-
June 09, 2026
NEW ORLEANS — A federal judge in Louisiana dismissed with prejudice an asbestosis case that featured interplay with a secondary diagnosis of traction bronchiectasis and expert testimony on a “contaminated house” theory after the parties informed the court they had resolved the matter.
-
June 09, 2026
NEW YORK — Plaintiffs successfully demonstrated the possibility that Johnson & Johnson consumer talc made its way from New York to the United Kingdom but not the talc from two other defendants, the New York justice overseeing consolidated asbestos litigation said in granting jurisdictional discovery into Johnson & Johnson’s contacts with the state and rejecting the argument that the state court would be an inconvenient forum while dismissing two other defendants on jurisdictional grounds.
-
June 09, 2026
LOS ANGELES — The evidence shows that even if a defendant can establish that a woman suffers from what she described as a “doom’s day gene,” the defendant has not eliminated the possibility that asbestos exposure also played a role, a California judge said in denying summary judgment to it.
-
June 09, 2026
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.
-
June 09, 2026
PHILADELPHIA — A trial court properly struck expert testimony in an instruction issued well after the jury heard the opinion and excluded a second expert’s untimely opinion and various other evidence, the majority of the Pennsylvania appellate court said in an unpublished opinion affirming a verdict for Johnson & Johnson entities.
-
June 03, 2026
By Eric D. Cook
-
June 08, 2026
LOS ANGELES — A jury hearing the second bellwether trial in consolidated ovarian-cancer cases in a California court found for Johnson & Johnson on June 5, finding no negligence on the company’s part for ovarian cancer alleged to have been caused by consumer talc use.
-
June 05, 2026
NEW ORLEANS — A federal judge skipped the third and mandatory step of increasing a remittitur calculation by 50% and should add $1.95 million to a proposed $3.9 million judgment in an asbestos case, a family tells a federal judge in Louisiana in a June 4 motion for reconsideration.
-
June 04, 2026
AUGUSTA, Ga. — Johnson & Johnson entities’ constitutional challenge raised only after an appeal was accepted came too late and the conflicting expert causation evidence at trial did not require a verdict in the companies’ favor, a Georgia appeals court said in affirming a ruling granting the plaintiff a new trial.
-
June 04, 2026
HARRISBURG, Pa. — Asbestos plaintiffs with claims filed outside the two-year window for filings against a dissolved company are not viable, and therefore, the plaintiffs lack the ability to attempt to pierce the corporate veil, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court said in reversing a lower appellate court.
-
June 03, 2026
TRENTON, N.J. —Ovarian cancer sufferers who claim consumer talc use caused their disease and Johnson & Johnson entities filed supplemental briefing before a federal special master in the federal multidistrict litigation on the extent to which plaintiffs’ experts changed their causation opinions and what impact that might have on their admissibility.
-
June 03, 2026
HARTFORD, Conn. — Connecticut law allows an employer to offset workers’ compensation liabilities against the amount of damages recovered for a man’s mesothelioma, even where the recoveries involved nonoccupational exposures, the Connecticut Supreme Court said in affirming a decision in favor of the Connecticut Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV).
-
June 02, 2026
ST. LOUIS — Johnson & Johnson entities asked a Missouri court to revoke the pro hac vice status of Beasley, Allen, Crow, Methvin, Portis & Miles P.C. attorneys as it considers posttrial motions after a jury in 2021 rejected a trio of women’s claims that they developed ovarian cancer after genital talc use. The case has already been stalled twice due to bankruptcy filings.
-
May 28, 2026
COLUMBIA, S.C. — The South Carolina Supreme Court on May 27 affirmed the appointment of a prejudgment receiver to handle a Cape PLC entity’s asbestos-related assets, finding that South Carolina law permits the appointment given the trial court’s conclusion that a moral fraud occurred and that an English court’s ruling finding U.S. courts lack jurisdiction over the entity did not bar the appointment.
-
May 26, 2026
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.
-
May 26, 2026
BALTIMORE — The District of Columbia Court of Appeals vacated and remanded a take-home asbestos case after the Maryland Supreme Court responded to a certified question by saying strict liability design defect claims do not require a duty element, according to the court’s docket.
-
May 26, 2026
ST. PAUL, Minn. — A Minnesota jury awarded a couple $10.2 million in a case in which a man contracted mesothelioma in his forties after decades-long exposure to asbestos in consumer talc products. Sources told Mealey Publications that it is the second largest mesothelioma-related verdict in Minnesota history and the first ever asbestos-talc verdict against store-brand talc manufacturer Vi-Jon LLC.
-
May 26, 2026
BISMARCK, N.D. — Union Carbide Corp. and a man with asbestosis argued before the North Dakota Supreme Court over whether state business registration law and recent U.S. Supreme Court precedent as well as the company’s own conduct created jurisdiction or whether the lack of any contacts with the suit doomed the suit.
-
May 22, 2026
CHICAGO — A May decision by a federal court in Pennsylvania rejecting protections for litigation involving fabricated evidence and other arguments buttresses Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Actclaims alleging a scheme by lawyers to file baseless asbestos lawsuits, a pipe maker tells a federal court in Illinois in a notice of supplemental authority.
-
May 22, 2026
TRENTON, N.J. — The special master involved in the federal multidistrict asbestos-talc ovarian cancer litigation said she would allow supplemental briefing on a trio of plaintiff-side specific causation experts after Johnson & Johnson entities complained about mid-hearing changes to opinions that altered the scope of the litigation. Among the complaints were that one of the experts used artificial intelligence on the stand, which required the special master to admonish the witness.
-
May 21, 2026
TRENTON, N.J. — Johnson & Johnson entities asked for supplemental briefing on specific causation experts after claiming that various problems arose during a hearing, including the experts changing opinions about talc’s role in ovarian cancer midhearing and an expert using artificial intelligence to respond to questioning. But in a motion to strike that filing, the plaintiffs told a federal judge in New Jersey that there are no grounds for supplemental briefing and that the judge clearly believes she has enough evidence to rule on the admissibility of the experts.
-
May 21, 2026
SAN FRANCISCO — A California appellate court revived a couple’s asbestos lawsuit, finding that two brothers’ differing testimony about the brand of joint compound they used in renovating their aunt’s house did not warrant granting an asbestos fiber supplier summary judgment.
-
May 13, 2026
By Mary Margaret Gay, Sarah Beth Jones and Tricia Richardson
-
May 20, 2026
NEW ORLEANS — A defense expert may testify that a man suffers from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in addition to other asbestos-related illnesses, a federal judge in Louisiana said May 19 in denying a motion to exclude. In other developments, the court announced that the man had settled with Shell USA Inc. and asked the court to reconsider summary judgment on a nonintentional tort claim, and the parties wrapped briefing on a plaintiff expert’s “contaminated house” testimony.
-
May 20, 2026
WILMINGTON, Del. — A family never established that it was foreseeable that the use of shotgun shell wads containing encapsulated asbestos could lead a hunter to develop mesothelioma, a manufacturer tells the Delaware Supreme Court in the opening brief for its challenge to a $9 million verdict.