Mealey's Asbestos

  • June 21, 2024

    Louisiana Court Affirms Jury’s $2.75M Asbestos Awards To Daughters

    NEW ORLEANS — Recent Louisiana Supreme Court precedent requiring some objective measure when awarding surviving children damages does not alter the conclusion that trial evidence of the “devastating effects” two daughters experienced from their father’s death from mesothelioma supports a jury’s award of $2.75 million to each, a Louisiana appeals court said.

  • June 21, 2024

    Asbestos Expert Warns: Employee Deposition Threatens His ‘Golden Years’

    ATLANTA — A non-testifying employee of asbestos expert William Longo and his lab warned that a magistrate judge’s ruling denying a motion to quash an untimely and irrelevant subpoena would doom him to spending his “golden years” giving depositions in asbestos litigation across the country.

  • June 20, 2024

    J&J Says Talc Plaintiffs Lack Power, Precedent To Block Bankruptcy

    TRENTON, N.J. —Talc plaintiffs waited too long to raise meritless claims of allegedly fraudulent corporate restructurings and lack the power to ask a district court to prevent a bankruptcy filing, Johnson & Johnson (J&J) and related entities tell a federal court in New Jersey in opposing injunctive relief.

  • June 19, 2024

    California High Court Reverses, Says Vertical Exhaustion Applies To Policies

    SAN FRANCISCO — The California Supreme Court reversed an appeals court’s ruling in a long-running asbestos insurance coverage dispute after determining that a vertical exhaustion method, rather than a horizontal exhaustion method, must be applied to excess policies that sit over an insured’s primary policies because the language of the excess policies and the insured’s reasonable expectations support a vertical exhaustion method.

  • June 19, 2024

    J&J Can’t Strike Talc Claims; Defendants Want ‘Improper’ Trial Conduct Excluded

    BRIDGEPORT, Conn. — Various Johnson & Johnson (J&J) entities failed in their bid to strike asbestos-talc allegations against them in a Connecticut court when the judge found sufficient allegations of successor liability.  Meanwhile, briefing wrapped up June 18 on the defendants’ two attempts at precluding the plaintiff from “improper conduct,” such as tacking an oversized poster to a courtroom wall and stacking books on the counsels’ table to “build a fort with them.”

  • June 18, 2024

    In Latest Suit, Women Seek Medical Monitoring Over Johnson & Johnson Talc

    TRENTON, N.J. — Women filed a putative class action in a New Jersey federal court against various Johnson & Johnson (J&J) entities on June 17 alleging fraud and misrepresentation among other claims and seeking medical monitoring for all women who used talc-based products on their genital area over a four-year period starting in 1960 and have not yet filed suit against the companies.

  • June 18, 2024

    J&J Seeks Delay In Judgment, $1.95M In Monthly Interest In Asbestos-Talc Case

    PORTLAND, Ore. — Johnson & Johnson (J&J) and a subsidiary told a judge in Oregon that its posttrial motions in the wake of a $260 million asbestos-talc jury verdict will bring to light the “persistent misconduct” that led to the verdict and asked for a stay of the judgment and resulting $1.95 million per month in interest while the court resolves the motions. VIDEO FROM THE TRIAL IS AVAILABLE.

  • June 18, 2024

    Judge: Amended Work History Changes Remove Causal Nexus, Federal Jurisdiction

    EAST ST. LOUIS, Ill. — Corrections to work history removed a pump company from allegations of military exposure, severing the connection needed for federal officer removal, a federal judge in Illinois said in remanding the case.

  • June 17, 2024

    Chamber Group Says Texas Asbestosis Ruling Threatens Litigation Stability

    HOUSTON — In an amicus curiae brief, the Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America and others told the Texas Supreme Court that an appellate court ruling creating a separate causation standard announced in a take-home de minimis asbestos exposure case threatens to return the state to a time when it was overrun by suspect asbestos and silica claims.

  • June 14, 2024

    J&J Can Depose Asbestos Expert Longo’s Employee, Special Master Says

    TRENTON, N.J. — Johnson & Johnson entities may depose the lab employee who performed the testing on which expert William Longo relies, the special master in New Jersey involved in the federal multidistrict litigation involving asbestos-talc claims said.

  • June 13, 2024

    Widow Didn’t Satisfy Burden In Asbestos Benefits Case, West Virginia Court Says

    CHARLESTON, W.Va. — The presumption of occupational exposure in a workers’ compensation case is rebuttable and still requires the claimant to meet the burden of proving that exposure to asbestos caused the injury in question, a West Virginia appeals court said in affirming the denial of benefits for a widow.

  • June 13, 2024

    Talc Plaintiffs Seek To Confine Proposed J&J Bankruptcy To New Jersey

    TRENTON, N.J. — A federal judge in New Jersey in a June 12 docket entry expedited briefing on talc plaintiffs’ motion seeking to enjoin Johnson & Johnson or its subsidiaries from declaring bankruptcy anywhere other than New Jersey.  The plaintiffs in the case claim that Johnson & Johnson performed a series of fraudulent transfers and bad faith bankruptcy filings to escape asbestos-talc liabilities.

