Asbestos

News & Analysis as of

Does asbestosis qualify under the Illinois Workers’ Occupational Diseases Act?

Asbestosis is covered under the Illinois Workers’ Compensation and Occupational Diseases Act. In other words, Illinois workers who develop this condition as a consequence of employment are entitled to benefits under state...more

Employers’ Asbestos Liabilities Do Not Extend to Workers’ Spouses

Two federal judges recently dismissed the claims of the spouses of workers who purportedly carried asbestos fibers home from their workplaces. In July 2014, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma...more

Washington Supreme Court Ratifies Employer Immunity for Asbestos Exposure

The Washington Supreme Court recently affirmed summary judgment in favor of an employer defending an asbestos lawsuit brought by a former employee. In Walston v. Boeing Co., No. 88511-7 (September 18, 2014), the Supreme...more

Policy Observer - September 2014

All Sums or Pro Rata: Did You Get the Coverage You Bought? In recent decades, liabilities stemming from long-term bodily injury or property damage—as from exposure to asbestos or contamination of the environment—have...more

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

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

Pennsylvania Does Not Recognize Duty to Warn an Employee’s Spouse

District court predicts that Pennsylvania will not recognize a duty to protect or warn the spouse of an employee in “take home” or “household” asbestos exposure cases. On August 26, Judge Eduardo C. Robreno of the U.S....more

Injured Sailors May Seek Punitive Damages in the Asbestos MDL

U.S. District Judge Eduardo C. Robreno of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, who oversees asbestos multidistrict litigation, issued a decision in July permitting injured sailors to seek punitive damage awards. In Re:...more

Update: California Supreme Court to Review Secondary Asbestos Exposure Cases

In Sedgwick’s June 2014 Toxic Tort and Environmental Law Update, we reported on two conflicting decisions from different California appellate courts regarding companies’ duty to prevent “take home exposures” to asbestos...more

Asbestos Alert: Failure To Recognize A Defendant’s Name Insufficient To Support Summary Judgment

Ganoe v. Metalclad Insulation Corp. - California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District (July 21, 2014) - Metalclad was an insulation contractor. Mark Ganoe worked in Department 132 at Goodyear Tire &...more

Texas Supreme Court Reaffirms Causation Standard

In Bostic, et. al. v. Georgia-Pacific Corporation, 57 Tex.Sup.Ct.J. 1091, the Supreme Court of Texas reaffirmed that the “substantial factor” causation test applies in asbestos personal injury cases, defined the quantitative...more

Pennsylvania Statute of Repose Applies to Asbestos Claims

In Graver v. Foster Wheeler Corp., 2014 Pa. Super. 132, the Superior Court of Pennsylvania held that the statute of repose applicable to designers and constructors of improvements to real property applied to asbestos claims....more

Florida High Court to Decide Which Test Governs Component Parts Doctrine

On April 8, 2014, the Florida Supreme Court heard oral arguments in an asbestos case concerning the liability of a defendant who has sold a component part to a manufacturer who then incorporates the part into its own...more

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

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...

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

Policyholders with Long-Tail Claims Under Liberty Mutual Policies Should Be Prepared for 'Sea Change' in Claims Handling After...

On July 17, 2014, Liberty Mutual Insurance Company announced that it had entered into a multi-billion-dollar “retroactive reinsurance” arrangement with National Indemnity Company (“NICO”), a subsidiary of Berkshire Hathaway,...more

Court Denies Renewed Attempt To Dismiss Defenses In Reinsurance Dispute Associated With Asbestos-Related Liabilities

In this case, plaintiffs sought leave to renew their motion to dismiss certain retention-related and assignment affirmative defenses based on provisions of certain Loss Portfolio Transfer (LPT) agreements, and to re-argue the...more

Texas Supreme Court: “Dose Matters” In Mesothelioma Cases Bostic v. Georgia-Pacific Corp., No. 10-0775

Yesterday, the Texas Supreme Court reaffirmed the substantial-factor standard of causation recognized in Borg-Warner Corp. v. Flores, and held that it applies in mesothelioma cases. The Court made clear that in...more

Texas Supreme Court opinions (7/14)

1. No. 10-0775, Bostic v. Georgia-Pacific Corp. -- This is a mesothelioma case. The overarching issue is whether the causation standard announced in Borg-Warner Corp. v. Flores (which was an asbestosis case) also applies to...more

Georgia-Pacific used secret research to downplay effect of asbestos

Chicago residents who have been diagnosed with asbestos-related diseases know the devastation that comes with their illnesses. Many, in an effort to receive proper medical care, have had to turn to the courts to seek...more

CA Appellate Courts: Secondary Exposure Claims Permitted Against Product Manufacturers, But Not Premises Owners

Two California Courts of Appeal recently decided cases that will significantly impact secondary asbestos exposure claims in California. The result is that premises owners have no duty to protect family members of workers on...more

Round Three: California Appellate Courts Home in on Duty of Care in Household Asbestos Exposure

On June 3, 2014, Wilson Elser issued a Client Alert on the decision in Johnny Blaine Kesner Jr. v. Superior Court of Alameda County (2014) 226 Cal.App.4th 251, in which the First District Court of Appeal held that an employer...more

Policyholder Observer

Encryption Flaw "Heartbleed" Creates Data Risk: How Insurance Can Stanch the Bleeding - In early April, news broke of an encryption flaw named “Heartbleed” that exposed companies to data breaches for over two and one...more

Court Construes Disputed Insurance Policy Language And Requires Reinsurer To Follow The Settlements

The case involved two facultative reinsurance contracts, each of which covered excess liability for similar umbrella liability insurance policies, and each of which contained a “follow the settlements” provision. After the...more

New Jersey Rejects Liability for Third-Party Manufactured Replacement Parts Based on Lack of Causation Evidence

In Hughes v. A.W. Chesterton Co., the Appellate Division of the Superior Court of New Jersey affirmed a trial court’s granting of Goulds Pumps’ motion for summary judgment to a set of consolidated asbestos personal injury...more

86 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 4