Asbestos

News & Analysis as of

That’s Not My Kid! Board Clarifies Definition Of “Child” Under The Longshore Act

On February 25, 2014, the Benefits Review Board rendered its decision in Smith v. Mt. Mitchell, LLC, ____BRBS____ (D.O.L. Ben. Rev. Bd. Feb. 25, 2014), which affirmed an Administrative Law Judge’s decision and order,...more

Hercules and the Lernaean Hydra: The Hercules Removal Jurisprudence Sprouts Yet Another Head

In yet another twist in the tortured labors of the Hercules jurisprudence regarding removal of general maritime law claims under 28 U.S.C. §1441(a), the Eastern District of Louisiana has generated a new, divergent “head” on...more

Asbestos Alert: Paulus v Crane Co.

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

Baltimore City Circuit Court Rejects Attempt to Consolidate Asbestos Cases

Order refusing to consolidate more than 13,000 non-mesothelioma cases continues a U.S.-wide trend of courts moving away from mass trial consolidations in asbestos cases. On March 5, the Circuit Court for Baltimore...more

It’s a Matter of Trust: The Garlock Decision as an Impetus for Increased Transparency Legislation in the Asbestos Trust Arena

On January 10, 2014, a bankruptcy court judge considered the estimated asbestos liability for Garlock Sealing Technologies, LLC (Garlock), ultimately determining that liability to be $125 million, a fraction of its previously...more

Pennsylvania Effectively Eliminates Workers’ Compensation Act as Source of Protection for Employers from Suits Arising Out of...

On January 29, 2014, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court denied defendants’ Petition for Reargument of the Court’s November 22, 2013, ruling in Tooey v. AK Steel Corp. et al. The ruling held that the Pennsylvania Workers’...more

Wisconsin Supreme Court Declares No Vacancy for Insured in Asbestos Coverage Dispute

In Phillips, et al. v. Parmelee, et al., – N.W.2d –, 2013 WL 6818145 (Wis. Dec. 27, 2013), the Supreme Court of Wisconsin affirmed trial and appellate court decisions in favor of an insurer arguing that an asbestos exclusion...more

Delaware Decision Makes It Increasingly Difficult for Insurers to Evade Coverage for Dissolved Corporations

Can an injured plaintiff obtain compensation from a dissolved company with unexhausted insurance policies and force the insurer to pay? The Delaware Supreme Court says yes—in certain circumstances. Originally published...more

Ninth Circuit En Banc Upholds Prior Ruling Vacating $10 Million Asbestos Verdict Over Failure to Conduct Daubert Hearing

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals en banc has affirmed a prior ruling vacating a $10 million jury verdict in an asbestos personal injury action, holding that the Washington federal district court abused its discretion by not...more

Unanimous Wisconsin High Court Sustains Broad Asbestos Exclusion That Comprehensively and Unambiguously Bars Coverage for Any...

In Phillips v. Parmelee, 2013 WI 105 (December 27, 2013), the Wisconsin Supreme Court rejected the argument that a broad asbestos exclusion in a business insurance policy was ambiguous. A unanimous court ruled that a real...more

Weekly Law Resume - The Sophisticated User Defense Does Not Automatically Apply to an Employee of a Sophisticated Employer

Anne Pfeifer v. John Crane, Inc. - Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Four (October 29, 2013) - JCI appealed from a judgment awarding plaintiffs William and Anne Pfeifer over $21 million dollars in...more

Wisconsin Appeals Court Allows Asbestos Case To Proceed Under Safe Place Statute

Robert Viola was a pipe insulator for 25 years, often working in buildings and power plants owned by Wisconsin Electric Power Company (“WEPCO”). After Mr. Viola died, the administrator of his estate brought a lawsuit against...more

Seventh Circuit Addresses Coverage Under Workers’ Comp Policy

In its recent decision in YKK USA, Inc., v. Safety Nat’l Cas. Corp., 727 F.3d 782 (7th. Cir. 2013), the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit had occasion to consider whether an employee’s common law claim...more

California Appellate Court Limits Application of Sophisticated User Doctrine

Stepping back from broad application of the sophisticated user doctrine in product liability and toxic tort litigation, the Second District of the California Court of Appeal, recently affirmed a jury’s $21 million verdict for...more

Delaware Supreme Court Holds Receiver is Required to Defend Lawsuits After a Corporation is Wound-Up; Finds No Generally...

In Anderson v Krafft-Murphy Co. Inc., 2013 Del. LEXIS 597 (Del. Nov. 26, 2013), the Delaware Supreme Court held that Sections 278 and 279 of the Delaware General Corporation Law, 8 Del. C. §§ 278-279, require a dissolved...more

Pennsylvania Supreme Court Rules on Workers’ Compensation Act Case

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

New York State Court Denies Late Notice Defense

New Hampshire Ins. Co. v. Clearwater Ins. Co., No. 653547/2011, 2013 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 5117 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. Oct. 31, 2013). A New York State motion court granted part of a cedent’s motion for summary judgment in a case...more

FACT Act Promises Transparency in Bankruptcy Trust Claims and Payments for Asbestos Exposure

Asbestos defendants are one step closer to greater transparency regarding the often illusive bankruptcy trust claims and payments. On Wednesday, November 13, 2013, the U.S. House of Representatives passed H.R. 982, the...more

Was Asbestos Used in Your Drilling Mud Program?

With the bankruptcy of dozens of traditional defendants in asbestos litigation, plaintiffs' attorneys have been creative in pursuing claims in previously untapped areas. One such area is alleged oilfield worker exposure via...more

California Court of Appeal Holds Intermediary’s Sophistication Not Sufficient, as a Matter of Law, to Avoid Supplier’s Liability...

On October 29, 2013, the California Court of Appeal affirmed as proper a trial court’s refusal to give defendant John Crane, Inc.’s (Crane’s) requested jury instruction on the “sophisticated user” defense. In Anne Pfeifer, et...more

Statute of Repose and Independent Contractor Defense Bar Asbestos Claims in New Jersey

In a unanimous decision, New Jersey’s intermediate appellate court applied the statute of repose and the independent contractor defense and reversed a $1.8 million verdict awarded to the widow of a union asbestos insulator. ...more

Ninth Circuit Affirms Dismissal of Asbestos “Take-Home” Exposure Case Against Premises Owner Finding No Foreseeability

On September 10, 2013, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal of an asbestos lawsuit brought against the owner of a shipyard in Puget Sound on the basis that “no reasonable fact finder could conclude that...more

Whistleblowers Blow their Whistles While They Work

The U.S. Department of Labor Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and Pilgrim Pride Corp. reached a $50,000 settlement in a 2012 whistleblower case. The case began when a manager for water reclamation at...more

Maryland High Court, Bucking Trend, Allows Expert to Testify that “Each and Every Exposure” to Asbestos Is Causally Related to...

To advance claims against as many defendants as possible, plaintiff attorneys in asbestos litigation routinely attempt to introduce expert testimony to the effect that “each and every exposure” to asbestos was a “substantial”...more

"Every Asbestos Exposure Counts" - Maryland Affirms Theory

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

80 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 4