  • June 12, 2024

    States, J&J Settle Talc Marketing Claims For $700 Million

    TRENTON, N.J. — Johnson & Johnson on June 11 agreed to pay $700 million to resolve investigations by 42 states and the District of Columbia into its marketing of baby powder and related talc products, various sources told Mealey Publications.

  • June 11, 2024

    Asbestos Boiler Company Can’t Stay New York Cases During Punitive Damages Appeal

    NEW YORK — A company’s concerns about potential verdicts while it appeals a punitive damages award are exaggerated, and any stay while it litigates the issue would “severely prejudice” plaintiffs who are literally on their death beds, a New York justice said in denying the company’s request.

  • June 11, 2024

    Portions Of Friction, Shipborne Asbestos Exposure Case Survive Dismissal

    SAN FRANCISCO — A man adequately alleges that asbestos attributable to a company through automobile friction products and by work alongside its employees caused his mesothelioma, but claims focused on worksite control and fraud fail, while a second company failed to establish that punitive damages and loss of consortium were not historically available under maritime law, a federal judge in California said in partially granting one motion to dismiss and denying the second.

  • June 11, 2024

    Plaintiff/Defense Experts Testifying Since Jan. 1, 2002

    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 06, 2024

    Judge Won’t Bar Experts, Admit Exhibits Ahead Of FTCA Asbestos Trial

    SEATTLE — Facing an upcoming trial on take-home and environmental asbestos claims under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA), a federal judge in Washington declined to preadmit certain exhibits or exclude expert testimony, finding the trio of motions premature or untimely.

  • June 06, 2024

    Supreme Court Reverses, Says Asbestos Debtor’s Insurer Can Challenge Reorganization

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — Because the primary insurer of Chapter 11 asbestos debtors Kaiser Gypsum Co. Inc. and Hanson Permanente Cement Inc. is on the hook for most of the debtors’ asbestos liabilities under their reorganization plan, it is a party in interest that has standing to object to the plan, the U.S. Supreme Court held June 6 in a unanimous decision.

  • June 05, 2024

    Asbestos Plaintiffs Warn Of Expert Oversight Motion’s ‘Massive Chilling Effect’

    TRENTON, N.J. — Allowing Johnson & Johnson to compel plaintiff-side expert William Longo to perform testing under the gaze of defense experts would be a “patently unreasonable” and unprecedented step and likely have a “massive chilling effect on expert witnesses,” plaintiffs in the federal multidistrict asbestos-talc litigation argue in opposing a motion to compel.

  • June 05, 2024

    Railway, Plaintiffs Brief Viability Of $8M Verdict In Libby, Mont., Case

    GREAT FALLS, Mont. — Whether federal law preempts strict liability claims against a railway and whether its failure to remediate asbestos contamination at its Libby, Mont., railyard constitutes an affirmative act or inactivity not subject to strict liability came before a Montana federal judge in briefing on judgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV).

  • June 04, 2024

    Oregon Jury Awards Couple $260 Million In J&J Asbestos-Talc Case

    PORTLAND, Ore. — An Oregon jury on June 3 awarded a couple $200 million in punitive damages and $60 million in compensatory damages for a South Korean immigrant’s mesothelioma caused by her lifelong asbestos exposure to Johnson & Johnson (J&J) talc products.  VIDEO FROM THE TRIAL IS AVAILABLE.

  • June 04, 2024

    Florida Federal Judge Allows Expert Testimony In Asbestos Exposure Case

    TAMPA, Fla. — Arguments made by the two remaining defendants in an asbestos exposure case failed to convince a Florida federal judge that testimony by the plaintiff’s expert is inadmissible under Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc., with the judge denying separate motions to exclude on June 3.

  • June 04, 2024

    Man’s Friction, Shipborne Asbestos Exposure Case Partially Survives Dismissal

    SAN FRANCISCO — A man adequately alleges asbestos attributable to a company through automobile friction products and by work alongside its employees caused his mesothelioma, but claims focused on worksite control and fraud fail, a federal judge in California said in partially granting a motion to dismiss.

  • June 03, 2024

    Minnesota Court Won’t Review Ruling Finding Contractor Duty Appeal Untimely

    ST. PAUL, Minn. — The Minnesota Supreme Court declined to review a case over whether a power company owed a duty to independent contractors in a case involving both direct and take-home exposures after the lower appellate court found that it could not extend the time for filing a notice of appeal.

  • May 29, 2024

    COMMENTARY: Review Of Expert Causation Testimony Under Federal Rule Of Evidence 702: An Early Assessment Of The 2023 Amended Rule

    By William L. Anderson and Mark A. Behrens