News & Analysis as of

Asbestos Litigation Mesothelioma

The King’s Time Is Up: Arizona Supreme Court Holds That the Statute of Repose Bars Untimely Claims by State Entities and Overrides...

by Pepper Hamilton LLP on

City of Phoenix v. Glenayre Elecs., Inc., 2017 Ariz. LEXIS 121 (Ariz. May 10, 2017) - Between 1960 and 2000, Carlos Tarazon (“Tarazon”) performed work installing and repairing water piping for various contractors and...more

Attempted End Run Around Wisconsin’s Exclusive Remedy of Worker’s Compensation Fails in Asbestos Litigation in the Seventh Circuit

by Ruder Ware on

Wisconsin’s exclusive remedy of worker’s compensation has long been a bulwark against civil suits brought by employees (subject to a few narrow exceptions not applicable here). This bulwark has survived a creative attack in...more

Court of Appeal upholds jury verdict in Petitpas et al. v. Ford Motor Company, et al

by Dentons on

In a unanimous 64 page decision, the Second District Court of Appeal, Division Four in Los Angeles affirmed the defense verdict in favor of Exxon Mobil Corporation and Ford Motor Company in a lawsuit brought by Marline and...more

Update on Bell Case Pending in Eastern District of Louisiana

by Miles & Stockbridge P.C. on

This post provides an update on the status of Bell v. Foster Wheeler Energy Corp., pending in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana following a previous blog post examining the court’s order...more

California Supreme Court Establishes Duty in Take-Home Asbestos Exposure Cases

by Perkins Coie on

On December 1, 2016, the Supreme Court of California held that the duty of employers and premises owners to exercise ordinary care in their use of asbestos in their businesses includes a duty to take reasonable care to...more

Florida Appellate Court Reverses Verdict Against Valve Manufacturer in Asbestos Case - Decision: Trial Court Abused Discretion in...

by Holland & Knight LLP on

Manufacturers of products that contained chrysotile asbestos won a major victory in Crane Co. v. DeLisle on Sept. 14, 2016, when Florida's Fourth District Court of Appeal (Fourth DCA) reversed a verdict entered against a...more

"Take-Home" Asbestos Case Decision Could have Ripple Effect

by Polsinelli on

Companies facing "take-home" asbestos or other toxic tort exposure claims in Arizona, or in other jurisdictions applying Arizona law, now have a new case to cite in dispositive motions. With the Sept. 20 Arizona Court of...more

Arizona Court of Appeals Deals Fatal Blow to "Take-Home" Asbestos Exposure Lawsuits

In a recent published opinion, the Arizona Court of Appeals held that an employer does not owe a duty of care to the child of an employee who contracts mesothelioma from asbestos brought home on the employee’s work clothes,...more

Sophisticated User Defense Does Not Extend to Salesman

by Low, Ball & Lynch on

Richard Moran III v. Foster Wheeler Energy Corporation - Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District (April 13, 2016) - In 2008, the California Supreme Court unanimously held that the “sophisticated user” defense...more

California Court Of Appeal Bends Over Backwards To Uphold Substantial Punitive Award In Asbestos Case

The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment requires procedural fairness in state trials, but that principle seems absent from a recent California Court of Appeal decision upholding a judgment against Kaiser Gypsum...more

Illinois Law Blocks Decades Old Asbestos Suits

by Howard Ankin on

According to the Mesothelioma Cancer Alliance, virtually every individual on the earth has been exposed to asbestos during some point in their lives, and Illinois residents are not excluded. With such a broad range of...more

Plaintiff’s Mere Presence in Area Where Asbestos is Present Insufficient to Establish Bystander Exposure

In Schiffer v. CBS Corporation (filed 9/9/15; modified 9/30/15), the California Court of Appeal, First Appellate District, affirmed summary judgment in favor of the defendant asbestos insulation manufacturer finding...more

Coverage Options for Employee Asbestos Claims

by K&L Gates LLP on

Over the past year, courts in Illinois and Pennsylvania have dramatically altered the ability of an employee to bring claims against past and present employers for asbestos-related injuries. Traditionally, employees were...more

Take-Home Exposure Claims Under Review by California's High Court

by Polsinelli on

On August 20, 2014, the California Supreme Court granted petitions for review in two published decisions that reached different conclusions on whether a defendant owed a duty for take-home exposures. Both matters (Haver v....more

Texas Supreme Court Enforces Medical Criteria for Claims Involving Asbestos and Declares the Application of Chapter 90...

by Wilson Elser on

In a 5–4 opinion issued in Union Carbide Corporation v. Daisy E. Synatzske et al. No. 12-0617 (Tex. July 3, 2014), the Texas Supreme Court held that Chapter 90 of the Texas Civil Practices and Remedies Code as applied to the...more

Texas Supreme Court Holds That Requirement to Provide Evidence of Approximate Dose Applies to Mesothelioma Cases as Well as...

by Wilson Elser on

On July 12, 2014, in Bostic v. Georgia Pacific Corp., No. 10-0775, a six-justice majority of the Texas Supreme Court issued a major decision on causation in asbestos cases. The Court held that the requirement to provide...more

Asbestos MDL Court Concludes Punitive Damages for Unseaworthiness Allowed for Seaman But Not for a Seaman’s Personal...

In a consolidated asbestos products liability multidistrict litigation (MDL), the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania held in In re Asbestos Products Liability Litigation (No. VI), MDL 875, that...more

New Jersey’s Appellate Division Finds Manufacturer Has a Duty to Warn of Asbestos Risk in Foreseeable Replacement Component Parts

by Wilson Elser on

On April 23, 2014, New Jersey’s Appellate Division held that a pump manufacturer had a duty to warn that replacement component parts contained asbestos. In two consolidated cases, the trial court granted summary judgment...more

Asbestos Alert: Paulus v Crane Co.

by Low, Ball & Lynch on

Second District Court of Appeal, Division Three, Action # B246505 (Filed Feb. 21, 2014, modified Mar. 24, 2014) 2014 WL 1157284 ____Cal.App.4th____ - Sufficiency of Expert Testimony to Prove Causation; Bankruptcy Trust...more

Pennsylvania Supreme Court Rules on Workers’ Compensation Act Case

by Morgan Lewis on

Court finds in Tooey that Pennsylvania Workers’ Compensation Act does not bar latent occupational disease lawsuits against employers. On November 22, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in Tooey et al. v. AK Steel Corp. et...more

"Every Asbestos Exposure Counts" - Maryland Affirms Theory

by Polsinelli on

Maryland's highest appellate court ruled last week that a plaintiff's expert in an asbestos injury lawsuit could testify that every single exposure to asbestos substantially contributes to the development of mesothelioma,...more

21 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 1
Cybersecurity

"My best business intelligence,
in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.