2BInformed: Engaging with EPA, OSHA’s New Regulation, and Asbestos
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit - Plaintiff Harry Marsh worked as a merchant mariner from 1944 to 1992. He was diagnosed with mesothelioma in 2018 and subsequently sued the owner of every vessel he...more
Jurisdiction: Supreme Court of New York, New York County - In this matter, Rockwell Automation, Inc. sought to dismiss the action against them on grounds that the plaintiff was not exposed to asbestos from burners...more
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit recently approved injunctive relief as part of a strategy for settling mass tort claims through the Chapter 11 bankruptcy case of Bestwall LLC, an entity created by...more
As previously reported in the Asbestos Case Tracker here, in June 2022 a jury awarded plaintiff Munir Seen $15 million, allocating 70 percent of the fault to joint compound manufacturer Kaiser Gypsum. Following the trial,...more
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit - In 2016, plaintiff Richard Nybeck sued various product manufacturers in the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas, alleging he developed lung cancer after...more
On September 1, 2021, the South Carolina Court of Appeals affirmed the circuit court’s verdict and additur in favor of Plaintiffs in the matter of Beverly Dale Jolly and Brenda Rice Jolly v. Gen. Elec. Co., et al. Fisher...more
Recently, KCIC posted their 2022 Mid-Year Asbestos Filings Update. This update is compiled using information collected through July 31st. This article illustrates some highlights from the update....more
On June 1, 2021, the United States Supreme Court declined to hear Johnson & Johnson’s (J&J) appeal to overturn a $2.12 billion dollar damages award to 22 female plaintiffs who alleged their ovarian cancer was caused by J&J’s...more
While too many of us get overdosed with clownish depictions - from doctors, hospitals, insurers, and corporations, especially Big Pharma firms - of how the civil justice system operates, it’s always worth a reminder of the...more
Under the Restatement (Third) of Torts: Products Liability § 5, Comment b (1998), the supplier of a product generally must warn about only those risks associated with the product itself, not those associated with the...more
The statute of limitations on asbestos claims was recently reevaluated by the Minnesota Supreme Court. In Palmer v. Walker Jamal Company, the court reinforces that the clock begins when the plaintiff learns they have an...more
Proximate cause jury instruction was further clarified by a Washington appellate court when the court reversed the asbestos defense verdict in Clevenger v. John Crane, Inc. In the case, plaintiff Era Clevenger alleged that...more
Most experienced asbestos trial lawyers will shout, “Depositions live forever!,” suggesting that evidence produced in one case at one time and in one state may live to influence the outcome in many cases for decades to come....more
In a consolidated appeal, the Georgia Court of Appeals recently looked at the proximate cause standard for asbestos cases in Davis v. John Crane. 2019 WL 5558711 (Ga. Ct. App. Oct. 29, 2019). In so doing, the appellate court...more
In the first judgment to provide guidance on the allocation of mesothelioma liabilities at a reinsurance level, the Court of Appeal in Equitas Insurance Limited v Municipal Mutual Insurance Limited [2019] EWCA Civ 718 has...more
The Court of Appeal’s highly anticipated judgment in Equitas v MMI has been handed down today (17 April 2019). The decision is the latest ruling in the long running saga and represents an important victory for reinsurers....more
On March 19, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court in Air & Liquid Systems Corp. v. Devries held that, under maritime law, a product manufacturer has a duty to warn of asbestos or other hazardous parts when its own product, although...more
In an eagerly anticipated decision by the asbestos bar, the United States Supreme Court in Air & Liquid Systems et al. v. DeVries et at., Dkt. No. 17-1104, 2019 WL 1245520 (March 19, 2019) rejected the “bare metal defense” as...more
On Wednesday, March 27, 2019, the Superior Court of New Jersey, Middlesex County, cleared Johnson & Johnson (J&J) of liability in a lawsuit brought by Ricardo Rimondi, who alleged that asbestos in the company’s talcum powder...more
In Air & Liquid Sys. Corp. et al. v. DeVries et al., No. 17-1104 (March 19, 2019), the U.S. Supreme Court held that under federal maritime law, a product manufacturer has a duty to warn when its product requires the...more
On March 19, the U.S. Supreme Court decided the case of Air & Liquid Systems Corp. v. Devries, affirming the ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in this maritime tort case involving the availability of...more
On March 19, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court decided the first case involving maritime law in several years. In Air & Liquid Systems Corp. et al v. Devries, et al, 586 US ___ (2019), Justice Kavanaugh, writing for the majority...more
In its decision Tuesday, the U.S. Supreme Court held, under maritime law, that manufacturers can be held liable for injuries caused by asbestos-containing parts manufactured and added to their products by third parties. The...more
On March 19, 2019, the Supreme Court decided Air & Liquid Systems Corp. v. DeVries, No. 17-1104, holding that in the maritime tort context, a product manufacturer has a duty to warn when: 1) its product requires incorporation...more
On July 12, 2018, in an unpublished opinion, the Illinois 5th District Court of Appeals reversed the Madison County Court, which had denied Ford Motor Company’s motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction in an...more