker summary judgment after it spent years litigating the case, only to later argue that it wasn’t the proper party, failed to respond to interrogatories and couldn’t eliminate the possibility that it was the liable party, a New York appellate court said Jan. 25.
-
January 23, 2024
Dismissal Stipulated In Asbestos Coverage Dispute Involving Guaranty Association
COLUMBIA, S.C. — Remaining defendant insurers stipulated to dismissal in a South Carolina federal court of cross-claims by or against two defendant insurers that were previously dismissed from a receiver’s asbestos coverage suit against insurers and the South Carolina Property and Casualty Insurance Guaranty Association.
-
January 23, 2024
Imputing Contacts, Judge Finds Personal Jurisdiction In Reinsurance Row
OMAHA, Neb. — Imputation is appropriate at this stage and, therefore, so is personal jurisdiction over a defendant that describes itself as “an events and hospitality company,” a Nebraska federal judge said in a Jan. 22 ruling denying dismissal of a suit involving a reinsurance contract and a settlement with Montana regarding alleged asbestos exposures.
-
January 23, 2024
Magistrate Judge Won’t Sanction Talc Defendant Over ‘Litigation Tactics’
NEW YORK — A dispute over an asbestos-talc defendant’s attempts to discover the identities of individuals in expert Jacqueline Moline’s study comes down to disagreement about litigation tactics and does not rise to the level required for sanctions, a magistrate judge in New York said Jan. 22 in denying a motion.
-
January 23, 2024
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.
-
January 22, 2024
Florida Appeals Court Leaves Asbestos Product ID Ruling Undisturbed
TALLAHASSEE, Fla. — A Florida appellate court denied an asbestos friction product defendant’s motion for rehearing and certification of a conflict, with one of the judges saying in a concurrence that the criminal rule on which the appellee relied had been rejected and was not applicable to an opinion on the standard for product identification.
-
January 18, 2024
Man Says Asbestos-Talc Case Doesn’t Require Inquiry Into His Company
BRIDGEPORT, Conn. — No grounds exist for subpoenaing a man’s business records in a case alleging exposure to asbestos in talc where there is no allegation or evidence of workplace exposures and where other courts previously rejected a similar request by another defendant, the man tells a Connecticut judge in a reply seeking a protective order and quashing of the subpoena.
-
January 18, 2024
Montana Asbestos Plaintiffs: Railroad’s Late Subpoena Of CARD Doctor Is Personal
GREAT FALLS, Mont. — Post-discovery attempts at deposing the retired medical director of a facility where a plaintiff last sought care five years ago and which has no connection to current mesothelioma diagnoses or treatments appear to be personal rather than legitimate efforts at producing evidence, two plaintiffs tell a federal judge in Montana in a Jan. 17 motion to quash a railroad’s subpoena.
-
January 18, 2024
Oven Company Appeals Rulings On Asbestos Experts, Summary Judgment
NEW YORK — A pizza oven asbestos defendant filed a pair of notices on Jan. 17 appealing a New York justice’s rulings allowing three causation experts’ testimony and denying the company summary judgment, according to the court’s docket.
-
January 18, 2024
Justice: Jurisdiction Lacking Over Holding Company In New York Asbestos-Talc Case
NEW YORK — A holding company with its place of business outside the state does not belong in a New York state asbestos case, and contracts and meeting notes without reference to the company do not establish the need for jurisdictional discovery, a New York justice said in granting a motion to dismiss.
-
January 18, 2024
Asbestos Plaintiffs May Pierce Corporate Veil Of Dravo Entities, Court Says
HARRISBURG, Pa. — Because questions remain about the propriety of a merger-dissolution process and whether the two resulting companies operated as a single entity, state court asbestos plaintiffs may pierce a company’s corporate veil, a Pennsylvania Superior Court panel said in reversing summary judgment for the defendant.